[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 10, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71593-71596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24503]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[MD Docket Ns. 20-105; FCC 20-120; FRS 17210]


Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2020

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) seeks comment on several regulatory fee issues impacting 
international services.

DATES: Submit comments on or before December 10, 2020; and reply 
comments December 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and 
reply comments identified by MD Docket No. 20-105, by any of the 
following methods below. Comments and reply comments may be filed using 
the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). 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://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy of each filing.
    Filings can be sent 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.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, 
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington DC 20554.
     Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the 
Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. 
This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety 
of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See FCC 
Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-
Delivery Policy, Public Notice, DA 20-304 (March 19, 2020). https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy
     During the time the Commission's building is closed to the 
general public and until further notice, if more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of a proceeding, paper filers 
need not submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number; an original and one copy are sufficient.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roland Helvajian, Office of Managing 
Director at (202) 418-0444.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ((Further Notice)), FCC 20-120, 
MD Docket No. 20-105, adopted and released on August 31, 2020. The full 
text of this document is available for public inspection on the 
Commission's website at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-120A1.pdf. This document is available in alternative formats (computer 
diskette, large print, audio record, and braille). Persons with 
disabilities who need documents in these formats may contact the FCC by 
email: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

[[Page 71594]]

I. Procedural Matters

    1. Ex Parte Information. This proceeding shall be treated as a 
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's 
ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy 
of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral 
presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a 
different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or 
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte 
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and 
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted 
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already 
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other 
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such 
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other 
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where 
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the 
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex 
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must 
be filed consistent with Sec.  1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. In 
proceedings governed by Sec.  1.49(f) of the Commission's rules or for 
which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, 
written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte 
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the 
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and 
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, 
searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize 
themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
    2. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. An initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis (IRFA) is contained in this summary. Comments to 
the IRFA must be identified as responses to the IRFA and filed by the 
deadlines for comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The 
Commission will send a copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 
including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.
    3. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis. This document 
does not contain new or modified information collection requirements 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified 
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer 
than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act 
of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

II. Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking

    4. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we invite comment 
on four proposals from commenters in this proceeding to differentiate 
regulatory fees for different types of NGSO systems in future years. 
First, Kineis notes the Commission has already concluded that a 
separate fee for small satellites would be appropriate; the NGSO 
systems vary dramatically in size, number of space stations, spectrum 
required, and services offered; the proposed fee increase for NGSO 
systems is substantial; and the Commission has not addressed this issue 
in many years. Kineis therefore proposes a formula to determine NGSO 
regulatory fees: x (number of operating satellites) multiplied by y 
(total transmit bandwidth) = index value. Kineis suggests fee tiers 
based on groupings of index values and basing the difference in fees on 
the average index value for each tier. We seek comment on this 
proposal.
    5. Second, Eutelsat contends that the fees assessed on NGSO systems 
should be separated into small and large NGSO systems, based on the 
number of satellites in the system. According to Eutelsat, large and 
complex NGSO systems require more staff time to oversee and receive 
greater benefits from the Commission. Smaller NGSO systems in more 
established bands, Eutelsat suggests, represent a smaller burden on 
Commission staff because they have greater sharing capabilities and 
operate in less congested and less contested frequency bands. We seek 
comment on this proposal.
    6. Third, Myriota proposes we divide NGSO systems into three 
categories: fixed-satellite service (FSS); mobile-satellite service 
(MSS); and remote sensing, Earth-exploration satellite service (EESS), 
and other NGSO systems. Myriota explains that the Commission has spent 
multiple years on the NGSO FSS processing round for more than ten 
applicants and some applicants seeking constellations of tens of 
thousands of satellites. Myriota contends that other types of NGSO 
systems, such as MSS or EESS systems, require fewer resources because 
they have fewer applicants and less complex issues, relative to the FSS 
systems. In addition, NGSO rulemakings from 2017-2019 primarily 
benefited NGSO FSS systems and the Commission has not updated the rules 
for MSS or remote sensing during that time period. Myriota argues that 
the Commission's rules for NGSO FSS systems generally reflect a level 
of complexity not present for other NGSO systems due to the extremely 
large constellations and complex sharing and coordination requirements. 
We seek comment on this proposal.
    7. Finally, AWS suggests that we assess a nominal fee for NGSO 
systems with five or fewer U.S. licensed earth stations for TT&C and 
non-domestic data downlink purposes. AWS proposes that the regulatory 
fee would be assessed on a per earth station basis at the same rate as 
earth station licenses. We seek comment on this proposal.
    8. The Commission considers the adoption of a new fee category or a 
change in fee categories only when it develops sufficient basis for 
making the change. Commenters should address whether the proposal are 
in accord with the requirements of section 9. Commenters should also 
address whether such proposals serve the goal of ensuring that our 
actions in assessing regulatory fees are fair, administrable, and 
sustainable.
    9. It has not been the experience of Commission staff reviewing 
satellite applications that certain broad categories of NGSO systems 
require substantially more time to process than others under the 
current rules. A smaller NGSO system in bands shared with other 
services may require greater staff efforts to approve than a larger 
NGSO system in bands without coordination difficulties. NGSO FSS 
systems, while occupying substantial staff time to review in the past 
few years, have also benefited from streamlining rulemakings that have 
eliminated some of the most cumbersome technical demonstrations, such 
as equivalent power-flux density showings. In contrast, systems 
operating in services that are allegedly easier to license, such as 
EESS, have involved complicated, multi-year coordination, phased 
deployments, multiple application amendments, and frequent grants in 
part, with the associated staff investment. Nonetheless, we recognize 
that the Commission has created the regulatory category for small 
satellites, in part, to charge different fees for certain systems. 
Accordingly, we invite comment on the proposals above regarding other 
categories of NGSO systems for FY 2021.

[[Page 71595]]

III. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission prepared this Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact 
on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Written comments are requested on this 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be 
filed by the deadline for comments on this Further Notice. The 
Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including the IRFA, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). 
In addition, the Further Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be 
published in the Federal Register.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    2. The Further Notice seeks comment on a regulatory fee issue 
raised by commenters for fiscal year (FY) 2021. In the Further Notice, 
the Commission seeks comment on four proposals to differentiate 
regulatory fees for different types of nongeostationary orbit satellite 
(NGSO) systems. The Commission seeks comment on a proposed formula to 
determine NGSO regulatory fees: x (number of operating satellites) 
multiplied by y (total transmit bandwidth) = index value. The 
Commission also seeks comment on separating large and small NGSO 
systems into different categories, based on the number of satellites in 
each system. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on a proposal to 
divide NGSO systems into categories: Fixed-satellite service (FSS); 
mobile-satellite service (MSS); and remote sensing, Earth-exploration 
satellite service (EESS), and other NGSO systems. Finally, the 
Commission seeks comment on assessing a nominal fee for NGSO systems 
with five or fewer U.S. licensed earth stations for telemetry, 
tracking, and command (TT&C) and non-domestic data downlink purposes, 
on a per earth station basis at the same rate as earth station 
licenses. The Commission seeks comment on these four proposals for 
different regulatory fee categories of NGSO systems for FY 2021.

B. Legal Basis

    3. This action, including publication of proposed rules, is 
authorized under sections (4)(i) and (j), 159, and 303(r) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    4. 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 and policies, 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.
    5. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at 
the outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly 
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size 
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory 
flexibility analysis, according to data from the SBA's Office of 
Advocacy, in general a small business is an independent business having 
fewer than 500 employees. These types of small businesses represent 
99.9% of all businesses in the United States which translates to 28.8 
million businesses.
    6. Next, the type of small entity described as 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 August 2016, there were approximately 356,494 small 
organizations based on registration and tax data filed by nonprofits 
with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
    7. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2012 Census of Governments indicate that there 
were 90,056 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general 
purpose governments and special purpose governments in the United 
States. Of this number there were 37, 132 General purpose governments 
(county, municipal and town or township) with populations of less than 
50,000 and 12,184 Special purpose governments (independent school 
districts and special districts) with populations of less than 50,000. 
The 2012 U.S. Census Bureau data for most types of governments in the 
local government category show that the majority of these governments 
have populations of less than 50,000. Based on this data we estimate 
that at least 49,316 local government jurisdictions fall in the 
category of ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Governmental entities 
are, however, exempt from application fees.
    8. All Other Telecommunications. ``All Other Telecommunications'' 
is defined as follows: This U.S. industry is comprised of 
establishments that are primarily engaged in providing specialized 
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications 
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes 
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal 
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing internet services or Voice over internet 
Protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry. The SBA has developed a 
small business size standard for ``All Other Telecommunications,'' 
which consists of all such firms with gross annual receipts of $35 
million or less. For this category, census data for 2012 show that 
there were 1,442 firms that operated for the entire year. Of these 
firms, a total of 1,400 had gross annual receipts of less than $25 
million. Thus, a majority of ``All Other Telecommunications'' firms 
potentially affected by the proposals in the Further Notice can be 
considered small.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    9. This Further Notice does not propose any changes to the 
Commission's current information collection, reporting, recordkeeping, 
or compliance requirements.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    10. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its approach, which may 
include the following four alternatives, among others: (1) The 
establishment of

[[Page 71596]]

differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take 
into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or 
reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use 
of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    11. The Further Notice seeks comment on four proposals for NGSO 
regulatory fee categories for FY 2021. The Commission will release a 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for all regulatory fees for FY 2021; the 
Further Notice will give parties an opportunity to file comments prior 
to the annual Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. If any of these proposals 
are adopted, it may reduce the regulatory fee burden on some satellite 
entities. In addition, the section 9(e)(2) annual regulatory fee 
exemption of $1,000 will reduce burdens on small entities with annual 
regulatory fees that total $1,000 or less.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules

    12. None.

IV. Ordering Clauses

    13. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to section 9(a), (b), 
(e), (f), and (g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 
U.S.C. 159(a), (b), (e), (f), and (g), this Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking is hereby adopted.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-24503 Filed 11-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P