        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [Docket No. 120403254-2255-01]
        RIN 0648-XB045
        Fisheries Off West Coast States; Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries; Annual Specifications

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to implement the annual catch limit (ACL), harvest guideline (HG), annual catch target (ACT) and associated annual reference points for Pacific mackerel in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Pacific coast for the fishing season of July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012. This rule is proposed according to the Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP). The proposed 2011/2012 ACL or maximum HG for Pacific mackerel is 40,514 metric tons (mt). The proposed ACT, which will be the directed fishing harvest target, is 30,386 mt. If the fishery attains the ACT, the directed fishery will close, reserving the difference between the ACL and ACT (10,128 mt) as a set aside for incidental landings in other CPS fisheries and other sources of mortality. This rule is intended to conserve and manage the Pacific mackerel stock off the U.S. West Coast.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by April 30, 2012.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document identified by NOAA-NMFS-2012-0072 by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov. To submit comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, first click the “submit a comment” icon, then enter NOAA-NMFS-2012-0072 in the keyword search. Locate the document you wish to comment on from the resulting list and click on the “Submit a Comment” icon on the right of that line.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Rodney R. McInnis, Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802.
          • Fax: (562) 980-4047

            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). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Copies of the report “Pacific Mackerel (Scomber japonicus) Stock Assessment for USA Management in the 2011-12 Fishing Year” and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review for this action may be obtained from the Southwest Regional Office (see ADDRESSES).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Joshua Lindsay, Southwest Region, NMFS, (562) 980-4034.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        During public meetings each year, the estimated biomass for Pacific mackerel is presented to the Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Management Team (Team), the Council's CPS Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel) and the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), and the biomass and the status of the fisheries are reviewed and discussed. The biomass estimate is then presented to the Council along with the calculated overfishing limit (OFL) and available biological catch (ABC), annual catch limit (ACL) and harvest guideline (HG) and/or annual catch target (ACT) recommendations and comments from the Team, Subpanel and SSC. Following review by the Council and after hearing public comment, the Council adopts a biomass estimate and makes its catch level recommendations to NMFS.
        This proposed rule would implement the 2011/2012 ACL, HG, ACT and other annual catch reference points, including OFL and an ABC that takes into consideration uncertainty surrounding the current estimate of biomass, for Pacific mackerel in the U.S. EEZ off the Pacific coast. (The EEZ off the Pacific Coast encompasses ocean waters seaward of the outer boundary of state waters, which is 3 nautical miles off the coast, out to a line 200 nautical miles from the coast.) The CPS FMP and its implementing regulations require NMFS to set these annual catch levels for the Pacific mackerel fishery based on the annual specification framework in the FMP. This framework includes a harvest control rule that determines the maximum HG, the primary management target for the fishery, for the current fishing season. The HG is based, in large part, on the current estimate of stock biomass. The harvest control rule in the CPS FMP is HG = [(Biomass-Cutoff) * Fraction * Distribution] with the parameters described as follows:
        1. Biomass. The estimated stock biomass of Pacific mackerel age for the 2011/2012 management season is 211,126 mt.
        2. Cutoff. This is the biomass level below which no commercial fishery is allowed. The FMP established this level at 18,200 mt.
        3. Fraction. The harvest fraction is the percentage of the biomass above 18,200 mt that may be harvested.
        4. Distribution. The average portion (currently 70%) of the total Pacific mackerel biomass that is estimated to be in the U.S. EEZ off the Pacific coast, based on the average historical larval distribution obtained from scientific cruises and the distribution of the resource according to the logbooks of aerial fish-spotters.
        At the June 2011 Council meeting, the Council adopted the 2011-12 Pacific mackerel assessment and a Pacific mackerel biomass estimate of 211,126 metric tons (mt). Based on recommendations from its SSC and other advisory bodies, the Council recommended and NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) is proposing, an OFL of 44,336 mt, an ABC of 42,375 mt, an ACL and maximum harvest guideline (HG) of 40,514 mt, and an ACT of 30,386 mt for the 2011/2012 Pacific mackerel fishing year. These catch specifications are based on the most recent stock assessment and the control rules established in the CPS FMP.
        If the ACT is attained, the directed fishery will close, and the difference between the ACL and ACT (10,128 mt) will be reserved as a set aside for incidental landings in other CPS fisheries and other sources of mortality. In that event, for the remainder of the fishing year, incidental harvest measures will be in place, including a 45 percent incidental catch allowance when Pacific mackerel are landed with other CPS (in other words, no more than 45% by weight of the CPS landed per trip may be Pacific mackerel), except that up to 1 mt of Pacific mackerel could be landed without landing any other CPS. Upon the fishery attaining the ACL/HG (40,514 mt), no vessels in CPS fisheries may retain Pacific mackerel. The purpose of the incidental set-aside and allowance of an incidental fishery is to allow for the restricted incidental landings of Pacific mackerel in other fisheries, particularly other CPS fisheries, when the directed fishery is closed to reduce bycatch and allow for continued prosecution of other important CPS fisheries.

        The NMFS Southwest Regional Administrator will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the date of any closure to either directed or incidental fishing.

        Detailed information on the fishery and the stock assessment are found in the report “Pacific Mackerel (Scomber japonicus) Stock Assessment for USA Management in the 2011-12 Fishing Year” (see ADDRESSES).
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the CPS FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        These proposed specifications are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
        Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, for the reasons as follows:
        The purpose of this proposed rule is to implement the 2011/2012 annual specifications for Pacific mackerel in the U.S. EEZ off the Pacific coast. The CPS FMP and its implementing regulations require NMFS to set an OFL, ABC, ACL and HG or ACT for the Pacific mackerel fishery based on the harvest control rules in the FMP. The specific harvest control rule is applied to the current stock biomass estimate to derive the annual HG, which is used to manage the commercial take of Pacific mackerel.

        The U.S. Small Business Administration defines small businesses engaged in fishing as those vessels with annual revenues of or below $4 million. The small entities that would be affected by the proposed action are the vessels that compose the West Coast CPS finfish fleet. Pacific mackerel harvest is one component of CPS fisheries off the U.S. West Coast, which primarily includes the fisheries for Pacific sardine, northern anchovy and market squid. Pacific mackerel are principally caught off southern California within the limited entry portion (south of 39 degrees N. latitude; Point Arena, California) of the fishery. Sixty-four vessels are currently permitted in the Federal CPS limited entry fishery off California. The average annual per vessel revenue in 2010 for the West Coast CPS finfish fleet was well below $4 million; therefore, all of these vessels therefore are considered small businesses under the RFA. Because each affected vessel is a small business, this proposed rule has an equal effect on all of these small entities, and therefore will impact a substantial number of these small entities in the same manner. Accordingly, there would be no economic impacts resulting from disproportionally between small and large business entities under the proposed action.
        The profitability of these vessels as a result of this proposed rule is based on the average Pacific mackerel ex-vessel price per mt. NMFS used average Pacific mackerel ex-vessel price per metric ton (mt) to conduct a profitability analysis because cost data for the harvesting operations of CPS finfish vessels was limited or unavailable.
        For the 2010/2011 fishing year the HG was 11,000 metric tons (mt) and was divided into a directed fishery of 8,000 mt and an incidental fishery of 3,000 mt. Approximately 2,100 mt of this HG was harvested in 2010/2011 fishing season with an estimated ex-vessel value of $414,256 mt. Using these figures, the average 2010/2011 ex-vessel price per mt of Pacific mackerel was approximately $200.
        The proposed ACL/HG for the 2011/2012 Pacific mackerel fishing season is 40,514 mt, with a directed fishing harvest target or ACT of 30,386 mt. This season's directed fishing target is more than 3 times higher than that of the previous year. If the fleet were to take the entire 2011/2012 ACT, and assuming a coastwide average ex-vessel price per mt of $206 (average of 2009 and 2010 ex-vessel), the potential revenue to the fleet would be approximately $6.3 million. However, this result will depend greatly on market forces within the fishery, and on the regional availability of the resource to the fleet and the fleets' ability to find schools of Pacific mackerel.
        Over recent years, the profitability from fishing Pacific mackerel has depended less on the catch level, and more on market forces within the fishery as well as the other CPS fisheries, and on the regional availability of the species to the fleet and the fleets' ability to easily find schools relatively close to port. If there is no change in market conditions (i.e., an increase demand for Pacific mackerel product) or proximity of the fish to the fleet, it is not likely that the full ACT will be taken during the 2011-2012 fishing year, in which case profits will be lower than if the entire ACT were taken. The annual average U.S. Pacific mackerel harvest from 2001 to 2010 is approximately 4,500 mt, and over the last 10 years landings have averaged approximately 6,000 mt without exceeding 10,000 mt. As a result, it is unlikely that the ACT proposed in this rule will limit the potential profitability of the fleet from Pacific mackerel.
        However, the revenue derived from harvesting Pacific mackerel is only one factor determining the overall revenue for a majority of the vessels in the CPS fleet, and, therefore, the economic impact to the fleet from the proposed action cannot be viewed in isolation. CPS vessels typically harvest a number of other species, including Pacific sardine, market squid, northern anchovy, and tuna, but focus on Pacific sardine, which had an estimated ex-vessel of $12.5 million in 2010, and market squid, which had an estimated ex-vessel of $71 million in 2010. Therefore, Pacific mackerel is only a small component of this multi-species CPS fishery and with the incidental catch provisions in this rule, the fleet will continue to be able to catch these other profitable species if the ACT is reached and directed mackerel fishing is closed.
        Based on the disproportionality and profitability analysis above, this rule, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of these small entities. As a result, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required, and none has been prepared.
        There are no reporting, record-keeping, or other compliance requirements required by this proposed rule. Additionally, no other Federal rules duplicate, overlap or conflict with this proposed rule.
        This action does not contain a collection-of-information requirement for purposes of the Paper Reduction Act.

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

          Dated: April 6, 2012.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2012-8857 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
        42 CFR Part 84
        [Docket No. CDC-2013-0017; NIOSH-250]
        Development of Inward Leakage Standards for Half-Mask Air-Purifying Particulate Respirators

          AGENCY:
          Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS.

          ACTION:
          Reopening of comment period.

          SUMMARY:

          On September 17, 2013, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) located within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) held a public meeting concerning inward leakage performance requirements for the class of NIOSH-certified non-powered air-purifying particulate respirators approved as half-facepiece respirators for protection from particulate-only hazards. The purpose of this meeting was to share information and to seek stakeholder feedback, in identified topic areas, concerning the development of inward leakage performance standards. Questions concerning the identified topics of specific interest were included in the meeting notice published in the Federal Register on September 4, 2013. Written comments were to be received by October 18, 2013. HHS/CDC received a request from a stakeholder for additional time to comment on this notice. In consideration of this request HHS/CDC is reopening the public comment period through December 31, 2013.

          DATES:
          Stakeholder comments to the questions included in the notice of September 4, 2013 (78 FR 54432) must be received by 11:59 p.m. ET on December 31, 2013.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft Laboratories, MS-C34, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH 45226.

            Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS) and docket number (CDC-2013-0017; NIOSH-250). All relevant comments, including any personal information provided, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov.

            Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents and submitted comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Colleen Miller, NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL), 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236; (412) 386-4956 (this is not a toll free number) or email csmiller1@cdc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Questions for stakeholders regarding the development of inward leakage performance standards for half-mask air-purifying particulate respirators were published in the Federal Register on September 4, 2013 (78 FR 54432).

          Kathleen Sebelius,
          Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

      [FR Doc. 2013-27445 Filed 11-18-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 64
        [CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123; DA 17-656]
        Petition for Partial Reconsideration, or in the Alternative, Suspension of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding
        Correction
        In proposed rule 2017-15302, appearing on page 33856, in the issue of Friday, July 21, 2017, make the following correction:
        On page 33856, in the second column, in the DATES section, in the fourth line, “July 31, 2017” should read “August 17, 2017”.

      [FR Doc. C1-2017-15302 Filed 7-24-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        National Park Service
        36 CFR Part 7
        [NPS-GOGA-19691; PX.XGOGA1604.00.1]
        RIN 1024-AE16
        Special Regulations, Areas of the National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Dog Management—Extension of Public Comment Period and Corrections

          AGENCY:
          National Park Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; extension of public comment period; corrections.

          SUMMARY:

          The National Park Service is extending the public comment period for the proposed rule to amend its special regulations for Golden Gate National Recreation Area regarding dog walking. Reopening the comment period for 30 days will allow more time for the public to review the proposal and submit comments. This document also corrects Table 4 to § 7.97 in the proposed rule by removing the designation of Ocean Beach as a Voice and Sight Control Area for walking four to six dogs that was included by an administrative error. The proposed rule also contained a typographical error in the email address for persons to contact the NPS for further information. The correct email address is goga_dogmgt@nps.gov.

          DATES:
          The comment period for the proposed rule that published on February 24, 2016 (81 FR 9139), is extended. Comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. EDT on May 25, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1024-AE16, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments after searching for RIN 1024-AE16.
          • Mail or hand deliver to: General Superintendent, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Attn: Dog Management Proposed Rule, Fort Mason, Building 201, San Francisco, CA 94123.

            Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and (RIN) 1024-AE16 for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. If you commented on the Draft Dog Management Plan/Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (draft Plan/SEIS), your comment has been considered in drafting the proposed rule. Comments submitted during this comment period should focus on this proposed rule, not the draft Plan/SEIS. For example, the National Park Service invites comments on the definitions contained in the proposed rule and the clarity of the descriptions of areas open to dog walking; the rules and restrictions that apply to dog walking and to Voice and Sight Control areas; the rules and restrictions that apply to the permitting program for walking four to six dogs; and whether commercial dog walking should be allowed under the proposed rule. Comments on the draft Plan/SEIS will be considered untimely because the comment period on the draft Plan/SEIS has closed. Comments will not be accepted by fax, email, or in any way other than those specified above, and bulk comments in any format (hard copy or electronic) submitted on behalf of others will not be considered. Organizations should direct their members to submit comments individually using one of the methods described above.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Attn: Public Affairs Office (Alexandra Picavet), Fort Mason, Building 201, San Francisco, CA, 94123. Phone: (415) 561-4728. Email: goga_dogmgt@nps.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Extension of Public Comment Period

        On February 24, 2014, the National Park Service (NPS) published in the Federal Register (81 FR 9139) a proposed rule to amend its special regulations for Golden Gate National Recreation Area regarding dog walking. The 60-day public comment period for this proposal would have closed on April 25, 2016. In order to give the public additional time to review and comment on the proposal, we are extending the public comment period through May 25, 2016. If you already commented on the proposed rule you do not have to resubmit your comments.

        To view comments received through the Federal eRulemaking portal, go to http://www.regulations.gov and enter 1024-AE16 in the search box. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Please note that submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Please make your comments as specific as possible and explain the basis for them.
        Correction to Table 4
        In the proposed rule on page 9150, make the following correction in Table 4 to § 7.97—Voice and Sight Control or On-Leash Dog Walking: Four to Six Dogs: Remove and reserve paragraph (E). This correction removes the designation of Ocean Beach as a Voice and Sight Control Area for walking four to six dogs, which was never intended to be designated this way and was included in Table 4 by an administrative error.
        Correction of Email Address

        In the proposed rule, on page 9140 in the first column, in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, correct the email address for interested parties to contact the NPS from “goga_dogmtg@nps.gov” to “goga_dogmgt@nps.gov”.

          Dated: March 23, 2016.
          Michael Bean,
          Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

      [FR Doc. 2016-07370 Filed 3-31-16; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 4310-EJ-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Parts 2, 26, and 27
        [WT Docket No. 00-32; FCC 00-63]
        Transfer of 4.9 GHz Band From Federal Government Use

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          This document proposes to allocate and establish licensing and service rules for the 4940-4990 MHz band that has recently been transferred from Federal Government to private sector use as substitute spectrum for the 4635-4685 MHz band reclaimed for Federal Government use. This document also grants in part a Petition for Rulemaking filed by Global Frontiers, Inc. (Global) to revise, among other requests, the Commission's rules relating to this band. The action taken in this document is necessary to comply with Congressional mandate to transfer spectrum from the Federal government to the private sector, to permit and encourage the introduction of new services and the enhancement of existing services.

          DATES:
          Submit comments on or before April 26, 2000; submit reply comments on or before May 17, 2000. Written comments by the public on the proposed information collections are due April 26, 2000. Written comments must be submitted by the Office Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed information collections on or before May 15, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Send comments and reply comments to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the information collections contained herein should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov, and to Ed Springer, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to Edward.Springer@omb.eop.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Elias Johnson, 202-418-1310. For additional information concerning the information collections contained in this document, contact Judy Boley at 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in WT Docket No. 00-32, FCC 00-63, adopted February 23, 2000, and released February 29, 2000. The complete text of the NPRM and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is available on the Commission's Internet site, at www.fcc.gov. It is also available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Courtyard Level, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC, and may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc., CY-B400, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC Comments may be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html, or by e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov.
        Synopsis of the NPRM
        1. In this NPRM, the Commission proposes to allocate and establish licensing and service rules for the 4940-4990 MHz (4.9GHz) band that has recently been transferred from Federal Government to private sector use as a substitute spectrum for the 4635-4685 MHz band reclaimed for Federal Government use. The Commission proposes to allocate the 4.9 GHz band for fixed and mobile services, except aeronautical mobile service, on a primary basis and seeks comment on the geographic area and spectrum blocks that should be used to license this spectrum. In addition, the Commission also proposes to license the 4.9 GHz band under part 27 of the Commission's Rules, except to the extent the Commission, in this NPRM, proposes to modify those rules to reflect the particular characteristics of this spectrum and the services that will be permitted to operate in this band. The Commission proposes to delete part 26 of the Rules (regarding General Wireless Communications Service) because it applies only to the 4660-4685 MHz band. The Commission also proposes that initial licenses for the 4.9 GHz band be acquired through competitive bidding under part I of the Commission's Rules. Furthermore, in a few instances, the Commission proposes to codify and conform certain rules for the 2.3 GHz band to provide for consistent regulation of part 27 services. Finally, the Commission grants in part a Petition for Rulemaking filed by Global Frontiers, Inc. (Global) to revise, among other requests, the Commission's rules relating to this band.
        2. Briefly, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA, Public Law 103-66 107 Stat. 312) required that the Secretary of Commerce identify at least 200 megahertz of spectrum then allocated for use by Federal Government agencies to be transferred to private sector use. The Commission, in the GWCS First Report and Order (60 FR 13071, March 10, 1995) among other things allocated the 4660-4685 MHz band on a primary basis to fixed and mobile services and proposed to designate this band for the new GWCS service. The subsequent Second GWCS Report and Order (60 FR 40712, August 9, 1995) established GWCS and adopted Part 26 of the Commission's Rules setting out licensing and operating rules for the service in the 4660-4685 MHz band. However, due to an evident lack of interest in this spectrum and certain concerns expressed by the United States Navy regarding the effect that transferring this spectrum to commercial use could have on its Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) system, the Department of Commerce, on March 30, 1999, notified the Commission that the Federal Government was reclaiming the 4635-4685 MHz band and identifying, as substitute spectrum, the 4.9 GHz band.
        3. Global, in its Petition for Rulemaking (filed on November 24, 1999) requested that the Commission: (1) Designate the 4.9 GHz band for GWCS in lieu of the reclaimed 4660-4685 MHz band; (2) make the service more attractive to applicants that require broadband capability in order to serve the public; (3) speed the process of licensing applicants that are not mutually exclusive; and (4) allow mutually exclusive applicants to consult and negotiate solutions to their mutual exclusivity. Global asked that the Commission make available for GWCS the entire 4.9 GHz band, that the band be broken down into five 10 megahertz wide bands, and apparently that the band be licensed using Economic Areas (EAs). Global also requested that the 15 MHz aggregation limit contained in § 26.101(a) be increased, and that GWCS licensees be able to partition their service territories to entities other than just rural telephone companies. In addition, Global asked that the Commission clarify how applications are to be filed and that the Commission promptly process GWCS applications. Finally, Global requested that the Commission encourage the avoidance of mutual exclusivity through negotiated engineering solutions.
        4. The NPRM proposes that licensees in the 4.9 GHz band be authorized to provide any fixed, mobile, or maritime mobile service, but not aeronautical mobile service. The NPRM seeks comment on this proposal. Further, the NPRM tentatively concludes that allocating the 4940-4990 MHz band to fixed and mobile services, except aeronautical mobile service, is consistent with section 303(y)(2) of the Communications Act (Act), 47 U.S.C. 303(y)(2), as amended by the Balanced Budget Act 1997, Public Law 105-33, 111 Stat. 251. The NPRM also invites comment on whether allocating the 4940-4990 MHz band to fixed and mobile services is in the public interest, and on whether a flexible spectrum allocation in this band would deter investment in communications and systems, or technology development. Further, the NPRM seeks comment regarding the extent to which significant flexibility in service rules may encourage such investments. Finally, the NPRM solicits comment on its tentative finding that the technical rules proposed in the NPRM satisfy the requirements of section 303(y)(2)(C).
        5. The NPRM seeks comment on its tentative conclusion that the action taken in the Public Safety Reallocation Order, 63 FR 06669, February 10, 2000, allocating the 764 MHz band on a primary basis to fixed and mobile services, and designating this spectrum solely for public safety use, and in the First Report and Order WT Docket No. 96-86, 63 FR 58645, November 2, 1998, which adopted rules for licensing and operation for public safety in those bands, there is no need to set aside spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band for public safety use.
        6. The NPRM next seeks comment on the Commission's proposals that the 4.9 GHz band be governed, in general, by part 27 of the Commission's Rules and that part 26 no longer serves a function and should be deleted from the Commission's Rules.
        7. The NPRM does not propose to restrict the types of fixed and mobile services that can be provided in the 4.9 GHz band (other than aeronautical mobile). Consistent with this approach, the Commission notes that licensees may be required to comply with rules contained in other parts of the Commission's Rules. The Commission seeks comment generally on any provisions in existing, service-specific rules that may require specific recognition or adjustment to comport with the supervening application of part 27, as well as any provisions that may be necessary in part 27 to fully describe the scope of covered services and technologies.
        8. The NPRM notes that the 4.9 GHz service will be subject to the Universal Licensing System (ULS). All 4.9 GHz licensees filing applications and other filings using FCC forms 601 through 605 or associated schedules must make these filings electronically in accordance with the electronic filing instructions provided by ULS, 47 CFR 1.913(b).

        9. The NPRM next proposes that, similar to licensees in other Commission services, applicants in the 4.9 GHz band be allowed to request common carrier and non-common carrier status for authorization in a single license rather than require the applicant to choose between common carrier and non-carrier services. This would enable 4.9 GHz licensees to provide all allowable services anywhere within its licensed area at any time, consistent with its regulatory status. In this regard, the NPRM proposes that applicants and licensees in the 4.9 GHz band be required to indicate a regulatory status based on any service they choose to provide, but not be required to describe their proposed services. The NPRM also proposes that if licensees change the service or services they offer, such that it would change their regulatory status, they must notify the Commission, within 30 days of the change although such change would not require prior Commission authorization. In addition to making these procedures applicable to the 4.9 GHz band, the NPRM also proposes to codify these procedures for the 2.3 GHz band, and seeks comment on these proposals.
        10. The NPRM proposes that there be no additional restrictions on eligibility, other than the foreign ownership restrictions set forth in section 310 of the Commission's Act, and as indicated in this decision. In addition, consistent with Global's request, the NPRM tentatively concludes that licensees in the 4.9 GHz band should be permitted to obtain all of the 4.9 GHz licenses in a given geographic area, and that a spectrum cap is not necessary to prevent a 4.9 GHz licensee from exercising market power. The NPRM seeks comment on these issues.
        11. Applicants in the 4.9 GHz band would be subject to section 27.12 of the Act, which implements the foreign ownership and citizenship requirements that restrict the issuance of licenses to certain applicants. An applicant requesting authorization only for non-common carrier services would be subject to section 310(a) but not to the additional prohibitions of section 310(b). An applicant requesting authorization for common carrier services (or for both common carrier and non-common carrier services) would be subject to both sections 310(a) and 310(b). Like common carriers, non-common carriers would be required to file the information whenever there are changes to their foreign ownership information. However, under the Commission's proposed rules, applicants requesting authorization exclusively to provide non-common carrier services would not be disqualified if its citizenship information reflects that it would be disqualified from a common carrier license or required to file a waiver. The NPRM solicits comment on these proposals.

        12. The NPRM seeks comment on the appropriate geographic area to use for licensing the 4.9 GHz band. (See paras 41-43 of the full text of the NPRM.) Additionally, the NPRM invites comment on the appropriate size spectrum block or blocks that should be used to license the 4.9 GHz band. Global requests that the spectrum be divided into five 10 megahertz wide spectrum block. Alternatively, the NPRM seeks comment on whether this spectrum should be auctioned in two 25 MHz licenses. The NPRM requests comment on whether larger or smaller blocks would provide more options for services provided by licensees in the band, on whether the spectrum should be auctioned in paired spectrum blocks, on whether the Commission should license unpaired spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band, and on whether the Commission should make changes to its bidding rules to promote bidder flexibility

        13. The NPRM seeks comment on whether to provide for license terms not to exceed 10 years from the date of original issuance and whether to provide a right to a renewal expectancy. (See paras. 48 through 50 of the full NPRM.) Further, the NPRM invites comments on the Commission's tentative conclusion that, in order to claim a renewal expectancy, a 4.9 GHz licensee involved in a comparative renewal proceeding must include at a minimum a showing including: (1) A description of current service in terms of geographic coverage and population served or links installed; (2) an explanation of the licensee's record of expansion, including a timetable for the construction of new base sites or links to meet changes in demand for service; (3) a description of the licensee's investments in its system; and (4) copies of any Commission Orders finding the licensee to have violated the Communications Act or any Commission rule or policy, and a list of any pending proceedings that relate to any matter described by the requirements for the renewal expectancy.
        14. On December 20, 1996, the Commission released a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 96-148, 62 FR 696, January 6, 1997, proposing, among other actions, to revise the partitioning rules for the band 4660-4685 MHz and to establish disaggregation rules for this band. The proposals contained in that document are superseded by the proposals discussed in the NPRM, and that proceeding is terminated to the extent that it addressed partitioning and disaggregation rules for the band 4660-4685 MHz.
        15. The NPRM tentatively concludes, consistent with Global's request, to allow all 4.9 GHz licensees the flexibility to partition their service areas without any restriction, and to disaggregate their spectrum. Section 27.15 of the Commission's Rules permits licensees seeking approval for partitioning and disaggregation arrangements to request authorization from the Commission for partial assignment of a license, and provides that licensees may apply to partition their licensed geographic service areas or disaggregate their licensed spectrum at any time following the grant of their licenses. In the Report and Order adopting the rule, 62 FR 653, January 6, 1997, the Commission decided to permit geographic partitioning of any service area defined by the partitioner and partitionee, to permit spectrum disaggregation without restriction on the amount of spectrum to be disaggregated, and to permit combined partitioning and disaggregation. The NPRM requests comment on the Commission's proposal that licensees in the 4.9 GHz band be eligible to the same extent to partition service areas and disaggregate spectrum, and also on what limits, if any, should be placed on the ability of licensees to partition service areas and disaggregate spectrum.
        16. The NPRM also requests comment on its proposal that 4.9 GHz applicants and licensees be required to, in the case of partitioning, file FCC form 603 and list the partitioned service area on a schedule to the application. Further, the NPRM proposes that licensees in the 4.9 GHZ band follow § 27.15(c) provisions against unjust enrichment and the remaining provisions governing partitioning and disaggregation in § 27.15 of the Commission's Rules.

        17. The NPRM also seeks comment on the Commission's proposal regarding construction requirements for parties to partitioning, disaggregation, or combined partitioning and disaggregation agreements. The NPRM proposes to allow parties to partitioning agreements to choose between two options for satisfying the construction requirements. The first option provides that the partitioner and partitionee would each certify that it would independently satisfy the substantial service requirement for its respective partitioned area. If a licensee fails to meet this requirement during the relevant license term, that licensee's authorization would be subject to cancellation at the end of the license term. Under the second option, the partitioner would certify that it has met or will meet the substantial service requirement for the entire market. If the partitioner fails to meet this standard during the relevant license term, however, only its license would be subject to cancellation at the end of the license term. The partitionee's license would not be affected by that failure.
        18. The NPRM additionally proposes to allow parties to disaggregation agreements to choose between two options for satisfying the construction requirements. Under the first option, the disaggregator and disaggregatee would certify that they each would share responsibility for meeting the substantial service requirement for the geographic service area. If parties choose this option, both parties' performance will be evaluated at the end of the relevant license term and both licenses could be subject to cancellation. The second option would allow the parties to agree that either the disaggregator or the disaggregatee would be responsible for meeting the substantial service requirement for the geographic service area. If parties choose this option, and the party responsible for meeting the construction requirement fails to do so, only the license of the non-performing party would be subject to cancellation.
        19. The NPRM proposes construction standards and safe harbor provisions for 4.9 GHz licensees. As mandated by § 27.14(a) of the Commission's Rules, licensees would be required to provide “substantial service” in their service areas within 10 years of being licensed. A failure to meet this requirement would result in forfeiture of the license and the licensee's ineligibility to regain it. As proposed, licensees would be required to submit an acceptable showing to the Commission at the end of the license period demonstrating that they have provided substantial service during the license term or are providing substantial service at the end of the term. In addition, the NPRM proposes the safe harbors that would be applicable to 2.3 GHz licensee, as well as to 4.9 GHz licensees. The first safe harbor proposal states that for a licensee who chooses to offer fixed, point-to-point service, the construction of four permanent links per one million people in its licensed service area during its license term or the license-renewal mark would constitute substantial service. The second safe harbor proposal provides that, for a licensee who chooses to offer mobile services or point-to-point multipoint services, a demonstration of coverage to 20 percent of the population of its licensed service area during its licensed term or at the license-renewal mark would constitute substantial service.
        20. Under the proposed approach, the Commission intends to reserve the right to review these construction requirements in the future if complaints are received related to section 309(j)(4)(B) of the Act, or if a reassessment is warranted because spectrum is being warehoused or is otherwise not being used despite demand. The Commission will also reserve the right to impose additional, more stringent construction requirements on licenses in the future in the event that actual anticompetitive or universal service problems develop. The NPRM seeks comment on these proposals.
        21. The NPRM seeks comment on its tentative proposal that, for applicants in the 4.9 GHz band, providing common carrier or non-common carrier service, the Commission provide for a five-day period for filing petitions to deny applications, and a seven-day notice period for all auctionable services, as mandated for auctionable services in §§ 1.2108(b) and 1.2108(c) of the Commission's Rules.

        22. The NPRM considers general common carrier obligations. The NPRM first invites comment on its proposal that the Commission exercise its authority to forbear from enforcing the same Title II of the Act requirements that the Commission has determined not to apply to CMRS licensees, for 4.9 GHz and 2.3 GHz licensees that provide common carrier fixed services. Title II of the Act imposes a variety of obligations on the operations of common carriers that are not otherwise imposed on wireless communications services. These operational requirements include the filing of tariffs, maintaining of records, liabilities, and discontinuance of service. The 1996 Act provides the Commission with the authority to forbear from Title II requirements. (See 47 U.S.C. 160, as added by the 1996 Act.) The statute requires that, before forbearing from applying any section of Title II, the Commission must find that each of the following applies:
        (a) Enforcement of such regulation or provision is not necessary to ensure that the charges, practices, classifications, or regulations by, for, or in connection with that telecommunications carrier or telecommunications service are just and reasonable and are not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory.
        (b) Enforcement of such regulation or provision is not necessary for the protection of consumer; and
        (c) Forbearance from applying such provision or regulation is consistent with the public interest.

        The NPRM seek comment on the application of these criteria to the 4.9 and 2.3 GHz band.
        23. The NPRM seeks comment regarding whether to include an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) provision in the Commission's rules applicable to services in the 4.9 GHz band, and if so, which of the Commission's EEO rules should be adopted. The NPRM also seek comment on whether the Commission's EEO rules should be applied to licensees at 2.3 GHz.
        24. The NPRM next proposes to apply the technical standards of part 27, including power limits, equipment authorization, radiofrequency safety standards, emission limits, frequency stability, antenna structures and air navigation safety, international coordination and disturbance of AM station antenna patterns, as well as technical standards contained in other sections of the Commission's Rules, to 4.9 GHz licensees.
        25. The NPRM offers two approaches to in-band interference control. Parties are asked to provide their analysis of both a general coordination requirement, in which the Commission would rely principally upon the use of coordination procedures to avoid harmful interference between the operation of licensees in adjacent service areas, and establishment of a field strength limit. Comments are particularly sought on issues such as coordination procedures and criteria, and on what the boundary limit should be. Comment is also sought on whether to modify § 27.64 of the Commission's Rules, which states that part 27 stations operating in full accordance with applicable Commission rules and the terms and conditions of their authorizations are normally considered to be non-interfering, and provides for Commission action to require modification to eliminate significant interference. The NPRM further invites comment on whether power limits and coordination procedures should be imposed to adequately protect radio astronomy operation.
        26. The NPRM notes that the U.S. Navy's CEC system operates on multiple frequencies in the bands below the 4.9 GHz, and invites comment on what measures should be taken to protect the 4.9 GHz licensees from interference from Federal Government use of the adjacent band. For example, should certain technical standards be imposed on 4.9 GHz licensees?

        27. The NPRM proposes to use the part 1 auction rules to initially license the 4.9 GHz band, and to move the remaining part 26 auction rules for the band 4660-4685 MHz to the 4.9 GHz band. The NPRM also tentatively concludes that mutually exclusive initial applications for the 4.9 GHz band must be resolved through competitive bidding and that the Commission's previous determinations of auctionability is dispositive with regard to the substituted 4.9 GHz spectrum. (See para. 94 of the NPRM). The NPRM solicits comment on these tentative conclusions.
        28. The NPRM proposes to conduct the auction for initial licenses in the 4.9 GHz band in conformity with the general competitive bidding rules set forth in part 1, subpart Q of the Commission's Rules, and consistent with the bidding procedures that have been employed in previous Commission auctions. The NPRM invites comment on this proposal and on whether any of the Commission's part 1 rules would be inappropriate in an auction for this service.

        29. The NPRM considers the definition of small business in the context of the 4.9 GHz band. Specifically, the NPRM proposes to define a small business as any firm with annual average gross revenues for the three preceding years not in excess of $40 million. For entities that qualify as small businesses, the NPRM proposes to provide a bidding credit of 15 percent. The NPRM also proposes to define a very small business as one with average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years not in excess of $15 million. For entities that qualify as very small businesses, the NPRM proposes a bidding credit of 25 percent. The NPRM invites comment on the appropriateness of these standards and on related issues. (See paragraphs 101 through 103.) In calculating gross revenues for purposes of small business eligibility in 4.9 GHz auction, the NPRM proposes to attribute the gross revenues of the applicant, its controlling interests, and its affiliates.
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
        30. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 603, the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules proposed in the NPRM. The Commission requests written public comment on the analysis. In order to fulfill the mandate of the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 regarding the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, the Commission asks a number of questions in the IRFA regarding the prevalence of small businesses in the affected industries.
        31. Comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments filed in this rulemaking proceeding, but they must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this NPRM, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

          Ex Parte Presentations

        32. For purposes of this permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking proceeding, members of the public are advised that ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed under the Commission's Rules. (See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, 1.1206(a).)
        Pleading Dates
        33. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, interested parties may file comments on or before April 26, 2000, and reply comments on or before May 17, 2000. Comments and reply comments should be filed in WT Docket No. 00-32. All relevant and timely comments will be considered by the Commission before final action is taken in this proceeding. To file formally in this proceeding, interested parties must file an original and four copies of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If interested parties want each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of their comments, they must file an original plus nine copies. Interested parties should send comments and reply comments to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Room TW-A325, 445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, with a copy to Eli Johnson, Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554.
        34. Comments may also be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to <http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html>. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet E-Mail. To obtain filing instructions for E-Mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of the message, “get form <your E-Mail address>.” A sample form and directions will be sent in reply.
        35. Comments and reply comments will be available for public inspection during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, at the Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554. Copies of comments and reply comments are available through the Commission's duplicating contractor: International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS, Inc.), CY-B400, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20054, (202) 857-3800.
        Ordering Clauses
        36. These actions are taken pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 7, 10, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), and 310 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310.
        37. Notice is hereby given of the proposed regulatory changes described in the NPRM, and that comment is sought on these proposals.
        38. The Petition for Rulemaking of Global Frontiers, Inc. To Revise Title 47, CFR, parts 2 and 26 in Order To Reallocate Frequencies to GWCS and Make Related Changes, is granted to the extent indicated.
        39. Pursuant to sections 1, 4(i) and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and 332, the rulemaking proceeding captioned Geographic Partitioning and Spectrum Disaggregation by Commercial Mobile Radio Services Licensees, WT Docket No. 96-148, is terminated to the extent indicated.
        40. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
        41. This is a synopsis of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The full text of Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement may be found in Appendix A of the full NPRM.

        42. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 1
           of the possible significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), WT Docket No. 00-32. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

            1 5 U.S.C. 603, The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq., has been amended by the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAA). Title II of the CWAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).

        Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
        43. The Commission's objectives in the NPRM are to: (1) Accommodate the introduction of new uses of spectrum and the enhancement of existing uses; (2) encourage commercial development of equipment that can operate in the 4.9 GHz band; (3) facilitate the awarding of licenses to entities who value them the most; and (4) create new jobs, foster economic growth and improve access to communications by industry and the American public. The Commission also seeks to ensure a regulatory plan for the 4.9 GHz band that will allow for the efficient licensing and use of the band, eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens, enhance the competitive potential of the band, and provide a wide variety of radio services to the public.
        Legal Basis for Proposed Rules
        44. The proposed action is authorized under sections 1, 4(i), 7, 10, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), and 310 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310.
        Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply
        45. 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 Section 3 of the Small Business Act, unless the Commission has developed one or more definitions that are appropriate for its activities. Under the Small business Act, a “small business concern” is one that: (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). A small organization is generally “any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.” Nationwide, as of 1992, there were approximately 275,801 small organizations.
        46. The definition of “small governmental entity” is one with populations of fewer than 50,000. There are 85,006 governmental entities in the nation. This number includes such entities as states, counties, cities, utility districts and school districts. There are no figures available on what portion of this number has populations of fewer than 50,000. However, this number includes 38,978 counties, cities and towns, and of those, 37,556, or ninety-six percent, have populations of fewer than 50,000. The Census Bureau estimates that this ratio is approximately accurate for all government entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, the Commission estimates that ninety-six percent, or about 81,600, are small entities that may be affected by our rules.
        47. The proposals in the NPRM affect applicants who wish to provide services in the 4.9 GHz band. The Commission notes that we have previously defined “small entity” for Blocks C and F broadband PCS licensees as firms that had average gross revenues of less that $40 million in the three previous calendar years. This regulation defining “small entity” in the context of broadband PCS auctions has been approved by the SBA. We also note that the Commission has adopted this same definition for 2.3 GHz and 39 GHz applicants, as well as for the band 4660-4685 MHz. With respect to prospective 4.9 GHz license applicants, the Commission proposes to use the small entity definition adopted in the Broadband PCS proceeding.
        48. In addition, the Commission notes that if the proposed special small business definition were not to be used, the applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the SBA rules applicable to radiotelephone (wireless) companies. This provides that a small entity is a radiotelephone company employing no more than 1,500 persons. According to the Bureau of the Census, only twelve radiotelephone firms from a total of 1,178 such firms which operated during 1992 had 1,000 or more employees.
        49. The NPRM observes that the capital costs of operational facilities in the 4.9 GHz band are likely to vary widely. Accordingly, the NPRM seeks to adopt small business size standards that afford licensees substantial flexibility. Thus, in addition to its proposal to adopt the general small business standard the Commission used in the case of broadband PCS, 2.3 GHz, 39 GHz, and 4660-4685 MHz licenses, the NPRM also proposes to adopt the definition for very small businesses, businesses with average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years not in excess of $15 million.
        50. While the NPRM proposes to use these definitions, the Commission has not yet determined or proposed how many licenses will be awarded, nor will it know how many licensees will be small businesses until the auction, if required, is held. In addition, at this point in the proceeding, the Commission does not know how many licensees will partition their license areas or disaggregate their spectrum blocks, if partitioning and disaggregation are allowed. The Commission assumes that, for purposes of our evaluations and conclusions in the IRFA, all of the prospective licensees are small entities, as that term is defined by the SBA or our proposed definitions for the 4.9 GHz band. We invite comment on this analysis.
        Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
        51. Entities interested in acquiring spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band will be required to submit license applications and high bidders will be required to apply for their individual licenses. The proposals under consideration in this item also include requiring commercial licensees to make showings that they are in compliance with construction requirements, file applications for license renewals and make certain other filings as required by the Communications Act. The Commission requests comment on how these requirements can be modified to reduce the burden on small entities and still meet the objectives of the proceeding.
        Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

        52. The NPRM seeks data demonstrating build-out and other capital requirements for services in the 4.9 GHz band, as well as the anticipated start-up costs for providing service, and how these costs compare with costs for other services. Commenters are invited to use comparisons with other services for which the Commission has already established auction procedures as a basis for their comments regarding the appropriate definitions for small and very small businesses. Commenters are asked to address to what extent the proposed size standards will impact the ability of small businesses to acquire financing. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether the proposed designated entity provisions would be sufficient to promote participation by businesses owned by minorities and by women, and participation by rural telephone companies.
        53. The Commission has reduced burdens wherever possible. To minimize any negative impact, however, the NPRM proposes certain incentives for small entities which will redound to their benefit. The Commission will continue to examine alternatives in the future with the objectives of eliminating unnecessary regulations and minimizing any significant economic impact on small entities. The Commission seeks comment on significant alternatives commenters believe should be adopted.
        Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules
        54. None
        Paperwork Reduction Analysis

        55. This NPRM contains proposed and modified information collections. As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, the Commission invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to take this opportunity to comment on the information collections contained in this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same time as other comments on this NPRM. OMB comments are due 60 days from the date of publication of this NPRM in the Federal Register. Comments should address: (1) 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; (2) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) 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.

          OMB Approval Number: None.

          Title: The Transfer of the 4.9 GHz Band from Federal Government Use: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

          Form No.: FCC Forms 601, 602, 603, 604, 605.

          Type of Review: New information collection.

          Respondents: Business or other for profit.

          Number of Respondents: 100.

          Estimated Time Per Response: 113 hours.

          Total Annual Cost Burden: 0.

          Total Annual Burden: 11,300 hours.

          Needs and Uses: The various information reporting and verification requirements, and the prospective coordination requirement will be used by the Commission to verify licensee compliance with Commission rules and regulations, and to ensure that licensees continue to fulfill their statutory responsibilities in accordance with the Communications Act of 1934. Such information has been used in the past and will continue to be used to minimize interference, verify that applicants are legally and technically qualified to hold licenses, and to determine compliance with Commission Rules.

          List of Subjects
          47 CFR Part 2
          Radio.
          47 CFR Parts 26 and 27
          Communications common carriers, Radio.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Magalie Roman Salas,
          Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 00-6605 Filed 3-14-00; 12:08 pm]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 090205130-9132-01]
        RIN 0648-AX55
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Commercial Golden Tilefish Segment of the Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Control Date

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

          ACTION:
          Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking; consideration of a control date.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that it is establishing a new control date to control future access to the commercial golden tilefish fishery operating in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic. If changes to the management regime are developed and implemented under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), a control date could be used to limit the number of participants in the fishery. This announcement is intended, in part, to promote awareness of the potential eligibility criteria for future access so as to discourage speculative entry into the fishery while the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS consider whether and how access to the golden tilefish fishery should be controlled.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before 5 p.m., eastern time, March 23, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AX55, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
          • Fax: Attn: Nikhil Mehta 727-824-5308.
          • Mail: Nikhil Mehta, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, Sustainable Fisheries Division, 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.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; toll free 1-866-SAFMC-10 or 843-571-4366; kim.iverson@safmc.net.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        At the December 2008 Council meeting, the Council recommended a new control date of December 4, 2008, for the commercial golden tilefish segment of the snapper-grouper fishery. The control date would apply to persons who are contemplating entering the commercial golden tilefish fishery in the EEZ of the South Atlantic region. The Council requested that this control date be published in the Federal Register to notify fishermen that if they enter such a fishery after December 4, 2008, they may not be assured of future access if the Council and/or NMFS decide to limit entry or impose other measures to manage this segment of the snapper-grouper fishery. A control date of October 14, 2005 (70 FR 60058), was previously established for the snapper-grouper fishery and would remain unchanged.
        Establishment of the new control date for the commercial golden tilefish segment of the snapper-grouper fishery would allow the Council to evaluate the level of participation in this segment of the snapper-grouper fishery and address any level of overcapacity. Control dates are intended to discourage speculative entry into a fishery, as new entrants entering the fishery after the control date are forewarned that they are not guaranteed future participation in the fishery.
        Establishment of this control date does not commit the Council or NMFS to any particular management regime or criteria for entry into the commercial golden tilefish fishery. Fishermen are not guaranteed future participation in the fishery regardless of their level of participation before or after the control date. The Council may recommend a different control date or it may recommend a management regime that does not involve a control date. Other criteria, such as documentation of landings or fishing effort, may be used to determine eligibility for participation in a limited access fishery. The Council and/or NMFS also may choose to take no further action to control entry or access to the fisheries, in which case the control date may be rescinded. Any action by the Council will be taken pursuant to the requirements for fishery management plan and amendment development established under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
        This notification also gives the public notice that interested participants should locate and preserve records that substantiate and verify their participation in the commercial golden tilefish fishery in the South Atlantic EEZ.

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

          Dated: February 11, 2009
          James W. Balsiger,
          Acting Assistant Administrator For Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E9-3607 Filed 2-19-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S