6888 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–2177 Filed 2–5–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 1 

[WC Docket No. 07–267; FCC 07–202] 

Petition To Establish Procedural 

Requirements To Govern Proceedings 

for Forbearance Under Section 10 of 

the Communications Act of 1934, as 

Amended 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission seeks comment regarding 

whether to adopt procedural rules to 

govern the Commission’s consideration 

of petitions to forbear from enforcing 

rules that are alleged to be unnecessary 

or inconsistent with the public interest 

(forbearance petitions). The Commission 

is responding to arguments that current 

procedures governing consideration of 

forbearance petitions are unfair, and to 

several proposed new rules that would 

include, for example, requiring 

forbearance petitions to be complete-asfiled, and assigning the burden of proof 

on parties that file forbearance petitions. 

The Commission intends both to solicit 

comment on the proposals before it and 

to encourage suggestions of other rules 

that the Commission should consider 

that would govern the form and content 

of forbearance petitions. 

DATES: Comments are due March 7, 

2008 and Reply Comments are due 

March 24, 2008. Written comments on 

the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed 

information collection requirements 

must be submitted by the public, Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB), and 

other interested parties on or before 

April 7, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WC Docket No. 07–267, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: ecfs@fcc.gov, and include 

the following words in the body of the 

message, ‘‘get form.’’ A sample form and 

directions will be sent in response. 

Include the docket number in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Mail: Secretary, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact 

the FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. In addition to 

filing comments with the Secretary, a 

copy of any comments on the 

Paperwork Reduction Act information 

collection requirements contained 

herein should be submitted to the 

Federal Communications Commission 

via e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov and to 

Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of 

Management and Budget, via e-mail to 

Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or via 

fax at 202–395–5167. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan Reel, Wireline Competition 

Bureau, (202) 418–1580. For additional 

information concerning the Paperwork 

Reduction Act information collection 

requirements contained in this 

document, contact Jerry R. Cowden at 

(202) 418–0447, or via the Internet at 

PRA@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

Comments on or before March 7, 2008 

and Reply Comments on or before 

March 24, 2008. Comments may be filed 

using: (1) The Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the 

Federal Government’s eRulemaking 

Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See 

Electronic Filing of Documents in 

Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, 

May 1, 1998. 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/ 

cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Filers should follow the instructions 

provided on the Web site for submitting 

comments. 

• For ECFS filers, if multiple docket 

or rulemaking numbers appear in the 

caption of this proceeding, filers must 

transmit one electronic copy of the 

comments for each docket or 

rulemaking number referenced in the 

caption. In completing the transmittal 

screen, filers should include their full 

name, U.S. Postal Service mailing 

address, and the applicable docket or 

rulemaking number. Parties may also 

submit an electronic comment by 

Internet e-mail. To get filing 

instructions, filers should send an email to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the 

following words in the body of the 

message, ‘‘get form.’’ A sample form and 

directions will be sent in response. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. If more than 

one docket or rulemaking number 

appears in the caption of this 

proceeding, filers must submit two 

additional copies for each additional 

docket or rulemaking number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail 

(although we continue to experience 

delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service 

mail). All filings must be addressed to 

the Commission’s Secretary, Office of 

the Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• The Commission’s contractor will 

receive hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary at 236 

Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, 

Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours 

at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All 

hand deliveries must be held together 

with rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes must be disposed of before 

entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–

418–0432 (tty). 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WC Docket No. 07–267, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 6889 

• E-mail: ecfs@fcc.gov, and include 

the following words in the body of the 

message, ‘‘get form.’’ A sample form and 

directions will be sent in response. 

Include the docket number in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Mail: Secretary, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 Analysis 

This document does not contain 

proposed information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–

13. In addition, therefore, it does not 

contain any proposed information 

collection burden ‘‘for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 

employees,’’ pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

Petition To Establish Procedural 

Requirements To Govern Proceedings 

for Forbearance Under Section 10 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

Amended 

1. In this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM), the Commission 

addresses the Petition filed on 

September 19, 2007 by Covad 

Communications Group, NuVox 

Communications, XO Communications, 

LLC, Cavalier Telephone Corp., and 

McLeod USA Telecommunications 

Services, Inc. (Petitioners or Covad, et 

al.) asking the Commission to consider 

the adoption of procedural rules to 

govern the Commission’s consideration 

of petitions for forbearance pursuant to 

the Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended (Act). 

2. Pursuant to section 10 of the Act, 

the Commission is required to forbear 

from any statutory provision or 

regulation if it determines that: (1) 

Enforcement of the regulation is not 

necessary to ensure that the 

telecommunications carrier’s charges, 

practices, classifications, or regulations 

are just, reasonable, and not unjustly or 

unreasonably discriminatory; (2) 

enforcement of the regulation is not 

necessary to protect consumers; and (3) 

forbearance from applying such 

provision or regulation is consistent 

with the public interest. In determining 

whether forbearance is consistent with 

the public interest, the Commission also 

must consider whether forbearance from 

enforcing the provision or regulation 

will promote competitive market 

conditions. In addition, section 

332(c)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes the 

Commission to ‘‘forbear’’ from applying 

the provisions of Title II to commercial 

mobile radio service (CMRS) providers, 

except for sections 201, 202, and 208, if 

certain criteria are satisfied. In 

particular, the Commission may 

exercise its forbearance authority 

pursuant to section 332 if it determines 

that: (1) Enforcement of the requirement 

is unnecessary to ensure that rates are 

just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory; (2) the requirement is 

not needed to protect consumers; and 

(3) forbearance is consistent with the 

public interest. The Commission also 

must consider whether any proposed 

forbearance from the requirements of 

Title II will enhance competition among 

CMRS providers. 

3. The Commission seeks comment in 

general on the need for procedural rules 

to govern the Commission’s 

consideration of petitions for 

forbearance pursuant to section 10 and/ 

or section 332 (collectively, forbearance 

petitions), and with respect to the issues 

raised and rules proposed by the 

Petitioners in particular. For example, 

the Petitioners cite the need to apply 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

notice-and-comment rules to 

forbearance petitions. The Petitioners 

state that to date the Commission’s 

practice has been to provide interested 

parties with the opportunity to 

comment on a forbearance petition. 

Petitioners argue, however, that the 

Commission should institutionalize this 

practice to ensure that potentiallyaffected parties have a well-defined 

right to have their views taken into 

account. The Commission seeks 

comment both on the Petitioners’

specific proposal and, more generally, 

on how the Commission should provide 

notice and an opportunity to comment 

in forbearance proceedings. 

4. The Petitioners also request the 

adoption of rules governing the format 

and content of forbearance petitions, 

including a complete-as-filed 

requirement. In particular, the 

Petitioners contend that a complete-asfiled rule would facilitate Commission 

review and would help ensure that all 

interested parties have a full and fair 

opportunity to present their views to the 

Commission. The Petitioners note that 

the Commission has adopted similar 

requirements in other circumstances, 

such as section 271 proceedings and 

formal complaint proceedings subject to 

statutory deadlines. The Commission 

seeks comment on the Petitioners’

specific proposal for complete-as-filed 

requirements, including whether the 

Commission should specify certain 

information necessary for a prima facie 

showing that forbearance is warranted 

as the Petitioners recommend. The 

Commission also seeks comment on the 

Petitioners’ proposal for a rule 

specifying that the forbearance 

petitioner has the burden of proof. The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

whether there are other particular rules 

governing the form and content of 

forbearance petitions that the 

Commission should consider. 

5. In addition, the Petitioners propose 

that the Commission require a 

forbearance petitioner to separately 

demonstrate how it has satisfied each 

component of the forbearance standard. 

They assert that such a requirement is 

consistent with the Commission’s 

pleading requirements in other contexts. 

The Petitioners contend that, in past 

practice, petitioners have failed to 

address each element of the section 10 

standard individually, instead generally 

asserting that the forbearance criteria are 

satisfied with respect to all of the 

regulations and statutory provisions 

from which they are seeking 

forbearance. The Commission seeks 

comment on the Petitioners’ specific 

proposal, including its relationship to 

the section 10 or section 332 

forbearance standard and the 

Commission’s forbearance analysis set 

forth in prior orders. 

6. The Commission also seeks 

comment on the Petitioners’ request that 

the Commission adopt particular rules 

addressing the scope and interpretation 

of protective orders in forbearance 

proceedings. The Petitioners suggest 

rules governing the timing of adoption 

of protective orders and the terms of 

access to, and use of, documents and 

information submitted pursuant to those 

protective orders. For example, the 

Petitioners suggest that all interested 

parties should be permitted to obtain 

copies of confidential and highly 

confidential documents. In addition, the 

Petitioners recommend that parties be 

allowed to use information submitted 

pursuant to protective order in one 

forbearance proceeding in other 

Commission forbearance proceedings in 

which a petitioning party seeks relief 

from the same rules and/or statutory 

provisions and that states be permitted 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
6890 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

to use documents designated as 

Confidential and Highly Confidential in 

related state proceedings. The 

Commission seeks comment on the 

Petitioners’ specific proposals, as well 

as any other comments regarding the 

submission of, access to, and use of 

documents and information covered by 

protective orders in forbearance 

proceedings. The Commission also 

seeks comment specifically on the 

relationship between the rules proposed 

by Petitioners or other commenters and 

the Commission’s rules and precedent 

regarding information withheld from 

public inspection. 

7. The Petitioners further seek rules 

establishing a timetable for Commission 

proceedings addressing forbearance 

petitions, which, among other things, 

incorporates a limited period for a 

petitioning party to cure minor defects 

in its petition without having to re-start 

the statutory clock, provides a specific 

vehicle for state commission input in 

the forbearance process; addresses 

motions to dismiss, and establishes a 

standard comment cycle; as well as a 

time limit on substantive ex parte 

submissions and other requirements. 

The Commission seeks comment on 

each of the proposals suggested by the 

Petitioners, as well as their general 

recommendation for the adoption of 

specific timetables for the Commission’s 

review of forbearance petitions. The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

other proposals for steps the 

Commission could take to facilitate the 

participation of state commissions, as 

well as other parties, in forbearance 

proceedings. 

8. The Petitioners propose that the 

Commission adopt additional 

requirements for petitions seeking 

forbearance from sections 251 and/or 

271 of the Act. For example, the 

Petitioners propose that petitioners 

seeking forbearance from sections 251 or 

271 must provide supporting data at the 

wire center level. The Petitioners further 

propose that the Commission adopt a 

rule inviting states to report to the 

Commission on the potential effects of 

sections 251 and/or 271 forbearance in 

their states. 

9. The Petitioners also suggest certain 

procedural requirements governing the 

resolution of forbearance petitions, 

including a proposal that the 

Commission adopt a rule requiring the 

issuance of a written order on all 

forbearance petitions, including those 

petitions that previously have been 

‘‘deemed granted.’’ The Commission 

seeks comment on that proposal. 

10. To the extent that the Commission 

adopts procedural rules to govern 

forbearance petitions, the Petitioners 

request that those rules apply both to 

forbearance petitions filed in the future, 

as the well as forbearance petitions 

already pending before the Commission. 

The Commission seeks comment on the 

extent of the Commission’s authority to 

adopt procedural rules governing both 

future forbearance petitions as well as 

those that already are pending before 

the Commission, particularly with 

respect to the procedural rules proposed 

by the Petitioners. The Commission also 

seeks comment on the propriety, as a 

policy matter, of extending particular 

procedural rules in such manner. 

11. In recent years, the Commission 

has witnessed a significant increase in 

the number of petitions seeking 

forbearance submitted by 

telecommunications carriers that the 

Commission oversees. These petitions 

have had different results, such as 

petitions being approved, denied, 

withdrawn or deemed granted. In the 

course of Congressional oversight, some 

Members of Congress have raised 

concerns with how forbearance is used. 

Some companies have indicated serious 

concerns with the forbearance process, 

while others argue that it is an 

important tool for the Commission to 

eliminate rules, consistent with the 

public interest. The Commission 

therefore seeks comment on whether 

forbearance is an effective means for the 

Commission to make changes to its 

regulations. The Commission also seeks 

comment on whether forbearance is 

being utilized for the purposes intended 

by Congress. The Commission asks 

whether there are unintended 

consequences of forbearance, such as a 

focus on these petitions at the expense 

of other industry-wide proceedings, 

including burdens on stakeholders from 

forbearance proceedings, such as 

administrative and financial costs. The 

Commission asks whether there are 

additional burdens placed on 

stakeholders due to the fact that there is 

a statutory deadline on the completion 

of forbearance petitions. The 

Commission also seeks comment 

regarding the effects of having a 

company-specific petition drive agency 

decisions, rather than the Commission 

deciding to take industry-wide actions. 

12. Finally, the Commission seeks 

comment on any other aspects of the 

Petition, as well as any other comments 

regarding the need for any other 

procedural rules to govern the 

Commission’s consideration of 

forbearance petitions. The Commission 

also invites comment on the possible 

effect on small entities from adopting 

any of the Petitioners’ proposed rules, or 

variations of those proposals set forth 

above. To the extent that the 

Commission were to adopt any 

procedural rules governing forbearance 

petitions proposed by the Petitioners or 

otherwise justified in the record, the 

Commission asks what would be the 

appropriate remedy for a violation of 

those rules. 

Ex Parte Presentations 

13. The rulemaking this NPRM 

initiates shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance 

with the Commission’s ex parte rules. 

Persons making oral ex parte 

presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentations must contain summaries 

of the substance of the presentations 

and not merely a listing of the subjects 

discussed. More than a one or two 

sentence description of the views and 

arguments presented generally is 

required. Other requirements pertaining 

to oral and written presentations are set 

forth in § 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s 

rules. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

14. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, the Commission 

has prepared an Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 

possible significant economic impact on 

small entities of the policies and rules 

addressed in this document. The IRFA 

is set forth separately below. Written 

public comments are requested on this 

IRFA. Comments must be identified as 

responses to the IRFA. Comments are 

due March 7, 2008 and Reply Comments 

are due March 24, 2008. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

15. This document contains proposed 

new or modified information collection 

requirements. The Commission, as part 

of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork burdens, invites the general 

public and the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) to comment on the 

information collection requirements 

contained in this document, as required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

pursuant to the Small Business 

Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public 

Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), 

we seek specific comment on how we 

might ‘‘further reduce the information 

collection burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 

employees.’’

Accessible Formats 

16. To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(Braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an e-mail to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 6891 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–

418–0530 (voice) or 202–418–0432 

(TTY). Contact the FCC to request 

reasonable accommodations for filing 

comments (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov; 

phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–418–

0432. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

17. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA), the Commission has prepared the 

present Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) of the possible 

significant economic impact on small 

entities that might result from this 

NPRM. Written public comments are 

requested on this IRFA. Comments must 

be identified as responses to the IRFA 

and must be filed by the deadlines for 

comments on the NPRM provided 

above. The Commission will send a 

copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration. In 

addition, the NPRM and the IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

A. Need For, and Objectives Of, the 

Proposed Rules 

18. In this NPRM, we seek comment 

on whether the Commission should 

adopt procedural rules governing its 

consideration of petitions for 

forbearance pursuant to section 10 or 

section 332 of the Act. In particular, we 

seek comment on the need to apply 

APA notice-and-comment rules to 

forbearance petitions. We also seek 

comment on the burdens of proof and 

production in forbearance proceedings. 

Additionally, we seek comment on 

whether to adopt rules governing the 

form and content of forbearance 

petitions, including possibly a 

‘‘complete-as-filed’’ requirement and a 

requirement that the petitioner 

demonstrate that it has satisfied each 

element of the forbearance standard. 

Further, we solicit comment on the need 

for rules governing the scope and 

interpretation of protective orders in 

forbearance proceedings. In addition, 

we seek comment on the need for rules 

establishing timetables for Commission 

proceedings addressing forbearance 

petitions. In the NPRM, we also seek 

comment on whether additional rules 

are warranted for petitions seeking 

forbearance from section 251 or section 

271 of the Act. We further seek 

comment on whether we should adopt 

procedural requirements governing the 

resolution of forbearance petitions. We 

also seek comment on the need for any 

other procedural rules governing 

forbearance petitions, the scope of 

application of such rules, and the 

appropriate remedies for violation 

should the Commission adopt such 

rules. For each of these issues, we seek 

comment on the possible effects on 

small entities, associated with any rules 

the Commission might adopt. 

B. Legal Basis 

19. The legal basis for any action that 

may be taken pursuant to this NPRM is 

contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 10, 

303, 332 and 403 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i)–(j), 160, 

303, 332, 403. 

C. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities To Which the 

Proposed Rules May Apply 

20. The RFA directs agencies to 

provide a description of, and where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities that may be affected by 

the proposed rules and policies, if 

adopted. The RFA generally defines the 

term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same 

meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’

‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition, 

the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same 

meaning as the term ‘‘small business 

concern’’ under the Small Business Act. 

A ‘‘small business concern’’ is one 

which: (1) Is independently owned and 

operated; (2) is not dominant in its field 

of operation; and (3) satisfies any 

additional criteria established by the 

SBA. 

21. Small Businesses. Nationwide, 

there are a total of 22.4 million small 

businesses, according to SBA data. 

22. Small Organizations. Nationwide, 

there are approximately 1.6 million 

small organizations. 

23. Small Governmental Jurisdictions. 

The term ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdiction’’ is defined generally as 

‘‘governments of cities, towns, 

townships, villages, school districts, or 

special districts, with a population of 

less than fifty thousand.’’ Census 

Bureau data for 2002 indicate that there 

were 87,525 local governmental 

jurisdictions in the United States. We 

estimate that, of this total, 84,377 

entities were ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdictions.’’ Thus, we estimate that 

most governmental jurisdictions are 

small. 

24. Incumbent Local Exchange 

Carriers (ILECs). Neither the 

Commission nor the SBA has developed 

a small business size standard 

specifically for incumbent local 

exchange services. The appropriate size 

standard under SBA rules is for the 

category Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers. Under that size standard, such 

a business is small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. According to 

Commission data, 1,303 carriers have 

reported that they are engaged in the 

provision of incumbent local exchange 

services. Of these 1,303 carriers, an 

estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer 

employees and 283 have more than 

1,500 employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that most 

providers of incumbent local exchange 

service are small businesses that may be 

affected by our proposed action. 

25. Competitive Local Exchange 

Carriers (CLECs), Competitive Access 

Providers (CAPs), ‘‘Shared-Tenant 

Service Providers,’’ and ‘‘Other Local 

Service Providers.’’ Neither the 

Commission nor the SBA has developed 

a small business size standard 

specifically for these service providers. 

The appropriate size standard under 

SBA rules is for the category Wired 

Telecommunications Carriers. Under 

that size standard, such a business is 

small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

According to Commission data, 769 

carriers have reported that they are 

engaged in the provision of either 

competitive access provider services or 

competitive local exchange carrier 

services. Of these 769 carriers, an 

estimated 676 have 1,500 or fewer 

employees and 94 have more than 1,500 

employees. In addition, 12 carriers have 

reported that they are ‘‘Shared-Tenant 

Service Providers,’’ and all 12 are 

estimated to have 1,500 or fewer 

employees. In addition, 39 carriers have 

reported that they are ‘‘Other Local 

Service Providers.’’ Of the 39, an 

estimated 38 have 1,500 or fewer 

employees and one has more than 1,500 

employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that most 

providers of competitive local exchange 

service, competitive access providers, 

‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and 

‘‘Other Local Service Providers’’ are 

small entities that may be affected by 

our proposed action. 

26. Interexchange Carriers (IXCs). 

Neither the Commission nor the SBA 

has developed a small business size 

standard specifically for providers of 

interexchange services. The appropriate 

size standard under SBA rules is for the 

category Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers. Under that size standard, such 

a business is small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. According to 

Commission data, 316 carriers have 

reported that they are engaged in the 

provision of interexchange service. Of 

these, an estimated 292 have 1,500 or 

fewer employees and 24 have more than 

1,500 employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that the majority 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
6892 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

of IXCs are small entities that may be 

affected by our proposed action. 

27. International Service Providers. 

There is no small business size standard 

developed specifically for providers of 

international service. The appropriate 

size standards under SBA rules are for 

the two broad census categories of 

‘‘Satellite Telecommunications’’ and 

‘‘Other Telecommunications.’’ Under 

both categories, such a business is small 

if it has $13.5 million or less in average 

annual receipts. 

28. The first category of Satellite 

Telecommunications ‘‘comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in 

providing point-to-point 

telecommunications services to other 

establishments in the 

telecommunications and broadcasting 

industries by forwarding and receiving 

communications signals via a system of 

satellites or reselling satellite 

telecommunications.’’ For this category, 

Census Bureau data for 2002 show that 

there were a total of 371 firms that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 307 firms had annual receipts of 

under $10 million, and 26 firms had 

receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. 

Consequently, we estimate that the 

majority of Satellite 

Telecommunications firms are small 

entities that might be affected by our 

action. 

29. The second category of Other 

Telecommunications ‘‘comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in (1) 

providing specialized 

telecommunications applications, such 

as satellite tracking, communications 

telemetry, and radar station operations; 

or (2) providing satellite terminal 

stations and associated facilities 

operationally connected with one or 

more terrestrial communications 

systems and capable of transmitting 

telecommunications to or receiving 

telecommunications from satellite 

systems.’’ For this category, Census 

Bureau data for 2002 show that there 

were a total of 332 firms that operated 

for the entire year. Of this total, 259 

firms had annual receipts of under $10 

million and 15 firms had annual 

receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. 

Consequently, we estimate that the 

majority of Other Telecommunications 

firms are small entities that might be 

affected by our action. 

30. Wireless Service Providers. The 

SBA has developed a small business 

size standard for wireless firms within 

the two broad economic census 

categories of ‘‘Paging’’ and ‘‘Cellular and 

Other Wireless Telecommunications.’’

Under both categories, the SBA deems 

a wireless business to be small if it has 

1,500 or fewer employees. For the 

census category of Paging, Census 

Bureau data for 2002 show that there 

were 807 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 804 firms had employment of 999 

or fewer employees, and three firms had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus, under this category and 

associated small business size standard, 

the majority of firms can be considered 

small. For the census category of 

Cellular and Other Wireless 

Telecommunications, Census Bureau 

data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 

firms in this category that operated for 

the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms 

had employment of 999 or fewer 

employees, and 19 firms had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus, under this second category 

and size standard, the majority of firms 

can, again, be considered small. 

31. Cellular Licensees. The SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard for wireless firms within the 

two broad economic census categories 

of ‘‘Paging’’ and ‘‘Cellular and Other 

Wireless Telecommunications.’’ Under 

both categories, the SBA deems a 

wireless business to be small if it has 

1,500 or fewer employees. For the 

census category of Paging, Census 

Bureau data for 2002 show that there 

were 807 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 804 firms had employment of 999 

or fewer employees, and three firms had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus, under this category and 

associated small business size standard, 

the majority of firms can be considered 

small. For the census category of 

Cellular and Other Wireless 

Telecommunications, Census Bureau 

data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 

firms in this category that operated for 

the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms 

had employment of 999 or fewer 

employees, and 19 firms had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus, under this second category 

and size standard, the majority of firms 

can, again, be considered small. 

32. Common Carrier Paging. As noted, 

the SBA has developed a small business 

size standard for wireless firms within 

the broad economic census categories of 

‘‘Cellular and Other Wireless 

Telecommunications.’’ Under this SBA 

category, a wireless business is small if 

it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the 

census category of Paging, U.S. Census 

Bureau data for 1997 show that there 

were 1,320 firms in this category, total, 

that operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 1,303 firms had employment of 

999 or fewer employees, and an 

additional 17 firms had employment of 

1,000 employees or more. Thus, under 

this category and associated small 

business size standard, the great 

majority of firms can be considered 

small. 

33. In addition, in the Paging Second 

Report and Order, the Commission 

adopted a size standard for ‘‘small 

businesses’’ for purposes of determining 

their eligibility for special provisions 

such as bidding credits and installment 

payments. A small business is an entity 

that, together with its affiliates and 

controlling principals, has average gross 

revenues not exceeding $15 million for 

the preceding three years. The SBA has 

approved this definition. An auction of 

Metropolitan Economic Area (MEA) 

licenses commenced on February 24, 

2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. Of 

the 2,499 licenses auctioned, 985 were 

sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming 

small business status won 440 licenses. 

An auction of MEA and Economic Area 

(EA) licenses commenced on October 

30, 2001, and closed on December 5, 

2001. Of the 15,514 licenses auctioned, 

5,323 were sold. One hundred thirtytwo companies claiming small business 

status purchased 3,724 licenses. A third 

auction, consisting of 8,874 licenses in 

each of 175 EAs and 1,328 licenses in 

all but three of the 51 MEAs 

commenced on May 13, 2003, and 

closed on May 28, 2003. Seventy-seven 

bidders claiming small or very small 

business status won 2,093 licenses. 

Currently, there are approximately 

74,000 Common Carrier Paging licenses. 

According to the most recent Trends in 

Telephone Service, 408 private and 

common carriers reported that they 

were engaged in the provision of either 

paging or ‘‘other mobile’’ services. Of 

these, we estimate that 589 are small, 

under the SBA-approved small business 

size standard. We estimate that the 

majority of common carrier paging 

providers would qualify as small 

entities under the SBA definition. 

34. Wireless Communications 

Services. This service can be used for 

fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital 

audio broadcasting satellite uses. The 

Commission defined ‘‘small business’’

for the wireless communications 

services (WCS) auction as an entity with 

average gross revenues of $40 million 

for each of the three preceding years, 

and a ‘‘very small business’’ as an entity 

with average gross revenues of $15 

million for each of the three preceding 

years. The SBA has approved these 

definitions. The Commission auctioned 

geographic area licenses in the WCS 

service. In the auction, which 

commenced on April 15, 1997 and 

closed on April 25, 1997, there were 

seven bidders that won 31 licenses that 

qualified as very small business entities, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 6893 

and one bidder that won one license 

that qualified as a small business entity. 

An auction for one license in the 1670–

1674 MHz band commenced on April 

30, 2003 and closed the same day. One 

license was awarded. The winning 

bidder was not a small entity. 

35. Wireless Telephony. Wireless 

telephony includes cellular, personal 

communications services, and 

specialized mobile radio telephony 

carriers. The SBA has developed a small 

business size standard for ‘‘Cellular and 

Other Wireless Telecommunications’’

services. Under the SBA small business 

size standard, a business is small if it 

has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

According to Trends in Telephone 

Service data, 437 carriers reported that 

they were engaged in wireless 

telephony. We have estimated that 260 

of these are small under the SBA small 

business size standard. 

36. Broadband Personal 

Communications Service. The 

broadband personal communications 

services (PCS) spectrum is divided into 

six frequency blocks designated A 

through F, and the Commission has held 

auctions for each block. The 

Commission has created a small 

business size standard for Blocks C and 

F as an entity that has average gross 

revenues of less than $40 million in the 

three previous calendar years. For Block 

F, an additional small business size 

standard for ‘‘very small business’’ was 

added and is defined as an entity that, 

together with its affiliates, has average 

gross revenues of not more than $15 

million for the preceding three calendar 

years. These small business size 

standards, in the context of broadband 

PCS auctions, have been approved by 

the SBA. No small businesses within the 

SBA-approved small business size 

standards bid successfully for licenses 

in Blocks A and B. There were 90 

winning bidders that qualified as small 

entities in the Block C auctions. A total 

of 93 ‘‘small’’ and ‘‘very small’’ business 

bidders won approximately 40 percent 

of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and 

F. On March 23, 1999, the Commission 

reauctioned 155 C, D, E, and F Block 

licenses; there were 113 small business 

winning bidders. 

38. On January 26, 2001, the 

Commission completed the auction of 

422 C and F Broadband PCS licenses in 

Auction No. 35. Of the 35 winning 

bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as 

‘‘small’’ or ‘‘very small’’ businesses. 

Subsequent events, concerning Auction 

35, including judicial and agency 

determinations, resulted in a total of 163 

C and F Block licenses being available 

for grant. On February 15, 2005, the 

Commission completed an auction of 

188 C Block licenses and 21 F Block 

licenses in Auction No. 58. There were 

24 winning bidders for 217 licenses. Of 

the 24 winning bidders, 16 claimed 

small business status and won 156 

licenses. 

39. Narrowband Personal 

Communications Services. The 

Commission held an auction for 

Narrowband PCS licenses that 

commenced on July 25, 1994, and 

closed on July 29, 1994. A second 

auction commenced on October 26, 

1994 and closed on November 8, 1994. 

For purposes of the first two 

Narrowband PCS auctions, ‘‘small 

businesses’’ were entities with average 

gross revenues for the prior three 

calendar years of $40 million or less. 

Through these auctions, the 

Commission awarded a total of 41 

licenses, 11 of which were obtained by 

four small businesses. To ensure 

meaningful participation by small 

business entities in future auctions, the 

Commission adopted a two-tiered small 

business size standard in the 

Narrowband PCS Second Report and 

Order. A ‘‘small business’’ is an entity 

that, together with affiliates and 

controlling interests, has average gross 

revenues for the three preceding years of 

not more than $40 million. A ‘‘very 

small business’’ is an entity that, 

together with affiliates and controlling 

interests, has average gross revenues for 

the three preceding years of not more 

than $15 million. The SBA has 

approved these small business size 

standards. A third auction commenced 

on October 3, 2001 and closed on 

October 16, 2001. Here, five bidders 

won 317 (Metropolitan Trading Areas 

and nationwide) licenses. Three of these 

claimed status as a small or very small 

entity and won 311 licenses. 

40. Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses. 

We adopted criteria for defining three 

groups of small businesses for purposes 

of determining their eligibility for 

special provisions such as bidding 

credits. We have defined a ‘‘small 

business’’ as an entity that, together 

with its affiliates and controlling 

principals, has average gross revenues 

not exceeding $40 million for the 

preceding three years. A ‘‘very small 

business’’ is defined as an entity that, 

together with its affiliates and 

controlling principals, has average gross 

revenues that are not more than $15 

million for the preceding three years. 

Additionally, the lower 700 MHz 

Service has a third category of small 

business status that may be claimed for 

Metropolitan/Rural Service Area (MSA/ 

RSA) licenses. The third category is 

‘‘entrepreneur,’’ which is defined as an 

entity that, together with its affiliates 

and controlling principals, has average 

gross revenues that are not more than $3 

million for the preceding three years. 

The SBA has approved these small size 

standards. An auction of 740 licenses 

(one license in each of the 734 MSAs/ 

RSAs and one license in each of the six 

Economic Area Groupings (EAGs)) 

commenced on August 27, 2002, and 

closed on September 18, 2002. Of the 

740 licenses available for auction, 484 

licenses were sold to 102 winning 

bidders. Seventy-two of the winning 

bidders claimed small business, very 

small business or entrepreneur status 

and won a total of 329 licenses. A 

second auction commenced on May 28, 

2003, and closed on June 13, 2003, and 

included 256 licenses: 5 EAG licenses 

and 476 Cellular Market Area licenses. 

Seventeen winning bidders claimed 

small or very small business status and 

won 60 licenses, and nine winning 

bidders claimed entrepreneur status and 

won 154 licenses. On July 26, 2005, the 

Commission completed an auction of 5 

licenses in the Lower 700 MHz band 

(Auction No. 60). There were three 

winning bidders for five licenses. All 

three winning bidders claimed small 

business status. 

41. Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses. In 

Service Rules for the 746–764 and 776–

794 MHz Bands, 16 FCC Rcd 1239 

(January 12, 2001), the Commission 

authorized service in the upper 700 

MHz band. This auction, previously 

scheduled for January 13, 2003, has 

been postponed. 

42. 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses. In 

the 700 MHz Guard Band Order, we 

adopted size standards for ‘‘small 

businesses’’ and ‘‘very small 

businesses’’ for purposes of determining 

their eligibility for special provisions 

such as bidding credits and installment 

payments. A small business in this 

service is an entity that, together with 

its affiliates and controlling principals, 

has average gross revenues not 

exceeding $40 million for the preceding 

three years. Additionally, a very small 

business is an entity that, together with 

its affiliates and controlling principals, 

has average gross revenues that are not 

more than $15 million for the preceding 

three years. SBA approval of these 

definitions is not required. An auction 

of 52 Major Economic Area (MEA) 

licenses commenced on September 6, 

2000, and closed on September 21, 

2000. Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 

licenses were sold to nine bidders. Five 

of these bidders were small businesses 

that won a total of 26 licenses. A second 

auction of 700 MHz Guard Band 

licenses commenced on February 13, 

2001, and closed on February 21, 2001. 

All eight of the licenses auctioned were 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
6894 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

sold to three bidders. One of these 

bidders was a small business that won 

a total of two licenses. 

43. Fixed Microwave Services. Fixed 

microwave services include common 

carrier, private operational-fixed, and 

broadcast auxiliary radio services. At 

present, there are approximately 22,015 

common carrier fixed licensees and 

61,670 private operational-fixed 

licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio 

licensees in the microwave services. 

The Commission has not created a size 

standard for a small business 

specifically with respect to fixed 

microwave services. For purposes of 

this analysis, the Commission uses the 

SBA small business size standard for the 

category ‘‘Cellular and Other 

Telecommunications,’’ which is 1,500 

or fewer employees. The Commission 

does not have data specifying the 

number of these licensees that have no 

more than 1,500 employees, and thus 

are unable at this time to estimate with 

greater precision the number of fixed 

microwave service licensees that would 

qualify as small business concerns 

under the SBA’s small business size 

standard. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that there are 

22,015 or fewer common carrier fixed 

licensees and 61,670 or fewer private 

operational-fixed licensees and 

broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in 

the microwave services that may be 

small and may be affected by the rules 

and policies proposed herein. We note, 

however, that the common carrier 

microwave fixed licensee category 

includes some large entities. 

44. 39 GHz Service. The Commission 

created a special small business size 

standard for 39 GHz licenses—an entity 

that has average gross revenues of $40 

million or less in the three previous 

calendar years. An additional size 

standard for ‘‘very small business’’ is: 

An entity that, together with affiliates, 

has average gross revenues of not more 

than $15 million for the preceding three 

calendar years. The SBA has approved 

these small business size standards. 

The auction of the 2,173 39 GHz 

licenses began on April 12, 2000 and 

closed on May 8, 2000. 

The 18 bidders who claimed small 

business status won 849 licenses. 

45. Local Multipoint Distribution 

Service. Local Multipoint Distribution 

Service (LMDS) is a fixed broadband 

point-to-multipoint microwave service 

that provides for two-way video 

telecommunications. The auction of the 

986 Local Multipoint Distribution 

Service (LMDS) licenses began on 

February 18, 1998 and closed on March 

25, 1998. The Commission established a 

small business size standard for LMDS 

licenses as an entity that has average 

gross revenues of less than $40 million 

in the three previous calendar years. An 

additional small business size standard 

for ‘‘very small business’’ was added as 

an entity that, together with its affiliates, 

has average gross revenues of not more 

than $15 million for the preceding three 

calendar years. The SBA has approved 

these small business size standards in 

the context of LMDS auctions. There 

were 93 winning bidders that qualified 

as small entities in the LMDS auctions. 

A total of 93 small and very small 

business bidders won approximately 

277 A Block licenses and 387 B Block 

licenses. On March 27, 1999, the 

Commission re-auctioned 161 licenses; 

there were 32 small and very small 

businesses that won 119 licenses. 

46. 218–219 MHz Service. The first 

auction of 218–219 MHz (previously 

referred to as the Interactive and Video 

Data Service or IVDS) spectrum resulted 

in 178 entities winning licenses for 594 

Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). 

Of the 594 licenses, 567 were won by 

167 entities qualifying as a small 

business. For that auction, we defined a 

small business as an entity that, together 

with its affiliates, has no more than a $6 

million net worth and, after federal 

income taxes (excluding any carry over 

losses), has no more than $2 million in 

annual profits each year for the previous 

two years. In the 218–219 MHz Report 

and Order and Memorandum Opinion 

and Order, we defined a small business 

as an entity that, together with its 

affiliates and persons or entities that 

hold interests in such an entity and 

their affiliates, has average annual gross 

revenues not exceeding $15 million for 

the preceding three years. A very small 

business is defined as an entity that, 

together with its affiliates and persons 

or entities that hold interests in such an 

entity and its affiliates, has average 

annual gross revenues not exceeding $3 

million for the preceding three years. 

The SBA has approved of these 

definitions. A subsequent auction is not 

yet scheduled. Given the success of 

small businesses in the previous 

auction, and the prevalence of small 

businesses in the subscription television 

services and message communications 

industries, we assume for purposes of 

this analysis that in future auctions, 

many, and perhaps most, of the licenses 

may be awarded to small businesses. 

47. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The 

Commission has not adopted a size 

standard for small businesses specific to 

the Rural Radiotelephone Service. A 

significant subset of the Rural 

Radiotelephone Service is the Basic 

Exchange Telephone Radio System 

(BETRS). In the present context, we will 

use the SBA’s small business size 

standard applicable to ‘‘Cellular and 

Other Wireless Telecommunications,’’

i.e., an entity employing no more than 

1,500 persons. There are approximately 

1,000 licensees in the Rural 

Radiotelephone Service, and the 

Commission estimates that there are 

1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in 

the Rural Radiotelephone Service that 

may be affected by the rules and 

policies proposed herein. 

48. Incumbent 24 GHz Licensees. This 

analysis may affect incumbent licensees 

who were relocated to the 24 GHz band 

from the 18 GHz band, and applicants 

who wish to provide services in the 24 

GHz band. The applicable SBA small 

business size standard is that of 

‘‘Cellular and Other Wireless 

Telecommunications’’ companies. This 

category provides that such a company 

is small if it employs no more than 

1,500 persons. For the census category 

of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 

show that there were 807 firms in this 

category that operated for the entire 

year. Of this total, 804 firms had 

employment of 999 or fewer employees, 

and three firms had employment of 

1,000 employees or more. Thus, under 

this category and associated small 

business size standard, the majority of 

firms can be considered small. For the 

census category of Cellular and Other 

Wireless Telecommunications, Census 

Bureau data for 2002 show that there 

were 1,397 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 1,378 firms had employment of 

999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms 

had employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus, under this second category 

and size standard, the majority of firms 

can, again, be considered small. These 

broader census data notwithstanding, 

we believe that there are only two 

licensees in the 24 GHz band that were 

relocated from the 18 GHz band, 

Teligent and TRW, Inc. It is our 

understanding that Teligent and its 

related companies have fewer than 

1,500 employees, though this may 

change in the future. TRW is not a small 

entity. Thus, only one incumbent 

licensee in the 24 GHz band is a small 

business entity. 

49. Future 24 GHz Licensees. With 

respect to new applicants in the 24 GHz 

band, we have defined ‘‘small business’’

as an entity that, together with 

controlling interests and affiliates, has 

average annual gross revenues for the 

three preceding years not exceeding $15 

million. ‘‘Very small business’’ in the 24 

GHz band is defined as an entity that, 

together with controlling interests and 

affiliates, has average gross revenues not 

exceeding $3 million for the preceding 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2008 / Proposed Rules 6895 

three years. The SBA has approved 

these definitions. The Commission will 

not know how many licensees will be 

small or very small businesses until the 

auction, if required, is held. 

D. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

50. Should the Commission decide to 

adopt any procedural rules governing 

petitions for forbearance, the associated 

rules potentially could modify or 

impose new reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. For example, we seek 

comment on the possible need for rules 

governing the form and content of 

forbearance petitions, such as 

‘‘complete-as-filed’’ requirements and 

obligations for forbearance petitioners to 

demonstrate that they have satisfied 

each element of the forbearance 

standard. The Commission also seeks 

comment on the possible need or rules 

governing the scope and interpretation 

of protective orders in forbearance 

proceedings, including rules governing 

the submission of, access to, and use of 

information submitted pursuant to 

protective orders in forbearance 

proceedings. In addition, we seek 

comment on the need for rules 

establishing timetables for Commission 

proceedings addressing forbearance 

petitions, including requirements 

governing modification of forbearance 

petitions and processes for ex parte 

filings. We further seek comment on 

whether we should adopt procedural 

requirements governing petitions for 

reconsideration of forbearance 

decisions. The Commission also seeks 

comment on the need for any other 

procedural rules governing forbearance 

petitions, the scope of application of 

such rules, and the appropriate 

remedies for violation should the 

Commission adopt such rules. These 

proposals may impose additional 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements on entities. Also, we seek 

comment on the effects of any of these 

proposals on small entities. Entities, 

especially small businesses, are 

encouraged to quantify the costs and 

benefits or any reporting requirement 

that may be established in this 

proceeding. 

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

51. The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant alternatives that 

it has considered in reaching its 

proposed approach, which may include 

(among others) the following four 

alternatives: (1) The establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance or reporting requirements 

under the rule for small entities; (3) the 

use of performance, rather than design, 

standards; and (4) an exemption from 

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, 

for small entities. 

52. The Commission’s primary 

objective is to implement the ‘‘procompetitive, deregulatory’’ framework 

established in sections 10 and 332 of the 

Act. We seek comment on the burdens, 

including those placed on small 

carriers, associated with related 

Commission rules and whether the 

Commission should adopt different 

requirements for small businesses. 

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rules 

53. None. 

Ordering Clauses 

54. Accordingly, it is ordered that 

pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 10, 303, 

332 and 403 of the Communications Act 

of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 

154(i)–(j), 160, 303, 332, 403, this Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking in WC Docket 

No. 07–267 is adopted. 

55. It is further ordered that the 

Covad, et al. Petition to Establish 

Procedural Requirements to Govern 

Proceedings for Forbearance Under 

Section 10 of the Communications Act 

of 1934, as Amended, WC Docket No. 

07–267 (filed Sept. 19, 2007), is granted 

to the extent indicated herein and 

otherwise is denied. 

56. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this NPRM, including the Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–2180 Filed 2–5–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 223 and 226 

[Docket No. 070801431–7787–01] 

RIN 0648–AV35 

Endangered and Threatened Species; 

Critical Habitat for Threatened Elkhorn 

and Staghorn Corals 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS), propose to 

designate critical habitat for elkhorn 

(Acropora palmata) and staghorn (A. 

cervicornis) corals, which we listed as 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), 

on May 9, 2006. Four specific areas are 

proposed for designation: the Florida 

unit, which comprises approximately 

3,301 square miles (8,671 sq km) of 

marine habitat; the Puerto Rico unit, 

which comprises approximately 1,383 

square miles (3,582 sq km) of marine 

habitat; the St. John/St. Thomas unit, 

which comprises approximately 121 

square miles (313 sq km) of marine 

habitat; and the St. Croix unit, which 

comprises approximately 126 square 

miles (326 sq km) of marine habitat. We 

propose to exclude one military site, 

comprising approximately 47 square 

miles (123 sq km), because of national 

security impacts. 

We are soliciting comments from the 

public on all aspects of the proposal, 

including our identification and 

consideration of the positive and 

negative economic, national security, 

and other relevant impacts of the 

proposed designation, and the areas we 

propose to exclude from the 

designation. A draft impacts report 

prepared pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of 

the ESA in support of this proposal is 

also available for public review and 

comment. 

DATES: Comments on this proposal must 

be received by May 6, 2008. Public 

hearings will be held; see 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for dates 

and locations. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the Regulation Identifier 

Number (RIN) 0648–AV35, by any of the 

following methods: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS