[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 62 (Monday, March 31, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16822-16826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-6494]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 25 and 74
[WT Docket No. 02-55; ET Docket Nos. 00-258 and 95-18; FCC 08-73]
Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission proposes to eliminate, as of January 1, 2009,
the requirement that Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) licensees in the
thirty largest markets and fixed BAS links in all markets be
transitioned before the Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) operators can
begin offering service. The Commission also seeks comment on how to
mitigate interference between new MSS entrants and incumbent BAS
licensees who have not completed relocation before the MSS entrants
begin offering service. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on
allowing MSS operators to begin providing service in those markets
where BAS incumbents have been transitioned.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or before April 30, 2008, and reply
comments must be filed on or before May 30, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by [WT Docket No. 02-55,
ET Docket No. 00-258 and ET Docket No. 95-18], by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [Optional: Include the E-mail address only if you
plan to accept comments from the general public]. Include the docket
number(s) in the subject line of the message.
Mail: [Optional: Include the mailing address for paper,
disk or CD-ROM submissions needed/requested by your Bureau or Office.
Do not include the Office of the Secretary's mailing address here.]
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] 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: Nicholas Oros, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418-0636, e-mail: [email protected], TTY
(202) 418-2989.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, WT Docket No. 02-55, ET Docket
No. 00-258, ET Docket No. 95-18, FCC 08-73, adopted March 5, 2008, and
released March 5, 2008. The full text of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC
20554. The complete text of this document also may be purchased from
the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445
12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may
also be downloaded at: http://www.fcc.gov.
Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47
CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this
document. 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
[[Page 16823]]
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 [email protected], 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 [email protected] or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
Summary of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. The Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, tentatively concludes
to eliminate, starting on January 1, 2009, the rule that 2 GHz Mobile
Satellite Service (MSS) systems may not begin operation until the
relocation of the Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) in the thirty
largest markets and fixed BAS links in all markets is complete (top 30
market rule). In addition, the Commission seeks comment on the
potential for interference that may occur if the 2 GHz MSS entrants
begin operations prior to relocation of the BAS incumbents as well as
means that interference may be avoided or corrected. The Commission
also seeks comment on allowing MSS operators to begin providing service
in those markets where BAS incumbents have been relocated, even if the
top 30 market rule is not eliminated.
2. The 2 GHz BAS licensees are being relocated from 1990-2110 MHz
to 2025-2110 MHz so as to provide spectrum for new services such as
MSS. MSS operations in the 2 GHz MSS band will consist of both
satellite uplink and ancillary terrestrial component (ATC) operations.
Because these MSS facilities are licensed in the same spectrum as
existing BAS operations, the Commission has had to adopt policies, such
as the top 30 market rule, that take into account the likelihood of MSS
and BAS interference. If MSS begins operation before BAS operations are
relocated, MSS ``would have to accept interference from the remaining
BAS users until they are relocated.'' Such interference could be caused
by BAS transmitters to both ATC base stations and satellite receivers.
MSS operations also would have to avoid causing interference from MSS
handset transmitters (satellite and ATC) to BAS receivers that are not
yet relocated. Under the current rules, BAS licensees maintain primary
status in the 1990-2025 MHz band until they are relocated by a new
entrant; they decline relocation by a new entrant; or the BAS
relocation rules sunset on December 13, 2013.
3. The Commission has tentatively concluded to eliminate the top 30
market rule as of January 1, 2009. This change would allow the 2 GHz
MSS operators to begin offering nationwide service, both satellite and
ATC, once the Commission has determined that they have met their
operational milestones and even if the BAS relocation is not completed.
Even in the absence of the top 30 market rule, MSS would be primary in
those TV markets where BAS relocation is completed but secondary in
those TV markets where BAS is not yet relocated. However, if the
Commission were to retain the top 30 market rule and BAS relocation
were to follow the plan submitted by Sprint Nextel et al., on December
6, 2007, the 2 GHz MSS operators would not be able to offer service
until September 2009, well beyond the dates by which MSS operators ICO
and TerreStar are required as a condition of their licenses to have
operational satellite systems. The Commission seeks comment on this
tentative conclusion to eliminate the top 30 market rule. It also seeks
comment on whether it should modify other requirements to facilitate
MSS entry into the 2 GHz MSS band.
4. In addition to the top 30 market rule, MSS operations cannot
begin until all fixed BAS links in all markets are relocated. Fixed BAS
links, unlike mobile BAS operations that can often be switched to other
available BAS channels, can't easily change frequencies which may make
it more challenging to avoid interference. Because MSS operations,
including ATC, could begin nationwide before the BAS relocation has
been completed in many markets, interference between the services could
occur. Because only those fixed links in the MSS band (2000-2020 MHz)
could potentially receive co-channel interference, the Commission seeks
comment on requiring only fixed BAS links in the MSS band in all
markets to be relocated before MSS can begin operations. If the
Commission decides not to adopt this modified requirement for
relocating fixed BAS links prior to MSS beginning operations in the MSS
band, it seeks comment on maintaining the current interference
requirement in order to minimize service disruptions, i.e., require
that MSS not cause interference to BAS in markets where BAS has not yet
relocated, and MSS would have to accept interference caused by BAS in
markets where BAS has not yet relocated.
5. Even if the Commission were to eliminate the top 30 market rule
by Jan. 1, 2009, it does not propose to alter the current rule that BAS
licensees maintain primary status in the 1990-2025 MHz band until they
are relocated by a new entrant; they decline relocation by a new
entrant; or the BAS relocation rules sunset on December 13, 2013. The
Commission seeks comment on whether it should maintain this requirement
or alter it in some way.
6. The MSS operators may be able to share spectrum with BAS
licensees that
[[Page 16824]]
are not relocated if the 2 GHz MSS operators were to begin offering
nationwide service by January 1, 2009. Sharing may be possible through
coordination between the MSS operators and BAS licensees or BAS may be
able to operate with reduced bandwidth using digital equipment where
possible. The Commission seeks comment on the likelihood and extent of
interference between MSS and BAS. It also seeks comment on how, if MSS
was secondary to BAS in a market, MSS could avoid or correct
interference that might occur.
7. In order to develop a complete record on approaches other than
the top 30 market rule that would allow 2 GHz MSS operators to begin
operations in the MSS band by January 1, 2009, the Commission also
seeks comment on a market-by-market approach for MSS entry. Under a
market-by-market approach, MSS could begin providing service, both
satellite and ATC, in a market once all BAS operations, including fixed
BAS links there have been relocated, rather than wait until BAS in the
top 30 markets and all fixed BAS links in all markets are relocated.
MSS deployment would be incremental and tied to BAS relocation, rather
than a nationwide cut-over at a specific date. This approach may be
feasible because ICO's and TerreStar's satellites are designed with
multiple spot beams that can operate independently of each other. Each
spot beam can concentrate the signals from the satellite to an area on
the ground with a radius of several hundred miles. Although the
footprint of a spot beam may not exactly match a TV market, many of the
BAS operations are being relocated in market clusters according to the
Sprint Nextel et al., plan. The result is that BAS relocation will be
occurring in large regional areas of the country, which should allow
the satellites' spot beams to provide service in many places while
effectively avoiding BAS operations that are not yet relocated. The
market-by-market approach also would facilitate the MSS operators'
ability to conduct market trials of their satellite and ATC networks in
different areas of the country as BAS operations are relocated but
before the top 30 markets are relocated. Although a market-by-market
approach would reduce the likelihood of interference between MSS and
BAS, interference between the two services would not be completely
avoided. Because ATC stations could not be operational in a market
until BAS there was relocated, co-channel interference from BAS
transmitters to ATC base station receivers and from MSS handsets
(operating with ATC base stations) to BAS receivers will be avoided.
However, because the spot beam footprint may not match exactly the BAS
market areas, co-channel interference from BAS transmitters to
satellite receivers and from MSS handsets (transmitting to MSS
satellites) to BAS receivers still may occur, although it is unlikely.
The Commission seeks comment on the likelihood and extent of
interference between MSS and BAS if it were to adopt a market-by-market
approach.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
9. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA),\1\ the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the
policies and rules proposed in this Further Notice of Proposed Rule
Making (FNPRM). 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 in the FNPRM. The Commission will send a
copy of this FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).\2\ In addition,
the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the
Federal Register.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 847
(1996).
\2\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
10. In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission
seeks comment on a tentative conclusion to modify the requirement that
BAS licensees in the thirty largest markets be transitioned before the
two 2 GHz Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) operators (ICO and TerreStar)
can begin offering service. Because the transition of the 2 GHz BAS
licensees may be completed beyond the dates by which the 2 GHz MSS
systems are expected to be operational, the Commission explores
alternative ways of balancing the needs of incumbent Broadcast
Auxiliary Services (BAS) licensees to provide service without suffering
harmful interference and the introduction of new MSS operations in a
timely manner.
11. In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission
request comments on a tentative conclusion to eliminate, as of January
1, 2009, the rule requiring that BAS in the top 30 markets by
population and all fixed BAS links be transitioned before 2 GHz MSS
operators may begin offering service. In addition, the Commission seeks
comment on whether and how to modify the requirement that fixed BAS
links in all markets be relocated before MSS operations can commence.
It also seeks comment on whether it should maintain the requirement
that BAS licensees maintain primary status in the 1990-2025 MHz band
until they are relocated; they decline relocation by a new entrant; or
the BAS relocation rules sunset on December 13, 2013. Furthermore, the
Commission seeks comment on what would be the extent and likelihood of
interference between MSS and BAS, if MSS operators enter the band
before the completion of the BAS transition. The Commission seeks
comment on how, if MSS was secondary to BAS in a market, MSS could
avoid or correct any interference that might occur. Finally, the
Commission seeks comment on using a market-by-market approach for MSS
entry to the band as an alternative to modifying the top 30 market
rule. Under a market-by-market approach, MSS could begin providing
service, both satellite and ATC, in a market once all BAS operations
have been relocated, rather than wait until the top 30 market rule is
satisfied.
B. Legal Basis
12. The proposed action is taken pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j)
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 CFR 154(i) and (j),
and Section 1.3 of the Commission's Rules.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
13. 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.\4\ The RFA generally
defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the
terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small
governmental jurisdiction.'' \5\ In addition, the term ``small
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern''
under the Small Business Act.\6\ A small
[[Page 16825]]
business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated;
(2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the SBA.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
\5\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
\6\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition
of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to the
RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies ``unless
an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public
comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are
appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such
definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
\7\ Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. The proposed rule modifications may affect the interest of BAS,
LTTS, and CARS licensees (which we have been referring to throughout
this document generically as ``BAS''). BAS services involve a variety
of transmitters, generally used to relay broadcast programming to the
public (through translator and booster stations) or within the program
distribution chain (from a remote news gathering unit to the studio).
The CARS service includes transmitters generally used to relay cable
programming within cable television system distribution systems. The
Commission has not developed a definition of small entities applicable
to Broadcast Auxiliary Service, Local Television Transmission Service
or Cable Television Relay Service. Therefore, the applicable definition
of small entity is the definition under the Small Business
Administration (SBA) rules applicable to radiotelephone companies.
15. BAS. This service uses a variety of transmitters to relay
broadcast programming to the public (through translator and booster
stations) or within the program distribution chain (from a remote news
gathering unit back to the stations). There are approximately 712 TV
BAS licensees in the 1990-2110 MHz band, and these licensees will
ultimately be required to use only the 2020-2110 MHz portion of that
band. It is unclear how many of these will be affected by our new
rules.
16. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities
specific to BAS licensees. The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)
has developed small business size standards, as follows: For TV BAS, we
use the size standard for Television Broadcasting, which consists of
all such companies having annual receipts of no more than $12.0
million.\8\ According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 906
Television Broadcasting firms, total that operated for the entire
year.\9\ Of this total, 734 firms had annual receipts of $9,999,999.00
or less and an additional 71 had receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,999.00.\10\ Thus, under this standard, the majority of firms
can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515120.
\9\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
Information, ``Receipts Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax:
1997,'' Table 4, NAICS code 515120 (issued Oct. 2000).
\10\ Id. The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. CARS. There are nine CARS mobile licensees in the 1990-2110 MHz
band, and these licensees will ultimately be required to use only the
2020-2110 MHz portion of that band. It is unclear how many of these
will be affected by our new rules. The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for Cable and other Program Distribution, which
consists of all such companies having annual receipts of no more than
$12.5 million.\11\ According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were
1,311 firms within the industry category Cable and Other Program
Distribution, total, that operated for the entire year.\12\ Of this
total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of $9,999,999.00 or less, and an
additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999.00.\13\
Thus, under this standard, the majority of firms can be considered
small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id. at NAICS code 515120.
\12\ Id.
\13\ Id. The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. LTTS. There are 34 LTTS licensees in the 1990-2110 MHz band,
and these licensees will ultimately be required to use only the 2020-
2110 MHz portion of that band. It is unclear how many of these will be
affected by our new rules. The Commission has not yet defined a small
business with respect to local television transmission services. For
purposes of this IRFA, we will use the SBA's definition applicable to
Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications--i.e., an entity with no
more than 1,500 persons.\14\ According to Census Bureau data for 1997,
there were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated for the
entire year.\15\ Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 or
fewer employees, and an additional 12 firms had employment of 1,000
employees or more.\16\ Thus, under this size standard, the majority of
firms can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212.
\15\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
Information, ``Employment Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income
Tax: 1997,'' Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Oct. 2000).
\16\ Id. The census data do not provide a more precise estimate
of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer
employees; the largest category provided is ``Firms with 1,000
employees or more.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. MSS. The appropriate SBA size standard for mobile satellite
service is for the category of ``Other Telecommunications.'' This
category ``comprises establishments primarily engaged in (1) providing
specialized telecommunications applications, such as satellite
tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operations; or
(2) providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities
operationally connected with one or more terrestrial communications
systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to or receiving
telecommunications from satellite systems.'' \17\ Under this category,
such a business is small if it has $13.5 million or less in average
annual receipts.\18\ For this category, Census Bureau data for 2002
show that there were a total of 332 firms that operated for the entire
year.\19\ Of this total, 303 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,999.\20\ Consequently, we estimate that the majority of Other
Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by
our action. The proposed rule changes would affect two 2 GHz MSS
operators. While the Commission does not believe these two MSS
operators to be small due to the high costs associated with launching
their service, it has nonetheless included them in this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517910 Other
Telecommunications''; http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.
\18\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes 517410.
\19\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series:
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of
Organization),'' Table 4, NAICS code 517910 (issued Nov. 2005).
\20\ Id. An additional 14 firms had annual receipts of $25
million or more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
20. The interest of BAS licensees would be affected by the proposed
rule changes by either subjecting them to the threat of increased
interference from MSS or by making their licenses secondary to MSS in a
portion of the spectrum. The potential harm to BAS will depend on the
particular changes made to the rule. If MSS is allowed to enter the
band on a market-by-market basis only where BAS has been transitioned,
BAS would likely suffer little or no interference. If MSS is allowed to
enter the band before BAS has been transitioned, but is required to
cause no interference to BAS, then BAS would also likely suffer little
or no interference. However, if BAS licensees are made secondary when
MSS enters the band, those BAS licensees who have not been relocated
could suffer interference. If such interference does occur, the BAS
licensee may be able to
[[Page 16826]]
avoid the interference by operating on another BAS channel. Moreover,
this interference would be temporary because all the BAS licensees are
scheduled to relocate by September 7, 2009 to spectrum that does not
conflict with MSS.
21. The proposed rule changes would also affect the interest of the
two 2 GHz MSS operators, TerreStar and ICO. Under the current rules
TerreStar and ICO cannot begin operations in this band until after the
top 30 markets have been relocated. Consequently, modifying the top 30
market rule to allow them to enter the band sooner will provide the 2
GHz MSS operators with a benefit and not a burden.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
22. Our primary concern in this proceeding continues to be
balancing the needs of incumbent BAS licensees to provide service
without suffering harmful interference and the introduction of new MSS
in a timely manner. If the Sprint Nextel et al., plan for BAS
relocation is successfully implemented, ICO's and TerreStar's ability
to begin operation in the 2 GHz MSS band could be delayed until
September 2009 under the current rules. On the other hand, if BAS
relocation of the top 30 markets and fixed BAS links in all markets is
completed earlier than is now anticipated but before all BAS markets
are relocated, interference between MSS, including ATC, and BAS is
likely to occur in those markets not yet relocated. In the latter case,
MSS would have to accept interference from the remaining BAS users
until they are relocated. It seeks comment on whether to maintain this
non-interference requirement. The Commission also seeks comment on
whether it should modify other requirements for MSS entry into the 2
GHz MSS band.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
23. None.
Ordering Clauses
24. The Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making is adopted. This
authority is taken pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 CFR 154(i) and (j), and
Section 1.3 of the Commission's Rules.
25. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-6494 Filed 3-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P