        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Chapters II, III, IV, V, and VI
        RIN 0648-XE742
        Plan for Periodic Review of Regulations

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of regulatory review; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that NMFS periodically review existing regulations that have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, such as small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. This plan describes how NMFS will perform this review and describes the regulations that are being proposed for review during the current review cycle.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by NMFS by September 6, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2016-0099, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0099, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Tara Scott, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (mark outside of envelope “Comments on 610 Review”).
          • Fax: 301-713-1193; Attn: Tara Scott.

            Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented, and considered by NMFS. Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Tara Scott, (301) 427-8579.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires that Federal agencies take into account how their regulations affect “small entities,” including small businesses, small Governmental jurisdictions and small organizations. For regulations proposed after January 1, 1981, the agency must either prepare a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or certify that the regulation, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Section 602 of the RFA requires that NMFS issue an Agenda of Regulations identifying rules the Agency is developing that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

        Section 610 of the RFA requires Federal agencies to review existing regulations. It requires that NMFS publish a plan in the Federal Register explaining how it will review its existing regulations which have or will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Regulations that become effective after January 1, 1981, must be reviewed within 10 years of the publication date of the final rule. Section 610(c) requires that NMFS annually publish a list of final rules it will review during the succeeding 12 months in the Federal Register. The list must describe, explain the need for, and provide the legal basis for the rule, as well as invite public comment on the rule.
        Criteria for Review of Existing Regulations

        The purpose of the review is to determine whether existing rules should be left unchanged, or whether they should be revised or rescinded in order to minimize significant economic impacts on a substantial number of small entities, consistent with the objectives of other applicable statutes. In deciding whether change is necessary, the RFA establishes five factors that NMFS must consider:
        (1) Whether the rule is still needed;
        (2) What type of complaints or comments were received concerning the rule from the public;
        (3) The complexity of the rule;
        (4) How much the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and
        (5) How long it has been since the rule has been evaluated or how much the technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.
        Plan for Periodic Review of Rules
        NMFS will ensure that all rules which have or will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities are reviewed within 10 years of the year in which they were originally issued. By December 31, 2016, NMFS will review the following rules issued during 2009:
        1. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 30B. RIN 0648-AV80 (74 FR 17603; April 16, 2009). NMFS issued this final rule to implement Amendment 30B to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. This final rule established annual catch limits (ACLs) and accountability measures (AMs) for commercial and recreational gag, red grouper, and shallow-water grouper (SWG); established a commercial quota for gag; adjusted the commercial quotas for red grouper and SWG; removed the commercial closed season for SWG; established an incidental bycatch allowance trip limit for commercial gag and red grouper; reduced the commercial minimum size limit for red grouper; reduced the gag bag limit and the aggregate grouper bag limit; increased the red grouper bag limit; extended the closed season for recreational SWG; eliminated the end date for the Madison-Swanson and Steamboat Lumps marine reserves; and required that federally permitted reef fish vessels comply with the more restrictive of Federal or state reef fish regulations when fishing in state waters. In addition, Amendment 30B established management targets and thresholds for gag consistent with the requirements of the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA); set the gag and red grouper total allowable catch (TAC); and established interim allocations for the commercial and recreational gag and red grouper fisheries. This final rule was intended to end overfishing of gag and maintain catch levels of red grouper consistent with achieving optimum yield (OY).
        2. Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Revisions to the Pollock Trip Limit Regulations in the Gulf of Alaska. RIN 0648-AW54 (74 FR 18156; April 21, 2009). NMFS issued this final rule to prohibit a catcher vessel from landing more than 300,000 lb (136 mt) of unprocessed pollock during a calendar day, and from landing a cumulative amount of unprocessed pollock from any Gulf of Alaska reporting area that exceeds 300,000 lb multiplied by the number of calendar days the pollock fishery is open to directed fishing in a season. This prevented catcher vessels from circumventing the intent of then-current trip limit regulations when making deliveries of pollock. Amending the then-current trip limit regulation to limit a vessel to 300,000 lb of pollock caught in a day allowed for the continued dispersion of catches of pollock in a manner that is consistent with the intent of Steller sea lion protection measures in the Gulf of Alaska. This action was intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) and other applicable laws.
        3. Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing Operations; Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan. RIN 0648-AV65 (74 FR 23349; May 19, 2009). NMFS determined that the pelagic longline fishery had a high level of mortality and serious injury across a number of marine mammal stocks, and issued the final Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan (PLTRP) and implemented regulations to reduce serious injuries and mortalities of pilot whales and Risso's dolphins in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery. The PLTRP was based on consensus recommendations submitted by the Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Team. The PLTRP was intended to meet the statutory mandates and requirements of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) through both regulatory and non-regulatory measures, including a special research area, gear modifications, outreach material, observer coverage, and captains' communications.

        4. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar) Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment. RIN 0648-AW77 (74 FR 29299; June 19, 2009). NMFS issued a final rule designating critical habitat for the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment (GOM DPS). NMFS previously determined that naturally spawned and several hatchery populations of Atlantic salmon which constitute the GOM DPS warranted listing as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). NMFS was required to designate critical habitat for the GOM DPS as a result of this listing. NMFS designated critical habitat for 45 specific areas occupied by Atlantic salmon at the time of listing that comprise approximately 19,571 km of perennial river, stream, and estuary habitat and 799 square km of lake habitat within the range of the GOM DPS and in which are found those physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species. The entire occupied range of the GOM DPS in which critical habitat is designated is within the State of Maine. NMFS excluded approximately 1,256 km of river, stream, and estuary habitat and 100 square km of lake habitat from critical habitat pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the ESA.

        5. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 16. RIN 0648-AW64 (74 FR 30964; June 29, 2009). NMFS issued the final rule to implement the approved measures of Amendment 16 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (Amendment 16), as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. This final rule established a seasonal closure of the recreational and commercial fisheries for gag and associated shallow-water grouper species; established a seasonal closure of the recreational fishery for vermilion snapper; reduced the aggregate bag limit for grouper and tilefish; reduced the bag limit for gag or black grouper combined; reduced the bag limit for vermilion snapper; prohibited captain and crew of a vessel operating as a charter vessel or headboat from retaining any fish under the aggregate bag limit for grouper and tilefish or the vermilion snapper bag limit; established semiannual quotas for the commercial vermilion snapper fishery; established a quota for the commercial gag fishery; established restrictions on the possession, sale, and purchase of gag and associated shallow-water grouper species after the gag commercial quota is reached; and required possession of a dehooking device on board a vessel when fishing for South Atlantic snapper-grouper and use of such device as needed to release fish with a minimum of injury. In addition, Amendment 16, for both gag and vermilion snapper, revised the definitions of maximum sustainable yield and OY, specified TAC, and established interim allocations of TACs for the recreational and commercial sectors. Amendment 16 also specified a minimum stock size threshold for gag and, based on the new assessment, for vermilion snapper. The intended effects of this final rule were to end overfishing of gag and vermilion snapper, protect shallow-water grouper during their spawning season, and reduce bycatch mortality of snapper-grouper species in the South Atlantic, pursuant to the MSA.
        6. International Fisheries; Western and Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Fishing Restrictions and Observer Requirements in Purse Seine Fisheries for 2009-2011 and Turtle Mitigation Requirements in Purse Seine Fisheries. RIN 0648-AX60. (74 FR 38544; August 4, 2009). NMFS issued regulations under authority of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act (WCPFC Implementation Act) to implement certain decisions of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPFC). Those decisions required that the members of the WCPFC, including the United States, take certain measures with respect to their purse seine fisheries in the area of competence of the WCPFC, which included most of the western and central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). The regulations included limits on the number of days that may be fished, periods during which fishing may not be done on schools in association with fish aggregating devices (FADs), areas of high seas closed to fishing, requirements to retain tuna on board up to the first point of landing or transshipment, requirements to carry observers, and requirements to handle sea turtles in a specified manner. This action was necessary for the United States to satisfy its international obligations under the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, to which it is a Contracting Party.
        7. Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (Amendment 92) and Gulf of Alaska License (Amendment 82) Limitation Program. RIN 0648-AX14 (74 FR 41080; August 14, 2009). NMFS issued regulations to implement Amendment 92 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area and Amendment 82 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska. This action removed trawl gear endorsements on licenses issued under the license limitation program in specific management areas if those licenses had not been used on vessels that met minimum recent landing requirements using trawl gear. This action provided exemptions to this requirement for licenses that were used in trawl fisheries subject to certain limited access privilege programs. This action issued new area endorsements for trawl catcher vessel licenses in the Aleutian Islands if minimum recent landing requirements in the Aleutian Islands were met. This action was intended to promote the goals and objectives of the MSA, the Fishery Management Plans, and other applicable law.

        8. Endangered and Threatened Species; Critical Habitat for the Endangered Distinct Population Segment of Smalltooth Sawfish. RIN 0648-AV74 (74 FR 45353; September 2, 2009). NMFS, issued a final rule to designate critical habitat for the U.S. distinct population segment (DPS) of smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata), which was listed as endangered on April 1, 2003, under the ESA. The critical habitat consists of two units: The Charlotte Harbor Estuary Unit, which comprises approximately 221,459 acres of coastal habitat; and the Ten Thousand Islands/Everglades Unit (TTI/E), which comprises approximately 619,013 acres of coastal habitat. The two units are located along the southwestern coast of Florida between Charlotte Harbor and Florida Bay. NMFS issued this rule to satisfy requirements under the Endangered Species Act.
        9. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Final Rulemaking to Designate Critical Habitat for the Threatened Southern Distinct Population Segment of North American Green Sturgeon. RIN 0648-AX04 (74 FR 52299; October 9, 2009). NMFS designated critical habitat for the threatened Southern distinct population segment of North American green sturgeon (Southern DPS of green sturgeon) pursuant to section 4 of the ESA. Specific areas proposed for designation included: Coastal U.S. marine waters within 60 fathoms (fm) depth from Monterey Bay, CA (including Monterey Bay), north to Cape Flattery, WA, including the Strait of Juan de Fuca, WA, to its United States boundary; the Sacramento River, lower Feather River, and lower Yuba River in California; the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun, San Pablo, and San Francisco bays in California; the lower Columbia River estuary; and certain coastal bays and estuaries in California (Humboldt Bay), Oregon (Coos Bay, Winchester Bay, Yaquina Bay, and Nehalem Bay), and Washington (Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor). This rule designated approximately 515 kilometers (km) (320 miles (mi)) of freshwater river habitat, 2,323 km2 (897 mi2) of estuarine habitat, 29,581 km2 (11,421 mi2) of marine habitat, 784 km (487 mi) of habitat in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and 350 km2 (135 mi2) of habitat within the Yolo and Sutter bypasses (Sacramento River, CA) as critical habitat for the Southern DPS of green sturgeon. This rule excluded the following areas from designation because the economic benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion, and exclusion would not result in the extinction of the species: Coastal U.S. marine waters within 60 fm depth from the California/Mexico border north to Monterey Bay, CA, and from the Alaska/Canada border northwest to the Bering Strait; the lower Columbia River from river kilometer 74 to the Bonneville Dam; and certain coastal bays and estuaries in California (Elkhorn Slough, Tomales Bay, Noyo Harbor, and the estuaries to the head of the tide in the Eel and Klamath/Trinity rivers), Oregon (Tillamook Bay and the estuaries to the head of the tide in the Rogue, Siuslaw, and Alsea rivers), and Washington (Puget Sound). Particular areas were also excluded based on impacts on national security and impacts on Indian lands. The areas excluded from the designation comprised approximately 0.2 km (0.1 mi) of freshwater habitat, 2,945 km2 (1,137 mi2) of estuarine habitat and 1,034,935 km2 (399,590 mi2) of marine habitat. This final rule responded to and incorporated public comments received on the proposed rule and supporting documents, as well as peer reviewer comments received on the draft biological report and draft ESA section 4(b)(2) report.

        10. Fisheries of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Fisheries of the Arctic Management Area; Bering Sea Subarea. RIN 0648-AX71 (74 FR 56734; November 3, 2009). NMFS issued a final rule that implements the Fishery Management Plan for Fish Resources of the Arctic Management Area (Arctic FMP) and Amendment 29 to the Fishery Management Plan for Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs (Crab FMP). The Arctic FMP and Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP established sustainable management of commercial fishing in the Arctic Management Area and moved the northern boundary of the Crab FMP out of the Arctic Management Area south to Bering Strait. This action was necessary to establish a management framework for commercial fishing and to provide consistent management of fish resources in the Arctic Management Area before the potential onset of unregulated commercial fishing in the area. This action was intended to promote the goals and objectives of the MSA, the Arctic and Crab FMPs, and other applicable laws.
        11. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 15B; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico. RIN 0648-AW12 (74 FR 58902; November 16, 2009). NMFS issued this final rule to implement Amendment 15B to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region, as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. This final rule, for South Atlantic snapper-grouper, required a private recreational vessel that fishes in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), if selected by NMFS, to maintain and submit fishing records; required a vessel that fishes in the EEZ, if selected by NMFS, to carry an observer and install an electronic logbook and/or video monitoring equipment provided by NMFS; prohibited the sale of snapper-grouper harvested or possessed in the EEZ under the bag limits and prohibited the sale of snapper-grouper harvested or possessed under the bag limits by vessels with a Federal charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper regardless of where the snapper-grouper were harvested; required an owner and operator of a vessel for which a commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit has been issued and that has on board any hook-and-line gear to comply with sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish release protocols, possess on board specific gear to ensure proper release of such species, and comply with guidelines for proper care and release of such species that are incidentally caught; and expanded the allowable transfer of a commercial vessel permit under the limited access program and extended the allowable period for renewal of such a permit. Amendment 15B also revised the stock status determination criteria for golden tilefish and specified commercial/recreational allocations for snowy grouper and red porgy. In addition, NMFS removed language specifying commercial quotas for snowy grouper and red porgy that were no longer in effect and revised sea turtle bycatch mitigation requirements applicable to the Gulf reef fish fishery to add two devices that were inadvertently omitted from a prior rule. The intended effects of this final rule were to provide additional information for, and otherwise improve the effective management of, the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery; minimize the impacts on incidentally caught threatened and endangered sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish; and remove outdated language, all pursuant to the MSA.
        12. International Fisheries Regulations; Fisheries in the Western Pacific; Pelagic Fisheries; Hawaii-Based Shallow-Set Longline Fishery. RIN 0648-AW49 (74 FR 65460; December 10, 2009). This final rule implemented the management provisions in Amendment 18 to the Pelagics Fishery Management Plan for the pelagic fisheries in the U.S. western Pacific, and made several housekeeping changes to the pelagic fishing regulations that were not related to Amendment 18. This final rule removed the annual limit on the number of fishing gear deployments (sets) for the Hawaii-based pelagic shallow-set longline fishery, and increased the annual number of allowable incidental interactions that occur between the fishery and loggerhead sea turtles. The final rule optimized yield from the fishery without jeopardizing the continued existence of sea turtles and other protected resources. This final rule also made several administrative clarifications to the regulations. The intent of this final rule was to achieve optimal yield from the fishery, pursuant to the MSA, without jeopardizing the continued existence of sea turtles and other protected resources.

          Dated: August 1, 2016.
          Emily H. Menashes,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2016-18521 Filed 8-3-16; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 76
        [MB Docket No. 07-42; FCC 07-18]
        Implementation of Section 612 of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 as Amended by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and Section 616 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          In this document, the Commission seeks comment on proposed rules and guidance to implement sections 612 and 616 of the Communications Act. In the context of its review of recent merger transactions and comments filed in its Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, the Commission determined to review the program carriage complaint processes and initiate a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding leased access rules.

          DATES:
          Comments for this proceeding are due on or before September 4, 2007; reply comments are due on or before September 21, 2007.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 07-42, 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.
          • 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.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For additional information on this proceeding, contact Katie Costello, Katie.Costello@fcc.gov of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418-2233.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        This is a summary of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 07-18, adopted on March 2, 2007, and released on June 15, 2007. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents 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.) The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. 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).
        Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
        This document seeks comment on potential revised and new information collection requirements. The Commission will invite the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment at a later date on any rules developed as a result of this proceeding that require the collection of information, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. The Commission will publish a separate notice seeking public and agency comments, which should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 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 will seek specific comment on how we might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”
        Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
        I. Introduction
        1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”), in light of issues raised in recent merger transactions and comments filed in the Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, 71 FR 66946-02, we review the Commission's leased access, 47 CFR sections 76.970 through 76.977, and program carriage, 47 CFR sections 76.1300 through 76.1302, complaint processes. We initiate this review in order to provide guidance and further implement Section 612 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Communications Act), 47 U.S.C. 532, which requires a cable operator to set aside channel capacity for commercial use by video programmers unaffiliated with the operator, and Section 616 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 536, which prohibits a cable operator or other multichannel video programming distributor (“MVPD”) from requiring a financial interest in any program service as a condition for carriage of such service, from coercing a programmer to grant exclusive carriage rights, or from engaging in conduct that unreasonably restrains the ability of an unaffiliated programming vendor to compete fairly by discriminating against such vendor on the basis of affiliation or nonaffiliation.
        II. Commercial Leased Access Rules
        2. The commercial leased access (leased access) requirements are set forth in Section 612 of the Communications Act. The leased access rules require a cable operator to set aside channel capacity for commercial use by video programmers unaffiliated with the operator. The statutory framework for commercial leased access was first established by the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. Congress established leased access set-aside requirements in proportion to a system's total activated channel capacity.
        3. In the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (1992 Cable Act), Congress broadened Section 612's explicit statutory purpose to include the promotion of competition in the delivery of diverse sources of video programming, and required the Commission: (a) To determine the maximum reasonable rates that a cable operator may establish for commercial use of designated channel capacity; (b) to establish reasonable terms and conditions for such use; and (c) to establish procedures for the expedited resolution of disputes concerning rates or carriage. Congress also required that the Commission's rules not adversely affect the operation, financial condition, or market development of the cable system.
        4. The Commission adopted a maximum rate formula for full-time carriage on programming tiers based on the average implicit fee that other programmers are implicitly charged for carriage to permit the operator to recover its costs and earn a profit. The Commission also adopted a maximum rate for a la carte services based on the highest implicit fee that other a la carte services implicitly pay, and a prorated rate for part-time programming.

        5. The Commission seeks comment on the current status of leased access programming and on the following issues: Do programmers actually use leased access channels? To what extent are they able to use the set-aside channels? How many leased access channels do cable operators provide? Which programmers are using those channels? Are programmers using the channels on a full-time or part-time basis? For what purposes are leased access channels used? Do cable operators turn down requests for leased access? If so, why? To what extent and for what purposes do the cable operators use the channels for themselves? Does the cable operators' option to use the channels contribute to programmers' lack of use of the set-aside channels? Are the terms in leased access agreements the same or similar to those that the cable operator has with its programmers? Do cable operators impose different requirements regarding, for example, insurance or termination provisions? If so, why? The Commission also seeks comment on the effectiveness of leased access enforcement, specifically on the costs associated with the complaint or other dispute resolution processes and whether there should be a defined time period for cable operators to respond to leased access requests or other aspects of the enforcement process. Regarding the Commission's rules that allow programmers to file complaints to challenge a cable operator's rates before the Commission, the Commission seeks comment on these issues: To what extent do programmers make use of the Commission's process to challenge rates that they believe violate the Commission's regulations? Is the process too burdensome? Is it effective? Should there be changes to the complaint process, such as an expedited complaint process before the Commission? The Commission's rules require a cable operator to respond to a programmer's request for rate information within 15 calendar days. The Commission seeks comment on whether cable operators are responsive to programmer's requests and whether they include all required information.
        6. The Commission also seeks comment on its rate formula for leased access, such as specific methodologies that the Commission should consider and how such methodologies would better serve Congress' statutory objectives in a legally sustainable way.
        7. The Commission's leased access rules involve calculations based on activated channels and location. Because of the development of digital signal processing and signal compression technologies, the number of video services carried on a cable system may no longer be a simple calculation and may change dynamically over time depending, for instance, on the degree of compression and whether the programming is carried in a standard or high definition digital format. The Commission seeks comment on whether and how the digital transition affects channel capacity and channel count for purposes of the calculation of carriage obligations and average rates; whether, consistent with changes in technology, cable operators have updated their terms of access to facilities, such as allowing programmers to submit video to the operator via the Internet.
        8. The Commission requests comment on whether leased access programmers should have the ability to request carriage on a specific tier and whether there is evidence that cable operators seek to place leased access programming on digital tiers or other less popular tiers, when leased access programmers would prefer the basic tier, whether cable operators have acted reasonably in regard to placing leased access channels at specific channel locations what specific reform measures should the Commission consider? The Commission seeks comment on which service tier leased access programs appear, and on which channel within the tier do cable operators place the programming and whether leased access rules apply to video-on-demand (VOD) or other technologies that do not fit a traditional “tier”.
        9. The Commission seeks comment on other ways that advances in technology or marketplace developments should affect the leased access rules, in particular, whether and how the deployment of advanced digital services (e.g., interactive electronic programming guides, addressable digital set-top boxes, VOD), should inform its review. The Commission seeks comment on any other issues that would properly inform its leased access inquiry.
        III. Program Carriage Rules
        10. Section 616 of the Communications Act directs the Commission to establish regulations governing program carriage agreements and related practices between cable operators or other MVPDs and video programming vendors. The Commission's program carriage rules prohibit a cable operator or other MVPD from requiring a financial interest in any program service as a condition for carriage of such service, from coercing a programmer to grant exclusive carriage rights, or from engaging in conduct that unreasonably restrains the ability of an unaffiliated programming vendor to compete fairly by discriminating against such vendor on the basis of affiliation or nonaffiliation.
        11. In addition to establishing rules governing program carriage, the Commission has established procedures for the review of program carriage complaints and has established appropriate penalties and remedies. These procedures generally provide for resolution of a complaint on the basis of a complaint, answer, and reply. However, the Commission has recognized that the staff may be unable in some cases to resolve carriage agreement complaints on the sole basis of a written record. In such cases, if the staff determines that the complainant has established a prima facie case but that disposition of the complaint would require the resolution of factual disputes or other extensive discovery, the staff is to notify the parties that they have the option of choosing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) or an adjudicatory hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). In terms of appropriate relief for violations of the program carriage rules, the Commission has stated that the appropriate relief will be determined on a case-by-case basis, and that appropriate remedies and sanctions may include forfeitures, mandatory carriage, or carriage on terms revised or specified by the Commission.
        12. The Commission seeks comment on whether and how its processes for resolving carriage disputes should be modified. Currently, the Commission's rules provide that any complainant alleging a violation of Section 616(a)(3)'s prohibition on discrimination must demonstrate that the alleged discrimination is on the basis of affiliation or nonaffiliation of a vendor, and that the effect of the conduct that prompts the complaint is to unreasonably restrain the ability of the complainant to compete fairly. If, after reviewing the pleadings and supporting documentation filed by the parties, the Commission staff finds that the complainant has established a prima facie case under Section 76.1301(c), the staff may direct an ALJ to hold a hearing, issue a recommended decision on the facts underlying the discrimination claim and a recommended remedy, if necessary, and then return the matter to the Commission. The Commission seeks comment on these procedures, and, in particular, whether the elements of a prima facie case should be clarified.

        13. The Commission has established timelines for the resolution of individual program carriage complaints. The Commission seeks comment on the effectiveness of this mechanism and whether similar changes or additional time limits would improve the existing process. For instance, whether specific time limits on the Commission, cable operators, or others would promote a speedy and just resolution of these disputes.
        14. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should adopt rules to address the complaint process; whether the Commission should adopt additional rules to protect programmers from potential retaliation if they file a complaint or whether the existing penalties for frivolous program carriage complaints are appropriate or should be modified.
        15. Independent programmers assert that many cable operators require them to negotiate for carriage on a system-by-system basis, even while they negotiate national carriage agreements with other programmers. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should adopt rules that expressly allow independent programmers to seek nationwide access directly from multiple system cable operators and, if so, how such a process would operate.
        16. The Commission seeks comment on any other issues that would properly inform its program carriage inquiry.
        IV. Arbitration
        17. The Commission seeks comment on the application of arbitration procedures to resolve leased access and program carriage disputes. Should the Commission establish arbitration procedures specifically for these types of complaints? If so, what procedures should be established? Should such procedures be elective or mandatory, and who should bear the costs of arbitration? What standard of review should the Commission employ in reviewing an arbitration decision if arbitration is required or otherwise used?
        V. Procedural Matters
        18. Ex Parte Rules. This is a permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex Parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided that they are disclosed as provided in the Commission's rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).
        19. Comment Information. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before 45 days after this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is published in the Federal Register, and reply comments on or before 65 days of publication. 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 (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 e-mail 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 messenger-delivered 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 should 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).
        20. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities of the proposals addressed in this NPRM. The IRFA is set forth below. Written public comments are requested on the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines for comments on the NPRM, and they should have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA.
        VI. Ordering Clauses
        21. It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 303, 612 and 616 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303, 532 and 536, notice is hereby given of the proposals described in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
        22. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

        23. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (the RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact of the policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed rulemaking (Notice) on a substantial number of small entities. 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 Notice indicated on the first page of this document. The Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
        Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Regulatory Approaches

        24. The focus of the leased access and program carriage provisions contained in Sections 612 and 616 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, adopted as part of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, was to promote competition and diversity in the video programming marketplace and prevent cable systems, other MVPDs and affiliated programmers from preventing fair competition in video programming distribution through various practices. This proceeding requests comments on proposed changes to the Commission's rules to further enhance the Congressional objectives and respond to complaints that the rules are ineffective. Ultimately, these policies and rules are geared to the benefit of independent programmers, many of which may be small entities.
        Legal Basis
        25. The authority for the action proposed in the rulemaking is contained in Section 4(i), 303, 612 and 616 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303, 532 and 536.
        Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply
        26. 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, 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 Small Business Administration (“SBA”).
        27. Cable and Other Program Distribution. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for cable and other program distribution services, which includes all such companies generating $12.5 million or less in revenue annually. This category includes, among others, cable system operators, closed circuit television services, direct broadcast satellite services, multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems, subscription television services and open video systems. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1,311 firms in this category, total, that had operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million and an additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less than $25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of providers in this service category are small businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. We note, however, that the rules at issue in this Notice only apply at this time to cable operators, and not other MVPD providers.
        28. Cable System Operators (Rate Regulation Standard). The Commission has developed its own small business size standard for cable system operators, for purposes of rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a “small cable company” is one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide. The most recent estimates indicate that there were 1,439 cable operators who qualified as small cable system operators at the end of 1995. Since then, some of those companies may have grown to serve over 400,000 subscribers, and others may have been involved in transactions that caused them to be combined with other cable operators. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are now fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system operators that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
        29. Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard). The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is “a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.” The Commission has determined that there are 67,700,000 subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based on available data, the Commission estimates that the number of cable operators serving 677,000 subscribers or fewer, totals 1,450. The Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore is unable, at this time, to estimate more accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the size standard contained in the Communications Act of 1934.
        30. Direct Broadcast Satellite (“DBS”) Service. DBS service is a nationally distributed subscription service that delivers video and audio programming via satellite to a small parabolic “dish” antenna at the subscriber's location. Because DBS provides subscription services, DBS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and Other Program Distribution. This definition provides that a small entity is one with $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. Currently, only four operators hold licenses to provide DBS service, which requires a great investment of capital for operation. All four currently offer subscription services. Two of these four DBS operators, DIRECTV and EchoStar Communications Corporation (“EchoStar”), report annual revenues that are in excess of the threshold for a small business. A third operator, Rainbow DBS, is a subsidiary of Cablevision's Rainbow Network, which also reports annual revenues in excess of $12.5 million, and thus does not qualify as a small business. The fourth DBS operator, Dominion Video Satellite, Inc. (“Dominion”), offers religious (Christian) programming and does not report its annual receipts. The Commission does not know of any source which provides this information and, thus, we have no way of confirming whether Dominion qualifies as a small business. Because DBS service requires significant capital, we believe it is unlikely that a small entity as defined by the SBA would have the financial wherewithal to become a DBS licensee. Nevertheless, given the absence of specific data on this point, we acknowledge the possibility that there are entrants in this field that may not yet have generated $12.5 million in annual receipts, and therefore may be categorized as a small business, if independently owned and operated.
        31. Private Cable Operators (PCOs) also known as Satellite Master Antenna Television (SMATV) Systems. PCOs, also known as SMATV systems or private communication operators, are video distribution facilities that use closed transmission paths without using any public right-of-way. PCOs acquire video programming and distribute it via terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban multiple dwelling units such as apartments and condominiums, and commercial multiple tenant units such as hotels and office buildings. The SBA definition of small entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution Services includes PCOs and, thus, small entities are defined as all such companies generating $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. Currently, there are approximately 135 members in the Independent Multi-Family Communications Council (IMCC), the trade association that represents PCOs. Individual PCOs often serve approximately 3,000-4,000 subscribers, but the larger operations serve as many as 15,000-55,000 subscribers. In total, PCOs currently serve approximately 1.1 million subscribers. Because these operators are not rate regulated, they are not required to file financial data with the Commission. Furthermore, we are not aware of any privately published financial information regarding these operators. Based on the estimated number of operators and the estimated number of units served by the largest ten PCOs, we believe that a substantial number of PCOs qualify as small entities.
        32. Home Satellite Dish (“HSD”) Service. Because HSD provides subscription services, HSD falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and Other Program Distribution, which includes all such companies generating $12.5 million or less in revenue annually. HSD or the large dish segment of the satellite industry is the original satellite-to-home service offered to consumers, and involves the home reception of signals transmitted by satellites operating generally in the C-band frequency. Unlike DBS, which uses small dishes, HSD antennas are between four and eight feet in diameter and can receive a wide range of unscrambled (free) programming and scrambled programming purchased from program packagers that are licensed to facilitate subscribers' receipt of video programming. There are approximately 30 satellites operating in the C-band, which carry over 500 channels of programming combined; approximately 350 channels are available free of charge and 150 are scrambled and require a subscription. HSD is difficult to quantify in terms of annual revenue. HSD owners have access to program channels placed on C-band satellites by programmers for receipt and distribution by MVPDs. Commission data shows that, between June 2003 and June 2004, HSD subscribership fell from 502,191 subscribers to 335,766 subscribers, a decline of more than 33 percent. The Commission has no information regarding the annual revenue of the four C-Band distributors.
        33. Wireless Cable Systems. Wireless cable systems use the Multipoint Distribution Service (“MDS”) and Instructional Television Fixed Service (“ITFS”) frequencies in the 2 GHz band to transmit video programming and provide broadband services to subscribers. Local Multipoint Distribution Service (“LMDS”) is a fixed broadband point-to-multipoint microwave service that provides for two-way video telecommunications. As previously noted, the SBA definition of small entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution, which includes such companies generating $12.5 million in annual receipts, appears applicable to MDS, ITFS and LMDS. In addition, the Commission has defined small MDS and LMDS entities in the context of Commission license auctions.
        34. In the 1996 MDS auction, the Commission defined a small business as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. This definition of a small entity in the context of MDS auctions has been approved by the SBA. In the MDS auction, 67 bidders won 493 licenses. Of the 67 auction winners, 61 claimed status as a small business. At this time, the Commission estimates that of the 61 small business MDS auction winners, 48 remain small business licensees. In addition to the 48 small businesses that hold BTA authorizations, there are approximately 392 incumbent MDS licensees that have gross revenues that are not more than $40 million and are thus considered small entities. MDS licensees and wireless cable operators that did not participate in the MDS auction must rely on the SBA definition of small entities for Cable and Other Program Distribution. Information available to us indicates that there are approximately 850 of these licensees and operators that do not generate revenue in excess of $12.5 million annually. Therefore, we estimate that there are approximately 850 small MDS providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
        35. While SBA approval for a Commission-defined small business size standard applicable to ITFS is pending, educational institutions are included in this analysis as small entities. There are currently 2,032 ITFS licensees, and all but 100 of these licenses are held by educational institutions. Thus, the Commission estimates that at least 1,932 ITFS licensees are small businesses.
        36. In the 1998 and 1999 LMDS auctions, the Commission defined a small business as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. Moreover, the Commission added an additional classification for a “very small business,” which was defined as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of less than $15 million in the previous three calendar years. These definitions of “small business” and “very small business” in the context of the LMDS auctions have been approved by the SBA. In the first LMDS auction, 104 bidders won 864 licenses. Of the 104 auction winners, 93 claimed status as small or very small businesses. In the LMDS re-auction, 40 bidders won 161 licenses. Based on this information, we believe that the number of small LMDS licenses will include the 93 winning bidders in the first auction and the 40 winning bidders in the re-auction, for a total of 133 small entity LMDS providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
        37. Open Video Systems (“OVS”). The OVS framework provides opportunities for the distribution of video programming other than through cable systems. Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within the SBA-recognized definition of Cable and Other Program Distribution Services, which provides that a small entity is one with $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. The Commission has certified 25 OVS operators with some now providing service. Broadband service providers (BSPs) are currently the only significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises, even though OVS is one of four statutorily recognized options for local exchange carriers (LECs) to offer video programming services. As of June 2003, BSPs served approximately 1.4 million subscribers, representing 1.49 percent of all MVPD households. Among BSPs, however, those operating under the OVS framework are in the minority, with approximately eight percent operating with an OVS certification. Serving approximately 460,000 of these subscribers, Affiliates of Residential Communications Network, Inc. (“RCN”) is currently the largest BSP and 11th largest MVPD. RCN received approval to operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, DC and other areas. The Commission does not have financial information regarding the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be operational. We thus believe that at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as small entities.
        38. Program Producers and Distributors. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities applicable to producers or distributors of cable television programs. Therefore, we will use the SBA classifications of Motion Picture and Video Tape Production (NAICS Code 51211), Motion Picture and Video Tape Distribution (NAICS Code 42199), and Theatrical Producers (Except Motion Pictures) and Miscellaneous Theatrical Services (NAICS Codes 56131, 71111, 71141, 561599, 71151, 71112, 71132, 51229, 53249). These SBA definitions provide that a small entity in the cable television programming industry is an entity with $21.5 million or less in annual receipts for NAICS Codes 56131, 51211, 42199, and 51212, and $5 million or less in annual receipts for NAICS Codes 56131, 71111, 71141, 561599, 71151, 71112, 71131, 71132, 51229, and 53249. Census Bureau data indicate the following: (a) There were 7,265 firms in the United States classified as Motion Picture and Video Production (NAICS Code 51211), and that 6,987 of these firms had $16.999 million or less in annual receipts and 7,002 of these firms had $24.999 million or less in annual receipts; (b) there were 1,139 firms classified as Motion Picture and Video Tape Distribution (NAICS Codes 42199 and 51212), and 1007 of these firms had $16.999 million or less in annual receipts and 1013 of these firms had $24.999 million or less in annual receipts; and (c) there were 5,671 firms in the United States classified as Theatrical Producers and Services (NAICS Codes 56131, 71111, 71141, 561599, 71151, 51229, and 53249), and 5627 of these firms had $4.999 million or less in annual receipts.
        39. Each of these NAICS categories is very broad and includes firms that may be engaged in various industries, including cable programming. Specific figures are not available regarding how many of these firms exclusively produce and/or distribute programming for cable television or how many are independently owned and operated. Thus, we estimate that our rules may affect approximately 6,987 small entities primarily engaged in the production and distribution of taped cable television programs and 5,627 small producers of live programs that may be affected by the rules adopted in this proceeding.

        40. A “small business” under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and “is not dominant in its field of operation.” The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not “national” in scope.
        41. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (“LECs”). 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 action. In addition, limited preliminary census data for 2002 indicate that the total number of wired communications carriers increased approximately 34 percent from 1997 to 2002.
        42. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, 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 93 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 action. In addition, limited preliminary census data for 2002 indicate that the total number of wired communications carriers increased approximately 34 percent from 1997 to 2002.
        43. Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry group comprises establishments primarily engaged in generating, transmitting, and/or distributing electric power. Establishments in this industry group may perform one or more of the following activities: (1) Operate generation facilities that produce electric energy; (2) operate transmission systems that convey the electricity from the generation facility to the distribution system; and (3) operate distribution systems that convey electric power received from the generation facility or the transmission system to the final consumer.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for firms in this category: “A firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt hours.” According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were 1,644 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Census data do not track electric output and we have not determined how many of these firms fit the SBA size standard for small, with no more than 4 million megawatt hours of electric output. Consequently, we estimate that 1,644 or fewer firms may be considered small under the SBA small business size standard.
        Description of Proposed Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements
        44. The NPRM seeks comment on a range of potential changes to existing reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. Regarding the Commission's rules implementing Section 612 of the Communications Act, the NPRM seeks comment on all aspects of the commercial leased access rules, as well as dispute resolution procedures. Similarly, regarding the Commission's rules implementing Section 616 of the Communications Act, the NPRM seeks comment on whether and how the Commission's dispute resolution and other rules should be modified.
        Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered

        45. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in proposing regulatory approaches, which may include 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. The NPRM seeks comment on the Commission's rules implementing Sections 612 and 616 of the Communications Act, as amended. While most of the leased access and program carriage complaints have been filed against large entities or affiliates of large entities, some small entities may be affected by any rule changes. Therefore, this NPRM invites comment on issues that may impact some small entities. In addition, this NPRM seeks comment on whether the Commission's rules and their enforcement are successful in promoting competition and diversity in the video programming marketplace and preventing cable systems and other MVPDs from preventing fair competition in video programming distribution through various practices. Those policies and rules are designed to promote and protect the interests of independent programmers in the video distribution marketplace and many of the programmers will qualify as small entities. In the event that the Commission modifies its rules in this proceeding, it will explain the steps that it has taken to minimize significant impacts on small entities and the significant alternatives that it has considered.
        Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Commission's Proposals
        46. None.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Marlene H. Dortch,
          Secretary.

       [FR Doc. E7-13827 Filed 7-17-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 146
        [FRL-7509-5]
        Underground Injection Control Program—Revision of Underground Injection Control Requirements for Class I Municipal Wells in Florida; Notice of Meeting

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Notice.

          SUMMARY:

          On May 5, 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency published two notices in the Federal Register. The first announced the Notice of Availability (NOA) (68 FR 23673) of EPA's “Relative Risk Assessment of Management Options for Treated Wastewater in South Florida” and the second announced the Notice of Data Availability (NODA) (68 FR 23666) which summarizes information from the relative risk assessment and solicits public comment on how the deep well injection findings should inform the final determination on the July 7, 2000 proposed rule, Revision to the Federal Underground injection Control (UIC) requirements for Class I Municipal Wells in Florida (65 FR 42234). This notice announces two (2) public meetings on the NODA.

          DATES:
          The meeting dates are: June 24, 2003, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., West Palm Beach, Florida; and June 25, 2003, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Tampa, Florida.

          ADDRESSES:
          For additional information see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this Federal Register. The meeting locations are: Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Southeast District, Public Meeting Room, 2nd Floor, 400 N. Congress Ave., West Palm Beach, Florida 33401; and Tampa Marriott Waterside Hotel, 700 South Florida Avenue; Tampa, FL 33602.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For inquiries, and/or to access the risk assessment report, contact Nancy H. Marsh, Ground Water & UIC Section, EPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 (phone: (404) 562-9450; E-mail: marsh.nancy@epa.gov) or Howard Beard, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA East, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Mail Code 4606M, Washington, DC 20460 (phone: (202) 564-3874; E-mail: beard.howard@epa.gov) or contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, phone (800) 426-4791. The Safe Drinking Water Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern daylight-saving time.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments may be given orally or in writing at the public meeting. If giving written comments please submit an original and three copies of your comments and enclosures (including any references). Comments should be limited to those issues discussed in the NODA and not the entire “Relative Risk Assessment of Management Options for Treated Wastewater in South Florida.” Written comments may also be mailed to Nancy H. Marsh at the address in the For Further Information Contact section. The public comment period ends July 7, 2003.

          Dated: May 30, 2003.
          James D. Giattina,
          Director, Water Management Division, Region 4.

      [FR Doc. 03-14321 Filed 6-5-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        RIN 0648-BB56
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 18A

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 18A to the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (Amendment 18A) for review, approval, and implementation by NMFS. The amendment proposes actions to update the current rebuilding strategy for black sea bass, modify the current system of accountability measures for black sea bass, limit effort in the black sea bass component of the snapper-grouper fishery, and improve fisheries data reporting in the for-hire sector of the snapper-grouper fishery.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before April 2, 2012.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the amendment identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2011-0282” by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic submissions: Submit electronic comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Kate Michie, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

            Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

          To submit comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, click on “submit a comment,” then enter “NOAA-NMFS-2011-0282” in the keyword search and click on “search”. To view posted comments during the comment period, enter “NOAA-NMFS-2011-0282” in the keyword search and click on “search”. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required field if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Comments received through means not specified in this rule will not be considered.

          Electronic copies of Amendment 18A may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. Amendment 18A includes an Environmental Impact Statement, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, a Regulatory Impact Review, and a Fishery Impact Statement.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kate Michie, telephone: (727) 824-5305, or email: Kate.Michie@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each regional fishery management council to submit any fishery management plan or amendment to NMFS for review and approval, partial approval, or disapproval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a plan or amendment, publish an announcement in the Federal Register notifying the public that the plan or amendment is available for review and comment.
        The South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
        Background
        The primary purpose of Amendment 18A is to address derby fishing conditions in the black sea bass component of the snapper-grouper fishery by reducing effort in the fishery and reducing the rate of harvest to optimize use of the resource among fishery participants. Amendment 18A would also implement measures to update the current rebuilding strategy for black sea bass in response to the outcome a new stock assessment for the species, and improve data reporting in the for-hire sector of the snapper-grouper fishery.
        Targeting of black sea bass has increased as restrictions are placed on other species, and black sea bass has been in a constant catch rebuilding plan since 2006, where the allowable catch is held steady as the stock rebuilds. Furthermore, as black sea bass rebuilds and the population size becomes larger, fish are being harvested at a faster rate. Due to these circumstances, the commercial and recreational annual catch limits (ACLs) have been met before the end of the fishing year for the past 3 fishing years, and the ACL closures have occurred earlier in each consecutive fishing year. In an effort to extend fishing opportunities further into the fishing season, the Council has approved several actions intended to reduce effort and the rate of harvest in the black sea bass segment of the snapper-grouper fishery.
        To reduce effort in the commercial sector for black sea bass, Amendment 18A contains an action to establish a black sea bass pot endorsement program. In order to qualify for a black sea bass pot endorsement the following eligibility criteria must be met:

        (1) The permit holder must have a South Atlantic Unlimited Snapper-Grouper Permit that is valid (not expired) on the effective date of the final rule implementing Amendment 18A, if approved; (2) the South Atlantic Unlimited Snapper-Grouper Permit must have black sea bass landings with pot gear between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2010, of at least 2,500 lb (1,134 kg), round weight; and (3) the South Atlantic Unlimited Snapper-Grouper Permit must have reported black sea bass landings with pot gear between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010. There are 31 South Atlantic Unlimited Snapper-Grouper Permit holders who meet the criteria and who would receive an endorsement to fish for black sea bass using pot gear, which constitutes a sizable reduction from the 50 permit holders who fished using black sea bass pot gear during the 2011/2012 fishing year.
        Related to the proposed endorsement program are provisions contained in Amendment 18A to allow for transferability of the endorsements once they are issued, and a 90-day opportunity to appeal the non-issuance of endorsements based on landings records. Additionally, Amendment 18A proposes to limit the number of black sea bass pot tags issued to any endorsement holder to 35 per vessel each permit year. Previously there was no limit on the number of pot tags a South Atlantic Unlimited Snapper-Grouper Permit holder could obtain and use.
        Amendment 18A also includes a 1,000 lb (454 kg), round weight, commercial trip limit intended to further reduce the rate of harvest of black sea bass. This action, paired with the endorsement program, is expected to result in the commercial fishing season, which begins on June 1, remaining open until August or September of the 2012/2013 fishing year, which is approximately 1 to 2 months longer than the previous fishing year.
        The Council determined a modification to the current size limit regulations for black sea bass may also help to reduce the rate of harvest in the commercial and recreational sectors. Therefore, Amendment 18A contains an action to change the recreational minimum size limit from 12 inches (30.5 cm), total length (TL) to 13 inches (33 cm), TL, and to increase the commercial minimum size limit from 10 inches (25.4 cm), TL, to 11 inches (28 cm), TL. In addition, Amendment 18A would require that all black sea bass pots be returned to shore (but may remain on the vessel) at the conclusion of each trip, in order to reduce bycatch of non-target species and reduce the risk of protected species interactions with vertical line gear.

        In October 2011, a new stock assessment for black sea bass was completed through the Southeast Data Assessment and Review process. The stock assessment indicates that black sea bass are no longer overfished but have not yet been fully rebuilt. A 10-year rebuilding plan was implemented in 2006 and should end in 2016. Amendment 18A contains actions to modify the current rebuilding strategy for black sea bass based on the outcome of this new stock assessment. The Council voted to modify the current constant catch rebuilding strategy to one that would hold catch constant (847,000 lb (384,193 kg)) round weight, (718,000 lb (325,679 kg)) gutted weight, in fishing years 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 and then change to Frebuild in 2014/2015. Frebuild is defined as a constant fishing mortality strategy that maintains the 66 percent probability of recovery rate throughout the remaining fishing seasons of the rebuilding timeframe. After the 2015/2016 fishing season, the fishing mortality rate would be held constant until modified. Additionally, Amendment 18A would set a new stock ACL for black sea bass, which would be equal to the optimum yield and the acceptable biological catch (ABC), which is 847,000 lb (384,193 kg) round weight, 718,000 lb (325,679 kg) gutted weight. The ACL would remain the same during the next two fishing seasons, after which a new assessment update would need to be completed to determine whether or not it is appropriate to increase the ACL in the 2015/2016 fishing year. Based on the current allocation formula implemented through the final rule for Amendment 13C to the FMP (71 FR 55096, September 21, 2006), the commercial allocation is 43 percent of the ABC and the recreational allocation is 57 percent of the ABC. Therefore, the commercial ACL would be set at 309,000 lb (140,160 kg) gutted weight, 364,620 lb (165,389 kg) round weight, and the recreational ACL would be set at 409,000 lb (185,519 kg) gutted weight, 482,620 lb (218,913 kg) round weight. Amendment 18A also proposes an annual catch target (ACT) of 357,548 lb (162,180 kg kg) gutted weight, 421,907 lb (191,400 kg) round weight, for the recreational sector, which is set at a level lower than the ACL to help prevent ACL overages from occurring. In the case of black sea bass, the recreational ACT would not trigger any preventative or corrective action. The ACT would serve as a management reference point to track the effectiveness of management measures intended to control recreational harvest.
        Amendment 17B to the FMP (Amendment 17B) implemented a system of accountability measures (AMs) for the commercial and recreational black sea bass sectors to limit harvest to the sector ACLs and correct for ACL overages if they occur. Subsequent to the implementation of Amendment 17B, the Council determined the methodology employed by the system of AMs under Amendment 17B may not be the most appropriate way to constrain harvest at or below the sector ACLs and it could unnecessarily penalize participants in the commercial and recreational sectors of the black sea bass component of the snapper-grouper fishery. Therefore, Amendment 18A proposes to modify the AMs specified in Amendment 17B to eliminate the use of the 3-year running average to determine ACL overages. Eliminating the 3-year running average would result in a reduced risk of implementing overly conservative AMs. The modified AMs in Amendment 18A would also implement a payback provision if the commercial ACL is exceeded, and includes a payback provision in the event the recreational ACL is exceeded regardless of the overfished status of the stock.
        In addition to the actions listed previously, Amendment 18A would also require vessels that have South Atlantic Charter/Headboat Snapper-Grouper Permits to report landings information electronically, if selected to do so by NMFS. Reporting would be required on a weekly or daily basis.

        The Council has submitted Amendment 18A for Secretarial review, approval, and implementation. The decision to approve, partially approve, or disapprove Amendment 18A will be based, in part, on consideration of comments, recommendations, and information received during the comment period on this notice of availability. After consideration of these factors, and in consistency with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws, NMFS will publish a notice of agency action in the Federal Register announcing the Agency's decision to approve, partially approve, or disapprove Amendment 18A, and the associated rationale.
        Proposed Rule for Amendment 18A

        A proposed rule that would implement measures outlined in Amendment 18A has been received from the Council. In accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is evaluating Amendment 18A to determine whether it is consistent with the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law. If that determination is affirmative, NMFS will publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register for public review and comment.
        Consideration of Public Comments

        Comments received by April 2, 2012, whether specifically directed to the amendment or the proposed rule, will be considered by NMFS in its decision to approve, disapprove, or partially approve the amendment. Comments received after that date will not be considered by NMFS in this decision. All comments received by NMFS on the amendment or the proposed rule during their respective comment periods will be addressed in the final rule.

          Authority:
           16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

          Dated: January 26, 2012.
          James P. Burgess,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2012-2081 Filed 1-30-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P