[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2836-2843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30323]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 54

[CC Docket No. 02-6; FCC 09-96]


Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, we propose revising the Federal 
Communications Commission's (Commission) rules regarding the schools 
and libraries universal service support mechanism, also known as the E-
rate program, to comply with the requirements of the Protecting 
Children in the 21st Century Act. Among other things, the Protecting 
Children in the 21st Century Act, titled Promoting Online Safety in 
Schools, revised the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), 
by adding a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary 
schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts 
under the E-rate program. We also propose to revise related Commission 
rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rules are due on or before February 18, 
2010 and reply comments are due on or before March 5, 2010. Written 
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection 
requirements should be submitted on or before March 22, 2010. If you 
anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult 
to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should 
advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by CC Docket No. 02-6, 
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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] or phone: (202) 
418-0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
     In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy 
of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection 
requirements

[[Page 2837]]

contained herein should be submitted to the Federal Communications 
Commission via e-mail to [email protected] and to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office 
of Management and Budget, via e-mail to [email protected] or via fax at 202-395-5167.

    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: Anita Cheng, Wireline Competition 
Bureau, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, (202) 418-7400 or 
TTY: (202) 418-0484. For additional information concerning the 
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained 
in this document, send an e-mail to [email protected] or contact Judith B. 
Herman at 202-418-0214 or via email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 02-6, FCC 09-96, adopted 
November 4, 2009, and released November 5, 2009. The complete text of 
this document is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 
12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may 
also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best 
Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863- 2893, 
facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via the Internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available on the Commission's Web site 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 accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
     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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
     Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or 
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must 
be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, 
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before 
entering the building. Please Note: Through December 24, 2009, 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. This filing 
location will be permanently closed after December 24, 2009. The filing 
hours at both locations are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
     In addition, one copy of each comment or reply comment 
must be sent to Charles Tyler, Telecommunications Access Policy 
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-
A452, Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: [email protected].

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).
    Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis:
    This document contains proposed information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments 
are due March 22, 2010.
    Comments on the proposed information collection requirements should 
address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the 
Commission, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on the respondents, including the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In 
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment 
on how we might further reduce the information collection burden for 
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-0853.
    Title: FCC Form 479, Certification by Administrative Authority to 
Billed Entity of Compliance with Children's Internet Protection Act; 
FCC Form 486, Receipt of Service Confirmation Form, FCC Form 500, 
Funding Commitment (FRN) Change Request Form.
    Form Number(s): FCC Forms 479, 486, 500.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit and not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 75,000 respondents and 75,000 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 1.07 hours (average time per 
response).
    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
    Frequency of Response: Annual, on occasion, and third party 
disclosure requirement.
    Total Annual Burden: 70,000 hours.
    Total Annual Cost: N/A.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact.
    Nature of Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not 
requesting that the respondents submit confidential information to the 
FCC. Respondents may, however, request confidential treatment for 
information they believe to be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of the 
Commission's rules.
    Needs and Uses: The existing information collection requires 
schools and libraries to certify that they have in place certain 
Internet safety policies, pursuant to the Children's Internet 
Protection Act (CIPA), 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), in order to receive E-
rate

[[Page 2838]]

discounts for Internet access. This information collection is being 
revised to add a new certification that the E-rate applicant has 
updated its Internet safety policy to include plans for educating 
minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with 
other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and 
cyberbullying awareness and response, as required by the Protecting 
Children in the 21st Century Act. This revision will not require any 
changes to the FCC Forms 479 or 486, which enable E-rate participants 
to certify that they are compliant with CIPA. This revision has no 
effect on the FCC Form 500, which is also part of this information 
collection. In addition, this information collection is being revised 
to add a rule provision requiring each Internet safety policy that is 
adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of the Act, as amended, to be made 
available to the Commission upon request by the Commission. Although 
this requirement is mandated by the statute, it is not currently in the 
Commission's rules.

Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

    1. In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), we propose 
revising the Federal Communications Commission's (Commission) rules 
regarding the schools and libraries universal service support 
mechanism, also known as the E-rate program, to comply with the 
requirements of the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act. Among 
other things, section 215 of the Protecting Children in the 21st 
Century Act, titled Promoting Online Safety in Schools, revised section 
254(h)(5)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), 
by adding a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary 
schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts 
under the E-rate program. We also propose to revise related Commission 
rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately.

II. Background

    2. Under the E-rate program, eligible schools, libraries, and 
consortia that include eligible schools and libraries may apply for 
discounted eligible telecommunications, Internet access, and internal 
connections services. In accordance with the Children's Internet 
Protection Act (CIPA), to be eligible for E-rate discounts for Internet 
access and internal connection services, schools and libraries that 
have computers with Internet access must certify that they have in 
place certain Internet safety policies and technology protection 
measures. As required by CIPA, Sec.  54.520(c)(i) of the Commission's 
rules requires that the Internet safety policy must include a 
technology protection measure that protects against Internet access by 
both adults and minors to visual depictions that are (1) obscene, or 
(2) child pornography, or, with respect to use of the computers by 
minors, (3) harmful to minors. In addition, Sec.  54.520(c)(i) requires 
the entity to certify that its policy of Internet safety includes 
monitoring the online activities of minors. Applicants make their CIPA 
certifications annually on the Confirmation of Receipt of Services Form 
(FCC Form 486).
    3. Among other things, the Protecting Children in the 21st Century 
Act revised section 254(h)(5)(B) of the Act by adding a new 
certification for elementary and secondary schools that have computers 
with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-rate program. In 
addition to the existing CIPA certifications required of schools in 
section 254(h)(5) of the Act, the Protecting Children in the 21st 
Century Act requires the school, school board, local educational 
agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of 
the school to certify that it ``as part of its Internet safety policy 
is educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including 
interacting with other individuals on social networking Web sites and 
in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.''

III. Discussion

A. Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act Rule Revisions

    4. We seek comment on revising Sec.  54.520(c)(i) of the 
Commission's rules to include the new certification requirement added 
by the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act. We propose to 
revise Sec.  54.520(c)(i) to add a certification provision that a 
school's Internet safety policy must include educating minors about 
appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other 
individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and 
cyberbullying awareness and response. We seek comment on this proposal.
    5. In addition, we tentatively conclude that a recipient of E-rate 
funding for Internet access and internal connections should be required 
to certify, on its FCC Form 486 for funding year 2010, that it has 
updated its Internet safety policy to include plans for educating 
minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with 
other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and 
cyberbullying awareness and response, as required by the Protecting 
Children in the 21st Century Act. We note that the next opportunity for 
applicants to certify to the CIPA requirements, including this new 
certification, would be on the FCC Form 486 for funding year 2009, 
which would typically be filed after the start of the 2009 funding year 
(i.e., after July 1, 2009). Schools may, however, require additional 
time to amend their Internet safety policies and implement procedures 
to comply with the new requirements after the completion of this 
rulemaking proceeding. In addition, we note that Congress did not set a 
timeframe for implementation of the new certification. We seek comment 
on this tentative conclusion.

B. Other Proposed Rule Revisions

    6. We also seek comment on revising certain rules to reflect more 
accurately existing statutory language regarding the CIPA 
certifications.
    7. First, we propose to revise the rules so that the definitions of 
elementary and secondary schools are consistent throughout. At this 
time, rule Sec. Sec.  54.500, 54.501, and 54.504 all contain 
differently worded definitions of elementary and secondary schools. We 
propose to define elementary and secondary schools in Sec.  54.500 of 
the rules, and to revise Sec. Sec.  54.501 and 54.504 to refer to Sec.  
54.500 definitions. We seek comment on this proposal.
    8. Second, we propose to revise Sec.  54.520(a)(1) to add ``school 
board'' to the definition of entities that are subject to CIPA 
certifications. Although section 254(h) of the Act includes the term 
``school board'' as an entity to which the CIPA certifications apply, 
our rules do not include this term. We seek comment on this proposal.
    9. Third, we propose to revise Sec.  54.520(a)(4) to add the 
existing statutory definitions of the terms ``minor,'' ``obscene,'' 
``child pornography,'' ``harmful to minors,'' ``sexual act,'' ``sexual 
contact,'' and ``technology protection measure,'' consistent with the 
statute. Sec.  54.520 of our rules does not currently include the 
definitions of these terms, but instead refers back to the statute. 
Including the statutory definitions of these terms in the definitions 
section of our rules could help clarify the CIPA requirements. We seek 
comment on this proposal.
    10. Fourth, we propose to revise Sec. Sec.  54.520(c)(1)(i) and 
54.520(c)(2)(i)

[[Page 2839]]

consistent with sections 254(h)(5)(D), (h)(6)(D), (h)(5)(B)(ii), 
(C)(ii), and (h)(6)(B)(ii), (C)(ii) of the Act to require that the 
technology protection measures be in operation during any use of 
computers with Internet access, and that the technology protection 
measures may be disabled by an authorized person, during adult use, to 
enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purpose. The 
statute requires that schools and libraries certify that they are 
enforcing the operation of the technology protection measures during 
the use of computers by minors and adults. This enforcement requirement 
is not currently included in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on 
this proposal.
    11. In addition, sections 254(h)(5)(D) and (h)(6)(D) of the Act 
permit a school or library administrator, supervisor, or other person 
authorized by the certifying authority to disable an entity's 
technology protection measure to allow bona fide research or other 
lawful use by an adult. We note that in the CIPA Order, although the 
Commission acknowledged this statutory provision, it declined to adopt 
any implementing rule provision, stating that

    [w]e decline to promulgate rules mandating how entities should 
implement these provisions. Federally-imposed rules directing school 
and library staff when to disable technology protection measures 
would likely be overbroad and imprecise, potentially chilling 
speech, or otherwise confusing schools and libraries about the 
requirements of the statute. We leave such determinations to local 
communities, whom we believe to be most knowledgeable about the 
varying circumstances of schools or libraries within those 
communities.

The Commission stated that its decision was supported by commenter 
concerns about the difficulty of school or library staff in determining 
whether an adult user was engaging only in bona fide research or other 
lawful purposes.
    12. We propose to revise the rules to codify this permission that a 
school or library administrator, supervisor, or other person authorized 
by the certifying authority may disable an entity's technology 
protection measure, during use by an adult, to allow bona fide research 
or other lawful use. We do not propose to adopt rules that mandate 
specific implementation methods, but merely mirror the statutory 
language. This will make clear that the statutory provision exists 
without imposing undue burdens on the entities to which it applies. We 
seek comment on whether it is sufficient to adopt this rule without 
specifying federal guidelines for determination of what constitutes 
bona fide research or other lawful use. We seek comment on whether this 
statutory provision imposes an undue burden on E-rate beneficiaries, 
particularly on small entities, and if so, we seek comment on the least 
burdensome method of implementing this provision. For example, we note 
that the CIPA Order discussed leaving these determinations to local 
communities because they would be most knowledgeable about the varying 
circumstances of schools or libraries within those communities. We 
believe that our proposed rules are consistent with that position. We 
also seek comment on any other methods of implementing this statutory 
provision.
    13. Fifth, we propose to revise Sec. Sec.  54.520(c)(1)(iii)(B), 
(2)(iii)(B), and (3)(i)(B) to clarify that it is only in the first year 
of participation in the E-rate program that an entity may certify that 
it will complete all CIPA requirements by the next funding year and 
still receive funding for that year, as adopted in the CIPA Order. The 
text of the existing rules contains an option for an entity to certify 
that it will come into compliance with the CIPA requirements by the 
next funding year, but does not specify that this certification option 
is only applicable to entities that are applying for E-rate discounts 
for the first time. We seek comment on this proposal.
    14. Sixth, we propose to add a rule provision to require local 
determination of what matter is inappropriate for minors. Among other 
things, the statute states that a determination regarding what matter 
is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board, local 
educational agency, library or other authority responsible for making 
the determination. Although this is mandated by the statute, it is not 
currently in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on this proposal. 
We also seek comment on whether this requirement will be burdensome, 
particularly for small entities. If so, we seek comment on how to 
reduce this statutorily mandated burden.
    15. Seventh, we propose to add a rule provision requiring each 
Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of 
the Act to be made available to the Commission upon request by the 
Commission. Although this requirement is mandated by the statute, it is 
not currently in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on this 
proposal. We also seek comment on the manner in which the Internet 
safety policy should be made available to the Commission and on the 
timing of such response. We also seek comment on the burdens that this 
requirement may impose on respondents, particularly on small entities, 
and on how the burdens may be reduced.
    16. Finally, we propose to add a rule provision requiring public 
notice and hearing to address any proposed Internet safety policy 
adopted pursuant to CIPA. Although this is mandated by the statute and 
was discussed in the CIPA Order, there is no provision addressing this 
issue in the existing rules. As discussed in the CIPA Order, this 
public notice and hearing requirement only applies to entities that 
have not already provided such notice and hearing relating to an 
Internet safety policy and technology protection measure. We seek 
comment on this proposal.

Procedural Matters

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    17. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603, 
requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for 
notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies 
that ``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 
605(b). The RFA generally defines ``small entity'' as having the same 
meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and 
``small governmental jurisdiction.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(6). In addition, the 
term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small 
business concern'' under the Small Business Act. 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A 
``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently owned and 
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA). 15 U.S.C. 632.
    18. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 
Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities by 
the policies and rules proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM). Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments 
must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the 
deadlines for comments on the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of 
this NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the NPRM (or 
summary thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.

[[Page 2840]]

1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    19. In the NPRM, we seek comment on revising the Commission's rules 
to add a new certification for elementary and secondary schools that 
have computers with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-
rate program, pursuant to the mandate of the Protecting Children in the 
21st Century Act. Such action is necessary to comply with the 
Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act.
2. Legal Basis
    20. The legal basis for the NPRM is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 
201 through 205, 214, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201-205, 214, 254, and 403, and 
Sec.  1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.411.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
Rules May Apply
    21. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
    22. The Commission has determined that the group of small entities 
directly affected by the rules herein includes eligible schools and 
libraries. Further descriptions of these entities are provided below.
    23. Small Businesses. Nationwide, there are a total of 
approximately 22.4 million small businesses according to SBA data.
    24. Small Organizations. Nationwide, there are approximately 1.6 
million small organizations.
    25. Small Governmental Jurisdictions. The term ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, 
townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a 
population of less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2002 
indicate that there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the 
United States. We estimate that, of this total, 84,377 entities were 
``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that most 
governmental jurisdictions are small.
    26. As noted, ``small entity'' includes non-profit and small 
government entities. Under the schools and libraries universal service 
support mechanism, which provides support for elementary and secondary 
schools and libraries, an elementary school is generally ``a non-profit 
institutional day or residential school that provides elementary 
education, as determined under state law.'' A secondary school is 
generally defined as ``a non-profit institutional day or residential 
school that provides secondary education, as determined under state 
law,'' and not offering education beyond grade 12. For-profit schools 
and libraries, and schools and libraries with endowments in excess of 
$50,000,000, are not eligible to receive discounts under the program, 
nor are libraries whose budgets are not completely separate from any 
schools. Certain other statutory definitions apply as well. The SBA has 
defined for-profit, elementary and secondary schools and libraries 
having $6 million or less in annual receipts as small entities. In 
funding year 2007 approximately 105,500 schools and 10,950 libraries 
received funding under the schools and libraries universal service 
mechanism. Although we are unable to estimate with precision the number 
of these entities that would qualify as small entities under SBA's size 
standard, we estimate that fewer than 105,500 schools and 10,950 
libraries might be affected annually by our action, under current 
operation of the program.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements
    27. Schools and libraries that have computers with Internet access 
must certify that they have in place certain Internet safety policies 
and technology protection measures in order to be eligible for E-rate 
discounts for Internet access and internal connection services. 
Pursuant to the mandate in the Protecting Children in the 21st Century 
Act, the NPRM proposes to revise Sec.  54.520(c)(i) of the Commission's 
rules to add a provision that a school's Internet safety policy must 
include educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including 
interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in 
chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.
    28. In addition, this NPRM revises certain rules to more accurately 
reflect the provisions of the Act with regard to certifications made 
pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA). 
Specifically, the rule revisions that may affect small entities 
require: (1) Schools and libraries to enforce the operation of 
technology protection measures during use of computers by minors and 
adults; (2) schools and libraries to disable technology protection 
measures to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful 
purpose; (3) local determination of what matter is inappropriate for 
minors; (4) schools and libraries to make available to the Commission, 
upon request by the Commission, any Internet safety policy that is 
adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of the Act; and (5) schools and 
libraries to provide public notice and hearing to address any proposed 
Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to CIPA.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    29. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance and reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or part thereof, for small 
entities.
    30. With regard to the new certification requirements pursuant to 
the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, we do not believe that 
there will be significant economic impact on small entities. Currently, 
schools and libraries file the FCC Form 486 to certify their compliance 
with the requirements regarding Internet safety policies and technology 
protection measures. Because schools and libraries will continue to use 
the same FCC Form 486 to certify their compliance with these 
requirements, there will be no additional reporting requirements.
    31. With regard to the remaining rule provisions, we believe that 
several of the rule revisions will have no economic impact on small 
entities because they merely clarify existing definitions and existing 
requirements. For example, the revisions regarding the definitions of 
elementary and secondary schools did not change the definitions, but 
merely clarified that the same definitions were utilized throughout the

[[Page 2841]]

rules, or codified existing statutory definitions.
    32. Several other rule revisions will have little economic impact 
on small entities because schools and libraries have already 
implemented these measures. We acknowledge that the existing rules do 
not contain provisions requiring schools and libraries to enforce the 
operation of technology protection measures during use of computers by 
minors and adults or to provide public notice and hearing to address 
any proposed Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to CIPA. 
However, as a practical matter, current E-rate beneficiaries have 
already implemented these requirements, even though these statutory 
requirements are not specifically stated in the text of the 
Commission's rules. Schools and libraries would have been unable to 
make the proper CIPA certifications unless the technology protection 
measures have been enforced during computer use by minors and adults. 
In addition, the requirement to provide public notice and hearing was 
discussed extensively in the CIPA Order even though an implementing 
rule was not adopted.
    33. The requirement that schools and libraries may disable 
technology protection measures to enable access for bona fide research 
or other lawful purpose may impose a burden on small entities. As 
stated in the NPRM, there are concerns about the difficulty of school 
or library staff determining whether an adult user was engaging only in 
bona fide research or other lawful purposes. Accordingly, the NPRM 
seeks comment on ways to implement this statutory mandate while keeping 
the burdens on entities at a minimum. The NPRM also seeks comment on 
ways to implement the rule revision requiring local determination of 
what matter is inappropriate for minors while minimizing burdens. 
Finally the NPRM proposes to require, pursuant to the statute, that 
schools and libraries make available to the Commission, upon request by 
the Commission, any Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to 
section 254(l) of the Act. Because this may have an impact on small 
economic entities, the NPRM proposes several methods of making the 
Internet safety policy available to the Commission, as well as seeking 
comment on ways to reduce this burden on respondents.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules
    34. None.

Ex Parte Presentations

    35. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 47 CFR 
1.1200 through 1.1216. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are 
reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain 
summaries of the substance of the presentations and not merely a 
listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence 
description of the views and arguments presented is generally required. 
47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2). Other requirements pertaining to oral and written 
presentations are set forth in Sec.  1.1206(b) of the Commission's 
rules. 47 CFR 1.1206(b).

C. Comment Filing Procedures

    36. 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).
    37. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using 
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    38. 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.
    39. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    40. Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or messenger-
delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be 
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, 
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before 
entering the building. Please Note: Through December 24, 2009, 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. This filing 
location will be permanently closed after December 24, 2009. The filing 
hours at both locations are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
    41. 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.
    42. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
    43. In addition, one copy of each comment or reply comment must be 
sent to Charles Tyler, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-A452, 
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: [email protected].
    44. 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).
Ordering Clauses
    45. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
contained in sections 1, 4(i), 201-205, 214, 254, and 403 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201-205, 
214, 254, and 403, and Sec.  1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 
1.411, this notice of proposed rulemaking is adopted.
    46. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this notice of proposed rulemaking, including the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54

    Communications common carriers, Health facilities, Infants and 
children, Libraries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, 
Telecommunications, Telephone.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 54 to read as 
follows:

[[Page 2842]]

PART 54--UNIVERSAL SERVICE

    1. The authority citation for part 54 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 205, 214, and 254 unless 
otherwise noted.

    2. Amend Sec.  54.500 by revising paragraphs (c) and (k) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  54.500  Terms and definitions.

* * * * *
    (c) Elementary school. An ``elementary school'' means an elementary 
school as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(18), a non-profit institutional day 
or residential school, including a public elementary charter school, 
that provides elementary education, as determined under state law.
* * * * *
    (k) Secondary school. A ``secondary school'' means a secondary 
school as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(38), a non-profit institutional day 
or residential school that provides secondary education, as determined 
under state law. A secondary school does not offer education beyond 
grade 12.
* * * * *
    3. Amend Sec.  54.501 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  54.501  Eligibility for services provided by telecommunications 
carriers.

* * * * *
    (b) Schools. (1) Only schools meeting the statutory definition of 
``elementary school'' or ``secondary school'' as defined in Sec.  
54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k), and not excluded under paragraphs (b)(2) 
or (b)(3) shall be eligible for discounts in telecommunications and 
other supported services under this part.
* * * * *
    4. Amend Sec.  54.504 by revising paragraph (b)(2)(i) and paragraph 
(c)(1)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  54.504  Requests for services.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) The schools meet the statutory definition of elementary or 
secondary schools in Sec.  54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k) of this 
section, do not operate as for-profit businesses, and do not have 
endowments exceeding $50 million.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The schools meet the statutory definition of elementary or 
secondary schools in Sec.  54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k) of this 
section, do not operate as for-profit businesses, and do not have 
endowments exceeding $50 million.
* * * * *
    5. Amend Sec.  54.520 by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), 
(c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(iii)(B), (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(iii)(B), (c)(3)(i)(B), and 
by adding paragraphs (c)(4), (c)(5), and (h) to read as follows:


Sec.  54.520  Children's Internet Protection Act certifications 
required from recipients of discounts under the federal universal 
service support mechanism for schools and libraries.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) School. For the purposes of the certification requirements of 
this rule, school means school, school board, school district, local 
education agency or other authority responsible for administration of a 
school.
* * * * *
    (4) Statutory definitions.
    (i) The term ``minor'' means any individual who has not attained 
the age of 17 years.
    (ii) The term ``obscene'' has the meaning given such term in 18 
U.S.C. 1460.
    (iii) The term ``child pornography'' has the meaning given such 
term in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
    (iv) The term ``harmful to minors'' means any picture, image, 
graphic image file, or other visual depiction that--
    (A) Taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a 
prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;
    (B) Depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way 
with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated 
sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted 
sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and
    (C) Taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, 
or scientific value as to minors.
    (v) The terms ``sexual act'' and ``sexual contact'' have the 
meanings given such terms in 18 U.S.C. 2246.
    (vi) The term ``technology protection measure'' means a specific 
technology that blocks or filters Internet access to the material 
covered by a certification under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced pursuant to 47 
U.S.C. 254(h) must include a technology protection measure that 
protects against Internet access by both adults and minors to visual 
depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use 
of the computers by minors, harmful to minors. The technology 
protection measure must be enforced during use of computers with 
Internet access, although an administrator, supervisor, or other person 
authorized by the certifying authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this 
section may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during 
use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other 
lawful purpose. This Internet safety policy must also include 
monitoring the online activities of minors and must educate minors 
about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other 
individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and 
cyberbullying awareness and response.
* * * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified 
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service represented in 
the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom this is the 
first year of participation in the federal universal service support 
mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are) undertaking such actions, 
including any necessary procurement procedures, to comply with the 
requirements of CIPA for the next funding year, but has (have) not 
completed all requirements of CIPA for this funding year.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced pursuant to 47 
U.S.C. 254(h) must include a technology protection measure that 
protects against Internet access by both adults and minors to visual 
depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use 
of the computers by minors, harmful to minors. The technology 
protection measure must be enforced during use of computers with 
Internet access, although an administrator, supervisor, or other person 
authorized by the certifying authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this 
section may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during 
use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other 
lawful purpose.
* * * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified 
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service represented in 
the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom this is the 
first year of participation in the federal universal service support 
mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are) undertaking such actions, 
including any necessary procurement procedures, to comply with the

[[Page 2843]]

requirements of CIPA for the next funding year, but has (have) not 
completed all requirements of CIPA for this funding year.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified 
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service under my 
administrative authority and represented in the Funding Request 
Number(s) for which you have requested or received Funding Commitments, 
and for whom this is the first year of participation in the federal 
universal service support mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are) 
undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement 
procedures, to comply with the requirements of CIPA for the next 
funding year, but has (have) not completed all requirements of CIPA for 
this funding year.
* * * * *
    (4) Local determination of content. A determination regarding what 
matter is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board, 
local educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for 
making the determination. No agency or instrumentality of the United 
States Government may establish criteria for making such determination; 
review the determination made by the certifying school, school board, 
local educational agency, library, or other authority; or consider the 
criteria employed by the certifying school, school board, local 
educational agency, library, or other authority in the administration 
of the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism.
    (5) Availability for review. Each Internet safety policy adopted 
pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 254(l) shall be made available to the Commission, 
upon request for the Commission, by the school, school board, local 
educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for 
adopting such Internet safety policy for purposes of the review of such 
Internet safety policy by the Commission.
* * * * *
    (h) Public notice; hearing. A school or library shall provide 
reasonable public notice and hold at least one public hearing or 
meeting to address the proposed Internet safety policy.

[FR Doc. E9-30323 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P