Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 24 / Friday, February 6, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 6235 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 08–132, 

adopted January 26, 2009, and released 

January 29, 2009. The full text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC’s Reference 

Information Center at Portals II, CY– 

A257, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. This document 

will also be available via ECFS (http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents 

will be available electronically in ASCII, 

Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) This 

document may be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone 

1–800–478–3160 or via e-mail http:// 

www.BCPIWEB.com. To request this 

document in accessible formats 

(computer diskettes, large print, audio 

recording, and Braille), send an e-mail 

to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). This document does not contain 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

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). Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to 

this proceeding. 

The Commission will send a copy of 

this Report and Order in a report to be 

sent to Congress and the Government 

Accountability Office pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A). 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Television, Television broadcasting. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as 

follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. 

§ 73.622 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 73.622(i), the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments 

under New Mexico, is amended by 

adding DTV channel 12 and removing 

DTV channel 20 at Clovis. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Clay C. Pendarvis, 

Associate Chief, Video Division, Media 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. E9–2572 Filed 2–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 90 

[WT Docket No. 02–55; FCC 08–276] 

Improving Public Safety 

Communications in the 800 MHz Band; 

County of Chester, PA and Sprint 

Nextel Corporation; City of 

Chesapeake, VA and Sprint Nextel 

Corporation 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: On December 23, 2008, the 

Commission addressed the June 25, 

2008 request by Sprint Nextel 

Corporation (Sprint) to defer the 800 

MHz rebanding financial ‘‘true-up’’ 

process until after rebanding is 

completed. The Commission concluded 

that the true-up should be deferred until 

additional progress in rebanding has 

occurred, and therefore postponed the 

true-up date from December 26, 2008 to 

July 1, 2009. The Commission also 

directed the 800 MHz Transition 

Administrator (TA) to file a report by 

May 1, 2009, with its recommendation 

on whether the true-up should be 

conducted on July 1, 2009 or postponed 

to a later date. 

DATES: Effective February 6, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy 

Ragsdale, Policy Division, Public Safety 

and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 

418–0838; John Evanoff, Policy 

Division, Public Safety and Homeland 

Security Bureau. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Fourth 

Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 

08–276, released on December 23, 2008. 

The complete text of this document is 

available for inspection and copying 

during normal business hours in the 

FCC Reference Information Center, 

Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. This 

document may also be purchased from 

the Commission’s duplicating 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 

445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 

378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile 

(202) 863–2898, or via e-mail at http:// 

www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available 

on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.fcc.gov. 

In the 800 MHz Report and Order, 69 

FR 67823, November 22, 2004, the 

Commission ordered rebanding of the 

800 MHz band to resolve interference 

between commercial and public safety 

systems in the band. The Commission 

required that band reconfiguration in 

non-border regions be completed in 36 

months. The Commission further 

ordered the TA to perform a financial 

reconciliation or ‘‘true-up’’ six months 

after the 36-month transition period 

ended, i.e., 42 months after the start of 

rebanding. The purpose of the true-up is 

to assess Sprint’s total creditable 

rebanding costs for both 800 MHz 

rebanding and relocating of Broadcast 

Auxiliary Service (BAS) licensees in the 

1.9 GHz band, and to compare these 

costs to the value of the 1.9 GHz 

spectrum that the Commission awarded 

to Sprint. If the value of the 1.9 GHz 

spectrum exceeds Sprint’s creditable 

costs, Sprint must pay the difference to 

the U.S. Treasury as an ‘‘anti-windfall’’ 

payment. The 36-month rebanding 

period established by the 800 MHz 

Report and Order expired on June 26, 

2008. Accordingly, under the currently 

applicable timetable, the true-up must 

occur no later than six months after that 

date, or by December 26, 2008. 

On December 23, 2008, the 

Commission addressed the June 25, 

2008 request by Sprint Nextel 

Corporation (Sprint) to defer the 800 

MHz rebanding financial ‘‘true-up’’ 

process until after rebanding is 

completed. The Commission concluded 

that the true-up should be deferred until 

additional progress in rebanding has 

occurred, and therefore postponed the 

true-up date from December 26, 2008 to 

July 1, 2009. The Commission also 

directed the 800 MHz Transition 

Administrator (TA) to file a report by 

May 1, 2009, with its recommendation 

on whether the true-up should be 

conducted on July 1, 2009 or postponed 

to a later date. 

The Commission also addressed 

several pending petitions for 

reconsideration or review of prior 

rebanding orders and public notices. 

First, the Commission denied two 

petitions that seek reconsideration of its 

decision in the Second Memorandum 

Opinion and Order, 72 FR 39756, July 

20, 2007, in this proceeding requiring 

parties to bear their own costs in 

rebanding-related litigation before the 

Commission. Second, the Commission 

exercised its discretion to treat two 

pending petitions for de novo review 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
6236 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 24 / Friday, February 6, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

filed by Sprint against Chesapeake, 

Virginia, and Chester County, 

Pennsylvania, as applications for review 

for purposes of resolving questions of 

law, and the Commission allowed the 

parties to file oppositions and replies as 

provided under the Commission’s 

application for review procedures. 

Third, the Commission denied a 

petition for reconsideration that alleges 

that the Commission’s Public Notice 

released on September 12, 2007, 72 FR 

55208, September 28, 2007, to expedite 

the rebanding process imposed 

unreasonable new regulatory burdens 

on 800 MHz licensees. Finally, the 

Commission delegated authority to the 

Public Safety and Homeland Security 

Bureau (PSHSB or Bureau) to develop a 

rebanding plan for the U.S. Virgin 

Islands based on a proposal submitted 

by the TA. 

Procedural Matters 

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis required by section 604 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 604, 

is included in Appendix A of the Fourth 

Memorandum Opinion and Order. 

B. Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 Analysis 

The Fourth Memorandum Opinion 

and Order does not contain new or 

modified information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public 

Law 104–13. In addition, therefore it 

does not contain any new or modified 

‘‘information burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 

employees,’’ pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, as amended (RFA), requires that a 

regulatory flexibility analysis be 

prepared for notice-and-comment 

rulemaking proceedings, unless the 

agency certifies that ‘‘the rule will not, 

if promulgated, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities.’’ 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 Small Business 

Administration (SBA). Consistent with 

what we describe below, we certify that 

the actions in this Fourth Memorandum 

Opinion and Order will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Because the Commission’s decision is 

limited to reporting requirements 

applicable to Sprint and the TA and 

affects no other entity, and because the 

Commission’s decision concerning 

Sprint merely extends the status quo, 

the Commission certifies that its 

decision will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. All other 

issues do not raise regulatory flexibility 

issues because the Commission’s actions 

deny petitions for reconsideration, defer 

action on certain petitions for de novo 

review and afford certain parties an 

opportunity to file oppositions and 

replies as provided under our 

application for review procedures, or 

internally delegate authority, and 

therefore do not raise any regulatory 

flexibility issues. The Commission will 

send a copy of the Fourth Memorandum 

Opinion and Order, including a copy of 

this Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Certification, to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the SBA, and will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–2568 Filed 2–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 216 

[Docket No. 0808041027–9041–02] 

RIN 0648–AX08 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Space Vehicle and Test 

Flight Activities from Vandenberg Air 

Force Base (VAFB), California 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS, upon application from 

the U.S. Air Force (USAF), is issuing 

regulations to govern the unintentional 

taking of marine mammals, by 

harassment, incidental to launching 

space launch vehicles, intercontinental 

ballistic and small missiles, and aircraft 

and helicopter operations at VAFB for 

the period February 2009 through 

February 2014. The USAF’s activities 

are considered military readiness 

activities pursuant to the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as 

amended by the National Defense 

Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA). 

These regulations, which allow for the 

issuance of ‘‘Letters of Authorization’’ 

(LOAs) for the incidental take of marine 

mammals during the described activities 

and specified time frames, prescribe the 

permissible methods of taking and other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on marine mammal 

species and their habitat, as well as 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

DATES: Effective February 7, 2009, 

through February 7, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the USAF’s 

application, which contains a list of 

references used in this document, and 

NMFS’ Final Environmental Assessment 

(EA) and Finding of No Significant 

Impact (FONSI) may be obtained by 

writing to P. Michael Payne, Chief, 

Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resource, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 

East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910–3225, by telephoning the contact 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, or on the Internet at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental.htm#applications. 

Documents cited in this final rule may 

also be viewed, by appointment, during 

regular business hours at the above 

address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Candace Nachman, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–2289, ext. 

156, or Monica DeAngelis, Southwest 

Regional Office, NMFS, (562) 980–3232. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) 

to allow, upon request, the incidental, 

but not intentional taking of small 

numbers of marine mammals by U.S. 

citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

may be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES