95-11010. Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act900 MHz SMR  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 22023-22034]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-11010]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
    47 CFR Part 90
    
    [PR Docket No. 89-553, GN Docket No. 93-252, PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 
    95-159]
    
    
    Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act--900 
    MHz SMR
    
    AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Commission adopted a Second Further Notice of Proposed 
    Rule Making seeking comment on proposed licensing and auction rules to 
    complete the licensing of the 900 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) 
    service. This Order implements the Commission's decision in the Third 
    Report & Order in GN Docket No. 93-252, 59 FR 59,945 (Nov. 21, 1994) 
    (CMRS Third Report & Order), to license the 900 MHz band on a Major 
    Trading Area (MTA) basis, and to use competitive bidding to select from 
    among mutually exclusive applicants. This Second Further Notice 
    requests comment on proposed new licensing rules and auction procedures 
    for the service, including special provisions for small businesses, 
    minority-owned and women-owned entities, and rural telephone companies.
    
    DATES: Comments must be filed on or before May 24, 1995, and reply 
    comments must be filed on or before June 1, 1995.
    
    ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., 
    Washington, D.C. 20554.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Amy Zoslov, (202) 418-0620, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 
    Commercial Wireless Division.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
    Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, in PR Docket No. 89-553, 
    FCC 95-159, adopted April 14, 1995, and released April 17, 1995. The 
    complete text of this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making is 
    available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
    the FCC Dockets Branch, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, 
    D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
    International Transcription Service, at (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, 
    N.W., Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
    
    Synopsis of the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making
    
    I. Introduction
    
        1. When the Commission established the 900 MHz SMR service in 1986, 
    it elected to use a two-phase licensing process. In Phase I, licenses 
    were assigned in 46 ``Designated Filing Areas'' (DFAs) comprised of the 
    top 50 markets. Phase II licensing, for facilities outside the DFAs, 
    was frozen after 1986, when the Commission opened its filing window for 
    the DFAs. In 1989, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rule 
    Making in PR Docket 89-553, 55 FR 00744, proposing to begin Phase II 
    licensing of SMR facilities nationwide. In 1993, the Commission adopted 
    a First Report & Order & Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in PR 
    Docket 89-553, 58 FR 12176 (March 3, 1993) (Phase II First R&O & 
    Further Notice), modifying its Phase II proposal and seeking comment on 
    whether to license the 900 MHz SMR band to a combination of nationwide, 
    regional and local systems. 8 FCC Rcd 1469 (1993). Shortly thereafter, 
    Congress amended the Communications Act to reclassify most SMR 
    licensees as Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) providers and 
    establish the authority to use competitive bidding to select from among 
    mutually exclusive applicants for certain services. The Commission 
    deferred further consideration of Phase II and incorporated the 900 MHz 
    SMR docket into its CMRS proceeding.
        2. In the CMRS Third Report & Order, FR 59,945 (Nov. 21, 1994), the 
    Commission further revised its Phase II proposals and established the 
    broad outlines for the completion of licensing in the 900 MHz SMR band. 
    The Commission left the specific auction rules for the Phase II 
    proceeding.
        3. The Commission seeks comment on the following proposals: 
    adoption of a single simultaneous multiple round auction; establishment 
    of upfront payment requirements; adoption of the Milgrom-Wilson 
    activity rule; adoption of application procedures; adoption of 
    procedures governing timing and duration of auction rounds, stopping 
    rules and bid increments; adoption of bid withdrawal and default rules; 
    adoption of procedures governing down payment and full payment for 
    winning bidders; adoption of anti-collusion rules for bidders; and 
    adoption of transfer disclosure and performance requirements for 
    winning bidders.
        4. With respect to rules for designated entities (i.e. small 
    businesses, women-owned and minority-owned entities, and rural 
    telephone companies), the Commission seeks comment on the following 
    proposals: insulating certain spectrum blocks from large bidders; 
    providing small businesses bidding credits, reduced down payment 
    requirements, and installment payment options; whether reduced upfront 
    payments are necessary; adoption of partitioning rule for rural 
    telephone companies; adoption of eligibility standards for small 
    business and rural telephone companies; and for small businesses, 
    adoption of restrictions on transfer or assignment of their licenses.
    II. Discussion
    
    A. Competitive Bidding
        5. In the CMRS Third Report & Order, 59 FR 59,945 (Nov. 21, 1994), 
    the Commission determined that it would use competitive bidding to 
    select from among mutually exclusive applicants in [[Page 22024]] the 
    900 MHz SMR service. Accordingly, under the Commission's auction 
    authority, if mutually exclusive applications for an MTA 10-channel 
    block are accepted for filing, the Commission will award that license 
    through competitive bidding. The Commission requests comment on 
    specific bidding procedures, as set forth below.
        6. Competitive Bidding Design. In the Second Report & Order, PP 
    Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 22980 (May 4, 1994) (Auctions Second Report 
    and Order), the Commission stated that (1) licenses with strong value 
    interdependencies should be auctioned simultaneously; and (2) multiple 
    round auctions generally will yield more efficient allocations of 
    licenses and higher revenues by providing bidders with information 
    regarding other bidders' valuations of licenses, especially where there 
    is substantial uncertainty as to value. Thus, where the licenses to be 
    auctioned are interdependent and their value is expected to be high, 
    simultaneous multiple round auctions would best achieve the 
    Commission's goals for competitive bidding. Based on these factors, the 
    Commission tentatively concluded that simultaneous multiple round 
    auctions are appropriate for the 900 MHz SMR service. The expected 
    value of 900 MHz SMR licenses is high, the licenses are interdependent, 
    and licensees will likely aggregate across spectrum blocks and 
    geographic regions. Because, however, the presence of incumbents on 
    certain channels could affect the relative desirability and value of 
    otherwise identical MTA licenses, the Commission proposes to delegate 
    authority to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to revisit the 
    issue of whether another auction design would be more appropriate. The 
    Commission seeks comments on this tentative conclusion and proposal.
        7. License Grouping. The Commission determined in the Auctions 
    Second Report & Order, 59 FR 22980 (May 4, 1994), that in a multiple 
    round auction, highly interdependent licenses should be grouped 
    together and put up for bid at the same time because such grouping 
    provides bidders with the most information about the prices of 
    complementary and substitutable licenses during the course of an 
    auction. The Commission also determined that the greater the degree of 
    interdependence among the licenses, the greater the benefit of 
    auctioning a group of licenses together in a simultaneous multiple 
    round auction. The Commission tentatively concludes that all 51 MTAs in 
    the 900 MHz band should be auctioned simultaneously. While this may 
    entail more administrative costs than breaking the licenses into 
    groups, the added cost will be outweighed by the informational and 
    bidding flexibility advantages afforded by a single auction. Moreover, 
    the 1020 MTA licenses to be auctioned are less than half the number of 
    broadband PCS licenses to be auctioned in Blocks A through F, and all 
    licenses will be for the same amount of spectrum and use a single 
    service area definition. The Commission also proposes to reserve the 
    discretion to inform applicants by Public Notice if the Commission 
    determines to hold more than one auction, on the basis that a single 
    auction proves administratively unworkable.
    B. Bidding Issues
        8. Bid Increments. The bid increment is the amount or percentage by 
    which a bid must be raised above the previous round's high bid in order 
    to be accepted as valid in the current bidding round. The Commission 
    proposes to start the 900 MHz auction with relatively large increments, 
    and adjust the increments as bidding activity indicates. In Stage I of 
    the auction, the minimum bid increment would be five percent of the 
    high bid in the previous round or $.02 per MHz-pop, whichever is 
    greater. In Stage II, the Commission would reduce the minimum bid 
    increment to the greater of five percent of $.01 per MHz-pop, and in 
    Stage III, the greater of five percent of $.01 per MHz-pop. The 
    Commission also proposes to retain the discretion to vary the minimum 
    bid increments for individual license or groups of licenses at any time 
    before or during the course of the auction, based on the number of 
    bidders, bidding activity, and the aggregate high bid amounts. Finally, 
    the Commission proposes to retain the discretion to keep an auction 
    open if there is a round in which no bids are submitted.
        9. Stopping Rules. In the CMRS Third Report & Order, 59 Fed. Reg. 
    59,945 (Nov. 21, 1994), the Commission noted that in multiple round 
    auctions, a stopping rule must be established for determining when the 
    auction is over. The Commission proposes to adopt a simultaneous 
    stopping rule for 900 MHz SMR. Under this approach, bidding remains 
    open on all licenses until there is no new acceptable bid for any 
    license. This approach also provides full flexibility to bid for any 
    license as more information becomes available during the course of the 
    auction. MTA licenses are expected to have relatively high values 
    because of the substantial amount of clear spectrum that remains 
    available, the high valuation of SMR spectrum in secondary market 
    transactions, the substitutability between licenses within the same MTA 
    and the ability to pursue back-up strategies. Likewise, the use of 
    MTAs, rather than BTAs or more numerous service areas, should reduce 
    complexity of a simultaneous stopping rule. Because the Commission 
    proposes to impose an activity rule, this approach will not lead to 
    excessively long auctions while affording bidders flexibility to pursue 
    back-up strategies.
        10. The Commission also proposes to retain the discretion to 
    announce at any time during the auction that the auction will end after 
    a specified number of additional rounds. Bids would only be accepted on 
    licenses where the high bid has increased in the last three rounds. 
    This would deter bidders from continuing to bid on a few low value 
    licenses solely to delay the closing of the auction. It would also 
    enable the Commission to end the auction when it determines that the 
    benefits of terminating the auction and issuing licenses exceed likely 
    benefits of continuing to allow bidding. The Commission proposes that 
    this mechanism be used only in case of extremely dilatory bidding and 
    that final bidding procedures would be announced by public notice. The 
    Commission also proposes to retain the discretion to conduct market by 
    market closings, if circumstances so warrant, to be announced during 
    the auction. Finally, the Commission proposes to retain discretion to 
    keep an auction open in a round in which no new acceptable bids are 
    submitted if the Commission receives a ``proactive'' waiver of the 
    activity rules, and to retain discretion to keep an auction open even 
    if no proactive waivers are filed.
        11. Duration of Bidding Rounds. The Commission reserves the 
    discretion to vary the duration of bidding rounds or the interval at 
    which bids are accepted (e.g. run more than one round per day) in order 
    to move the auction toward closure more quickly. The Commission will 
    announce any changes to the duration of and intervals between bidding 
    rounds either by public notice prior to the auction or by announcement 
    during the auction.
        12. Activity Rules. The Milgrom-Wilson activity rule encourages 
    bidders to participate in early rounds by limiting their maximum 
    participation to some multiple of their minimum participation level. 
    The Commission tentatively concludes that the Milgrom-Wilson activity 
    rule should be used in conjunction with the simultaneous stopping rule 
    to award 900 MHz SMR [[Page 22025]] licenses. Under this approach, the 
    minimum activity level increases during the course of the auction. 
    Absent waivers, a bidder's eligibility in the current round is 
    determined by the bidder's activity level and eligibility in the 
    previous round; in the first round, however, eligibility is determined 
    by the bidder's upfront payment and is equal to the upfront payment 
    divided by $.02 per MHz-pop. Bidders are required to declare their 
    maximum eligibility in terms of MHz-pops, and made an upfront payment 
    equal to $0.02 per MHz-pop. In each round, bidders are limited to 
    bidding on licenses encompassing no more than the number of MHz-pops 
    covered by their upfront payment, and licenses on which a bidder is the 
    high bidder from the previous round count toward this bidding limit. 
    Bidders have flexibility to shift their bids among any license for 
    which they have applied so long as, within each round, the total MHz-
    pops encompassed by those licenses does not exceed the total number of 
    MHz-pops on which they are eligible to bid. This approach would best 
    achieve the Commission's goals of affording bidders flexibility to 
    pursue backup strategies, while at the same time ensuring that 
    simultaneous auctions are concluded within a reasonable period of time. 
    The Commission seeks comment on these issues.
        13. During Stage I, the Commission tentatively concludes that a 
    bidder must be active on licenses encompassing one-half of the MHz-pops 
    for which it is eligible. In Stage II and Stage III, the Commission 
    tentatively concludes that the bidder must be active on 75 and 95 
    percent, respectively, of the MHz-pops for which it is eligible. The 
    penalty for falling below the minimum activity level at any stage would 
    be a reduction in maximum eligibility to bid in future rounds. The 
    transition from one stage of the auction to the next would be 
    determined by the aggregate level of bidding activity, subject to the 
    Commission's discretion. Once an auction proceeds from one stage to the 
    next, it could not revert to any previous stage. Moreover, the 
    Commission proposes to reserve the discretion to increase or decrease 
    these activity levels as well as to vary the timing of stages and 
    activity levels for each stage through public notices issued after 
    applications are filed and before the auction begins, as circumstances 
    warrant. The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
        14. In the Fourth Memorandum Opinion & Order, PP Docket No. 93-253, 
    59 FR 53364 (October 24, 1994), the Commission clarified that it 
    retained the discretion to modify the method and timing of submitting 
    waivers and to allow for both ``proactive'' and ``automatic'' waivers. 
    Proactive waivers are submitted by the bidder, while automatic waivers 
    would be submitted automatically for a bidder whenever its eligibility 
    would be reduced because of insufficient bidding activity and a waiver 
    is available unless the bidder specifically chooses not to have the 
    automatic waiver apply. The Commission proposes to use these waiver 
    procedures with respect to the 900 SMR auctions.
        15. Specifically, the Commission proposes to implement a waiver 
    procedure permitting each bidder to request and automatically receive a 
    certain number of waivers of the activity rule during the auction. The 
    Commission would announce by Public Notice how many waivers bidders 
    will receive. A waiver would permit a bidder to maintain its 
    eligibility at the same level as in the round for which the waiver is 
    submitted; it could not, however, be used to correct an error in the 
    amount bid. Under this proposal, a bidder may request a waiver either 
    in the round in which its bidding falls below the minimum required 
    level or prior to submitting a bid in the next round. If an activity 
    rule waiver is proactively requested in a round in which no other 
    bidding activity occurs, the auction would remain open. The Commission 
    seeks comment on these proposals. Finally, the Commission retains 
    discretion to use an alternative activity rule for 900 MHz SMR if it 
    determines that the Milgrom-Wilson rule is too complicated or costly to 
    administer. Any such change would be announced by public notice before 
    commencement of the auction.
        16. Rules Prohibiting Collusion. Section 1.2105(c) of the 
    Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.2105(c) prohibits collusive conduct in the 
    context of competitive bidding. This rule prohibits bidders from 
    communicating with one another after short-form applications have been 
    filed regarding the substance of their bids or bidding strategies, and 
    also prohibits bidders from entering into consortium arrangements or 
    joint bidding agreements after the deadline for short-form applications 
    has passed. 47 C.F.R. 1.2105(c)(1)-(2). The Commission proposes to 
    apply Section 1.2105(c) to 900 MHz SMR auctions. Bidders who have not 
    filed form 175 applications for any of the same MTA licenses would be 
    permitted enter into such discussions, consortia, or arrangements, or 
    add equity partners, during the course of an auction. Also, 
    communications among bidders concerning matters unrelated to the 
    auctions would be permitted. The Commission seeks comment on this 
    proposal.
        17. Under the collusion rules, bidders would also identify on their 
    Form 175 applications parties with whom they have entered into any 
    agreements relating to the competitive bidding process, and certify 
    that they will not enter into any such agreements with any parties 
    other than those identified. 47 CFR 1.2105(a)(2). Furthermore, winning 
    bidders in the 900 MHz SMR auctions would attach as an exhibit to the 
    Form 600 long-form application a detailed explanation of the terms and 
    conditions and parties involved in any such agreement entered into 
    prior to the close of bidding. All such arrangements would have been 
    entered into prior to filing of short-form applications to comply with 
    the Commission's rules. 47 CFR 1.2107. Allegations of specific 
    instances of collusion in violation of these rules would be 
    investigated by the Commission or referred to the Department of 
    Justice. The Commission also proposes that bidders found to have 
    violated the Commission's rules or the antitrust laws may be subject to 
    forfeiture of their down payment or their full bid amount, revocation 
    of their licenses, and prohibition from participation in future 
    auctions. The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
    C. Procedural, Payment and Penalty Issues
        18. Pre-Auction Application Procedures. The Commission proposes to 
    follow generally the processing and procedural rules established in 47 
    CFR Part 1, Subpart Q with certain modifications designed to address 
    the particular characteristics of the 900 MHz SMR service. Unlike 
    incumbent 900 MHz SMR licensees that are essentially confined to the 
    smaller DFA region, MTA licensees will gain use of a large geographic 
    area and the freedom to locate base stations anywhere within that 
    larger geographic region. Thus, the Commission proposes to treat MTA 
    applicants as initial applicants for public notice, application 
    processing, and auction purposes, regardless of whether they are 
    already incumbent operators.
        19. The 1993 Budget Act expressly provides the Commission authority 
    to require that bidders' applications contain all information and 
    documentation sufficient to demonstrate that the application is not in 
    violation of Commission rules, and to dismiss applications not meeting 
    those requirements prior to the competitive [[Page 22026]] bidding. 47 
    U.S.C. 309(j)(5). See also H. R. Rep. No. 111, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. 28 
    (1993). In furtherance of this policy, the Commission decided to 
    require only a short-form application prior to competitive bidding, and 
    determined that only winning bidders should be required to submit a 
    long-form license application after the auction. 47 CFR 1.2104, 1.207. 
    Because this procedure fulfills the statutory requirements and 
    adequately protects the public interest here, the Commission proposes 
    to extend application of these rules to the competitive bidding process 
    for 900 MHz SMR.
        20. Under this proposal, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 
    would release an initial Public Notice announcing the auction. The 
    Public Notice would specify the following: licenses to be auctioned; 
    time and place of the auction method of competitive bidding to be used; 
    applicable bid submission procedures; stopping rules; activity rules; 
    the deadline by which short-form applications must be filed; and the 
    amounts and deadlines for submitting the unfront payment. Applications 
    submitted before the release of the Public Notice would be returned as 
    premature. Likewise, applications submitted after the deadline 
    specified by Public Notice would be dismissed, with prejudice, as 
    untimely.
        21. All bidders would be required to submit short-form applications 
    on FCC Form 175 (and FCC Form 175-S, if applicable), by the date 
    specified in the initial Public Notice. See CFR 1.2105(a)(2). 
    Applications could be filed manually or electronically. Each applicant 
    would specify on its applications certain information, including its 
    status as a designated entity (if applicable), its classification 
    (i.e., individual, corporation, partnership, trust, or other), the 
    markets and frequency blocks for which it is applying, and the names of 
    persons authorized to place or withdraw a bid on its behalf. If there 
    is no mutual exclusivity for a particular license, and no petitions to 
    deny are filed, the application would be grantable after 30 days. The 
    Commission seeks comment on the proposals discussed above.
        22. Amendments and Modifications. To encourage maximum bidder 
    participation, the Commission proposes to provide 900 MHz SMR 
    applicants with an opportunity to correct minor defects in their short 
    form applications prior to the auction. The Commission also proposes to 
    waive the ex parte rules as they apply to submission of amended short-
    form applications to maximize applicants' opportunities to seek 
    Commission staff advice on making such amendments. Also, applicants 
    would be permitted to modify their applications to reflect formation of 
    consortia or changes in ownership at any time before or during an 
    auction, provided that (1) such changes do not result in a change in 
    control of the applicant, and (2) parties forming consortia or entering 
    into ownership agreements have not applied for licenses in any of the 
    same geographic licenses. Applicants would not, however, be permitted 
    to make major modifications to their applications, including changes in 
    markets, changes in control of the applicant, or additions of the other 
    bidders into the bidding consortia, until after the auction. 
    Applications that are not signed would be dismissed as unacceptable. 
    The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
        23. Applications with defects, minor or otherwise, would be listed 
    in a public notice. After reviewing corrected applications, the 
    Commission would release a second public notice announcing applicants 
    whose applications have been accepted or filing. This second public 
    notice would announce the date by which applicants must submit an 
    upfront payment to the Commission, generally no later than 14 days 
    before the scheduled auction. The Commission would release a third 
    public notice announcing the names of all applicants that have been 
    determined as qualified to bid. An applicant who fails to submit a 
    sufficient upfront payment to qualified it to bid on any license being 
    auctioned would not be identified on this Public Notice as a qualified 
    bidder. The Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
        24. Upfront Payments. The Commission tentatively concludes that 
    applicants that have been determined as qualified to bid should be 
    required to submit a payment of $0.02 per MHz-pop, based on the number 
    of 10-channel blocks in each MTA identified by an applicant on its Form 
    175. This requirement would help ensure that only serious and qualified 
    bidders participate and that any bid withdrawal or default penalties 
    are paid. See Auctions Second Report & Order at para.171. This formula 
    would also afford bidders the flexibility to change their strategy 
    during an auction and bid on a larger number of smaller licenses or a 
    smaller number of larger licenses, so long as the total MHz-pops 
    combination does not exceed that amount covered by the upfront payment. 
    Population information for each license would be announced in the 
    initial Public Notice released prior to the auction. The Commission 
    seeks comment on these proposals.
        25. Down payment and Full Payment. The Commission tentatively 
    concludes that winning bidders in 900 MHz SMR auctions should be 
    required to supplement their upfront payments with a down payment 
    sufficient to bring their total deposits up to 20 percent of their 
    winning bid(s). Under this proposal, if the upfront payment already 
    tendered by a winning bidder, after deducting any bid withdrawal and 
    default penalties due, amounts to 20 percent or more of its winning 
    bids, no additional deposit would be required. If the upfront payment 
    amount on deposit is greater than 20 percent of the winning bid amount 
    after deducting any bid withdrawal and default penalties due, the 
    additional monies would be refunded. If a bidder has withdrawn a bid or 
    defaulted but the amount of the penalty cannot yet be determined, the 
    bidder would be required to make a deposit of 20 percent of the amount 
    bid on such licenses. When it becomes possible to calculate and assess 
    the penalty, any excess deposit would be refunded. Upfront payments 
    would be applied to such deposits and to bid withdrawal and default 
    penalties due before being applied toward the bidder's down payment on 
    licenses the bidder has won and seeks to acquire. The Commission seeks 
    comment on these proposals.
        26. The Commission proposes to require winning bidders to submit 
    the required down payment by cashier's check or wire transfer to its 
    lock-box bank by a date to be specified by Public Notice, generally 
    within five business days following the close of bidding. The balance 
    of their winning bids would be made within five business days following 
    public notice that the Commission is about to award the license, and 
    grant of the license would be conditioned on this payment. An auction 
    winner that is eligible to make payments through an installment plan, 
    however, would be required to submit a deposit up to five percent of 
    its winning bid, and would submit an additional five percent of its 
    winning bid after the license granted. This would ensure that auction 
    winners have the necessary financial capabilities to complete payment 
    for the license and pay for the costs of constructing a system, without 
    hindering growth or diminishing access to the auctions. The Commission 
    seeks comment on this proposal.
        27. Bid Withdrawal, Default, and Disqualification. The Commission 
    proposes that bidders who withdraw a high bid, are found unqualified to 
    hold licenses, or default on payment of a [[Page 22027]] balance due, 
    would be assessed a substantial penalty. Any bidder that withdraws a 
    high bid during an auction before the Commission declares bidding 
    closed would be required to reimburse the Commission in the amount of 
    the difference between its high bid and the amount of the winning bid 
    the next time the license is offered by the Commission, if this 
    subsequent winning bid is lower than the withdrawn bid. If a license is 
    re-offered by auction, the ``winning bid'' would refer to the high bid 
    in the auction in which the license is re-offered. If a license is re-
    offered in the same auction, the ``winning bid'' would refer to the 
    high bid amount, made subsequent to the withdrawal, in that auction. If 
    the subsequent high bidder also withdraws its bid, that bidder would be 
    required to pay a penalty equal to the difference between its withdrawn 
    bid and the amount of the subsequent willing bid the next time the 
    license is offered by the Commission. If a license which is the subject 
    of withdrawal or default is not re-auctioned, but is instead offered to 
    the highest losing bidders in the initial auction, the ``winning bid'' 
    would refer to the bid of the highest bidder who accepts the offer. 
    Losing bidders would not be required to accept the offer, and therefore 
    may decline without penalty. The Commission seeks comment on these 
    proposals.
        28. The Commission also proposes that after bidding closes, a 
    defaulting winner would be assessed an additional penalty of three 
    percent of the subsequent winning bid or three percent of the amount of 
    the defaulting bid, whichever is less. See 47 CFR 1.2104(g), 1.2109. If 
    a default or disqualification involves an applicant's gross misconduct, 
    misrepresentation, or bad faith, the Commission would be able to 
    declare the applicant ineligible to bid in future auctions or take 
    other action. These penalties would adequately discourage default and 
    ensure that bidders have adequate financing and meet all eligibility 
    and qualification requirements.
        29. Finally, the Commission proposes that if the MTA winner 
    defaults, is otherwise disqualified after having made the required down 
    payment, or the license is terminated or revoked, then the Commission 
    would re-auction the license. If the default occurs within five days 
    after bidding has closed, the Commission would retain the discretion to 
    offer the license to the second highest bidder at its final bid level, 
    and thereafter to other bidders (in descending order of their bid 
    amounts). If only a small number of relatively low-value licenses were 
    to be re-auctioned and only a short time has passed since the initial 
    auction, the Commission would have authority to choose to offer the 
    license to the highest losing bidders if the cost of running another 
    auction exceed the benefits. The Commission seeks comment on these 
    proposals.
        30. Long-Form Applications. If the winning bidder makes the down 
    payment in a timely manner, the Commission proposes the following 
    procedures: A long-form application filed on FCC Form 600 must be filed 
    by a date specified by Public Notice, generally within ten business 
    days after the close of bidding. Designated entities must also submit 
    evidence to support their claim to any special provision, such as 
    bidding credits or installment payment options. Once the long-form is 
    accepted for filing, the Commission will issue a Public Notice 
    announcing this fact, triggering the filing window for petitions to 
    deny. If the Commission denies all petitions to deny, and is otherwise 
    satisfied that the applicant is qualified, the license(s) will be 
    granted to the auction winner. See generally 47 CFR 90.163-90.166. The 
    Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
        31. Petitions to Deny and Limitations on Settlements. A party 
    filing a petition to deny will be required to demonstrate standing and 
    meet all other applicable filing requirements. 47 CFR 90.163. The 
    Commission also adopted ``greenmail'' restrictions to prevent filing of 
    speculative applications and pleadings (or threats of the same) 
    designed to extract money from 900 MHz SMR applicants. 47 CFR 90.162. 
    Thus, the consideration than an applicant or petitioner is permitted to 
    receive for agreeing to withdraw an application or petition to deny is 
    limited to the legitimate and prudent expenses of the withdrawing 
    party. Finally, the Commission need not conduct a hearing before 
    denying an application if it determines that an applicant is not 
    qualified and no substantial issue of fact exists concerning that 
    determination.
        32. Transfer Disclosure Requirements. In the 1993 Budget Act 
    amendments to the Communications Act, Congress directed the Commission 
    to ``require such transfer disclosures and anti-trafficking 
    restrictions and payment schedules as may be necessary to prevent 
    unjust enrichment as a result of the methods employed to issue licenses 
    and permits. 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(4)(E)). To ensure that these statutory 
    requirements are met, the Commission concluded in the Auctions Second 
    Report & Order, 59 FR 22980 (May 4, 1994), that transfer disclosure 
    requirements will enable the Commission to accumulate the necessary 
    data to evaluate auction designs and judge whether licenses have been 
    issued for bids that fall short of the true market value of the 
    license. The Commission tentatively concludes to apply these same 
    requirements to all 900 MHz SMR licenses obtained through the 
    competitive bidding process. See 47 CFR 1.2111(a). Generally, licensees 
    transferring their licenses within three years after the initial 
    license grant would be required to file, together with their transfer 
    applications, the associated contracts for sale, option agreements, 
    management agreements, and all other documents disclosing the total 
    consideration received in return for the transfer of the license. The 
    Commission would give particular scrutiny to auction winners who have 
    not yet begun commercial service and who seek approval for a transfer 
    of control or assignment of their licenses, so it may determine if any 
    unforeseen problems relating to unjust enrichment have arisen outside 
    the small business context. The Commission seeks comment on this 
    proposal.
        33. Performance Requirements. The Communications Act requires the 
    Commission to ``include performance requirements, such as appropriate 
    deadlines and penalties for performance failures, to ensure prompt 
    delivery of service to rural areas, to prevent stockpiling or 
    warehousing of spectrum by licensees or permittees, and to promote 
    investment in and rapid deployment of new technologies and services. 47 
    U.S.C. 309(j)(4)(B). The Commission tentatively concludes that 
    additional performance requirements, beyond those already provided in 
    the service rules, and that coverage requirements adopted in this Order 
    will sufficiently prevent warehousing of spectrum. The Commission seeks 
    comment on this proposal.
    D. Treatment of Designated Entities
        34. Overview and Objectives. Congress provided that in establishing 
    eligibility criteria and bidding methodologies, the Commission shall 
    ``promot[e] economic opportunity and competition and ensur[e] that new 
    and innovative technologies are readily accessible to the American 
    people by avoiding excessive concentration of licenses and by 
    disseminating licenses among a wide variety of applicants, including 
    small businesses, rural telephone companies, and businesses owned by 
    members of minority groups and women.'' 47 U.S.C. 309(j)(3). Congress 
    also provided that to promote these objectives, the Commission shall 
    ``consider alternative payment schedules and methods of calculation, 
    including lump sums or [[Page 22028]] guaranteed installment payments, 
    with or without royalty payments, or other schedules or methods * * * 
    and combinations of such schedules and methods.'' 47 U.S.C. 
    309(j)(3)(B). The statute also requires the Commission to ``ensure that 
    small businesses rural telephone companies, and businesses owned by 
    members of minority groups and women are given the opportunity to 
    participate in the provision of spectrum-based services. Id. 
    Sec. 309(j)(4)(D). To achieve this goal, the statute indicates that the 
    Commission should ``consider the use of tax certificates, bidding 
    preferences, and other procedures.'' Id.
        35. Congress was particularly concerned that difficulties in 
    accessing capital would prevent designated entities from meaningful 
    participation in auctions and spectrum-based services. See H.R. Rep. 
    No. 111, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. 254-55 (1993). In other services, the 
    Commission has employed a wide range of special provisions and 
    eligibility criteria designed to meet this statutory objective. See, 
    e.g., Third Report & Order. PP Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 26741 (May 24, 
    1994). The Commission states its intention to meet this objective in 
    the 900 MHz SMR service, and tentatively concludes that it should 
    provide for bidding credits, installment payments and reduced down 
    payments to promote opportunities for small businesses, including small 
    businesses owned by women and minorities--on all channel blocks in each 
    MTA. These provisions would reduce barriers to accessing capital faced 
    by all small businesses. In addition, to facilitate the introduction of 
    service to rural areas, the Commission proposes to allow rural 
    telephone companies to obtain geographically partitioned 900 MHz SMR 
    licenses in areas where they provide telephone service.
        36. Bidding Credits. Bidding credits allow eligible designated 
    entities to receive a payment discount (or credit) for their winning 
    bid in an auction. In the Auctions Second Report & Order, 59 FR 22980 
    (May 4, 1994), the Commission determined that competitive bidding rules 
    applicable to individual services would specify the designated entities 
    eligible for bidding credits and the amounts of the available bidding 
    credits for that particular service. The Commission has since adopted 
    bidding credits for narrowband PCS, broadband PCS, and Interactive 
    Video and Data Service. See Third Memorandum Opinion & Order & Further 
    Notice of Proposed Rule Making, PP Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 44058 
    (August 26, 1994); Fifth Report & Order, PP Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 
    37566 (July 22, 1994); Fourth Report & Order, PP Docket No. 93-253, 59 
    FR 24947 (May 13, 1994). For 900 MHz SMR service, the Commission 
    proposes to offer a 10 percent bidding credit to small businesses 
    bidding on any of the ten-channel blocks within each MTA. These bidding 
    credit designations would help achieve the objectives of the Budget Act 
    and provide small businesses with a meaningful opportunity to 
    participate in the 900 MHz SMR auction, while taking into account the 
    concerns of incumbents within the DFAs. Because of the large number of 
    licenses available in this service, the Commission states that a higher 
    bidding credit would be unnecessary.
        37. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. Specifically, is 
    a 10 percent credit sufficient to enhance bidding opportunities? Also, 
    how should the presence of incumbents on all channel blocks affect the 
    availability of bidding credits on all blocks? In previous auctions 
    where bidding credits for women and minorities have been available, 
    varying degrees of participation in spectrum-based services has 
    resulted, and the Commission's auction experience to date has not 
    included a small business bidding credit available on all blocks. Also, 
    the Commission proposes to limit eligibility for bidding credits to 
    small businesses. The Commission seeks comment on whether eligibility 
    should be expanded to include businesses owned by minorities and/or 
    women, even if they do not fall within the Commission's small business 
    size standards for 900 MHz SMRs.
        38. In the event that the Commission modifies the bidding credit 
    eligibility proposal for minority- and women-owned entities, the 
    Commission also seeks comment on a second bidding credit alternative, 
    which would entitle small businesses and minority- and women-owned 
    entities to receive bidding credits on the five least encumbered blocks 
    in each MTA. In the event the Commission adopts a proposal to limit 
    bidding credits to small businesses, should it also limit availability 
    of the credit to the channel blocks with the fewest incumbents, or 
    would this limitation dilute the effectiveness of a small business 
    credit as a means of attracting broad designated entity participation 
    in the 900 MHz SMR service? What bidding credit amounts should apply to 
    women and minority-owned businesses and small businesses? Should women-
    owned and minority-owned businesses that are also small businesses 
    receive an aggregate bidding credit? The Commission seeks comment on 
    the ramifications of each proposal for incumbents in each block. 
    Finally, the Commission seeks comment on any possible alternative 
    bidding credit schemes.
        39. Reduced Down Payments/Installment Payments. The Commission 
    proposes to adopt an installment payment option for small businesses 
    that are winning bidders in the 900 MHz SMR auction. Under this 
    proposal, small businesses that are winning bidders in the 900 MHz SMR 
    auction would be entitled to pay their bid in installments over the 
    term of the license, with interest charges to be fixed at the time of 
    licensing at a rate equal to the rate for ten-year U.S. Treasury 
    obligations plus 2.5 percent. Under this proposed rule, qualified 
    licensees would make interest-only payments during the first two years 
    of the remaining license term. Timely payment of all installments would 
    be a condition of the license grant and failure to make such timely 
    payment would be grounds for revocation of the license. Additionally, 
    the Commission tentatively concludes that small businesses that are 
    eligible for installment payments also would be allowed to pay a 
    reduced down payment (five percent of the winning bid) five days after 
    the auction closes, with the remaining five percent down payment due 
    five days after Public Notice that the license is ready for grant. This 
    proposal would mitigate the effect of limited access to capital by 
    small businesses, especially those owned by minorities and/or women.
        40. The Commission seeks comment on these payment procedures. If 
    the Commission expands its installment payment eligibility proposal for 
    women- and minority-owned entities, should those entities also receive 
    reduced down payment and installment payment provisions and, if so, on 
    what terms? In the event the Commission adopts provisions for minority- 
    and women-owned applicants, should enhanced installment payments be 
    made available?
        41. Eligibility for Bidding Credits, Installment Payments and 
    Reduced Down Payments. The Commission proposes to limit eligibility for 
    bidding credits, installment payments and reduced down payments to 
    small businesses, including those owned by members of minority groups 
    and women and those rural telephone companies that meet the small 
    business size standards. The Commission proposes to define small 
    businesses as those entities with less than $3 million in average gross 
    revenues for each of the preceding [[Page 22029]] three years. The 
    Commission states that it is unnecessary to propose different 
    eligibility criteria for minority- and women-owned entities that do not 
    meet the small business size standards in order to achieve the goals of 
    Section 309(j) in the 900 MHz SMR service. Broadening the scope of 
    opportunities for very small businesses in all channel blocks still has 
    the potential to result in substantial participation by women and 
    minorities in the provision of 900 MHz SMR service. Moreover, the 
    Commission expects that because capital entry requirements are lower 
    than PCS, minority- and women-owned businesses will have greater 
    opportunities to participate.
        42. To enhance the Commission's understanding, however, of the 
    capital requirements the 900 MHz service is likely to entail, the 
    Commission seeks comment on the projected costs associated with 
    acquisition, construction and operation of 900 MHz MTA licenses. In 
    addition, to gain insight into which the degree of small business 
    participation has resulted in opportunities for women and minority-
    owned businesses, the Commission seeks comment on the composition of 
    existing 900 MHz SMR operators as well as providers in other similar 
    services such as 800 MHz SMR. For example, what proportion of existing 
    900 MHz SMR businesses are owned by women or minorities? To what extent 
    have participants in 900 MHz SMR networks been small businesses owned 
    by women and minorities? What is the likelihood that management 
    agreements are likely to serve as a vehicle for participation in the 
    900 MHz SMR service by minority and women-owned businesses? Finally, 
    regardless of whether the Commission adopts its proposal for small 
    businesses, the Commission proposes to request bidder information on 
    the short-form filings as to minority and/or women-owned status in 
    order to monitor the applicant pool and monitor participation by women 
    and minorities. The Commission seeks comment on this monitoring 
    proposal.
        43. Small Business Definition. The Commission defines eligibility 
    requirements for small businesses on a service-specific basis, taking 
    into account capital requirements and other characteristics of each 
    particular service. Second Memorandum Opinion & Order, PP Docket No. 
    93-253, 59 FR 44272 (August 26, 1994). Because 900 MHz SMR is expected 
    to be less capital-intensive than PCS, a much lower gross revenue 
    threshold is warranted. Therefore, the Commission proposes to define a 
    small business as an entity that, together with affiliates and 
    attributable investors, has average gross revenues for the three 
    preceding years of less than $3 million. This standard appropriately 
    accounts for build-out costs, abundant license supply, and low 
    acquisition costs. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. For 
    example, is it an appropriate threshold? Should it be higher or lower, 
    based on the types of companies that are likely to benefit from the 
    special provisions proposed here? The Commission also tentatively 
    concludes that it will consider the revenues of affiliates and certain 
    investors and it proposes to apply the 25 percent attribution threshold 
    and affiliation rules similar to those used in the PCS auction rules. 
    See 47 CFR 24.320(b)(2)(iv), 24.720(j)(1). The Commission seeks comment 
    on these issues.
        44. Finally, if the Commission adopts separate provisions for 
    minority-owned and women-owned entities, it also seeks comment on 
    whether it should adopt the definition of minority-owned and women 
    owned businesses contained in Section 1.2110(b)(2) of the Commission's 
    rules, 47 CFR 1.2110(b)(2), i.e., businesses in which minorities and/or 
    women who control the applicant have at least 50.1 percent equity 
    ownership and, in the case of a corporate applicant, a 50.1% voting 
    interest. Every general partner in a partnership either must be a 
    minority and/or a woman who individually or together own at least 50.1 
    percent of the partnership equity.
        45. Transfer Restrictions and Unjust Enrichment Provisions. In the 
    Fifth Report & Order, PP Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 37566 (July 22 1994), 
    the Commission adopted restrictions on the transfer or assignment of 
    licenses to ensure that designated entities do not take advantage of 
    special provisions by immediately assigning or transferring control of 
    their licenses. The Commission proposes to adopt these restrictions on 
    transfer and assignment of 900 MHz SMR licenses won by designated 
    entities. Under this proposal, a designated entity would be prohibited 
    from voluntarily assigning or transferring control of its license to 
    any other entity during the three years after license grant. In the 
    fourth and fifth years of the license term, the designated entity would 
    only be able to assign or transfer control of its license to another 
    qualified designated entity, and no unjust enrichment could be gained 
    through the transfer. Thus, if the entity to which the designated 
    entity transfers or assigns the license were not eligible for the same 
    provisions, the difference would have to be paid back to the U.S. 
    Treasury as a condition of approval of the transfer or assignment. The 
    Commission seeks comment on these proposals.
        46. For the remainder of the license term, the Commission proposes 
    to continue to impose unjust enrichment rules on designated entities. 
    These unjust enrichment provisions would deter speculation and 
    participation in the licensing process by those who do not intend to 
    offer service to the public, or who intend to use the Commission's 
    provisions to obtain a license at a lower cost than they otherwise 
    would have to pay, and later to sell it at the market price. Under this 
    proposal, licensees seeking to transfer their licenses for profit must, 
    within a specified time, remit to the government a penalty equal to a 
    portion of the total value of the benefit conferred by the government. 
    Therefore, if a designated entity making installment payments sells its 
    license to an entity that does not qualify as a designated entity, the 
    Commission would require payment of the remaining principal and any 
    interest accrued through the date of assignment as a condition of the 
    license assignment or transfer. If a transfer is made to another 
    eligible designated entity, no penalty would be assessed against the 
    original designated entity license holder. If bidding credits were 
    awarded to a licensee, the Commission would require a designated entity 
    approval for a transfer of control or an assignment of license to a 
    non-designated entity, or who proposes to take any other action 
    relating to ownership or control that will result in loss of status as 
    an eligible designated entity, to reimburse the government for the 
    amount for the amount of the bidding credit before transfer of the 
    license will be permitted. The Commission proposes to apply these 
    payment requirements for the entire license term. The Commission seeks 
    comment on this proposal.
        47. Rural Telephone Company Partitioning. Congress directed the 
    Commission to ensure that rural telephone companies have the 
    opportunity to participate in the provision of spectrum-based services. 
    Rural areas tend to be less profitable to serve than more densely 
    populated urban areas. Therefore, service to these areas may not be a 
    priority or feasible for many licensees. Rural telephone companies, 
    however, are well positioned to serve these areas because of their 
    existing infrastructure. Therefore, the Commission proposes a 
    geographic partitioning scheme to encourage participation by rural 
    telephone companies.
        48. Under this proposal, rural telephone companies would be 
    [[Page 22030]] permitted to acquire partitioned 900 MHz SMR licenses 
    either by: (1) forming bidding consortia consistent entirely of rural 
    telephone companies to participate in auctions, and then partition the 
    licenses won among consortia participants; or (2) acquiring partitioned 
    900 MHz SMR licenses from other licenses through private negotiation 
    and agreement either before or after the auction. The Commission would 
    require that partitioned areas conform to established geopolitical 
    boundaries and include all portions of the wireline service area of the 
    rural telephone company applicant that lies within the service area. 
    This partitioning scheme would prevent rural telephone companies from 
    having to bid on the entire MTA license to obtain licenses covering 
    their wireline service areas. In addition, rural telephone companies 
    would have the flexibility to serve areas in which they already provide 
    service, while the remainder of the service area could be served by 
    other providers. The Commission also proposes to use the definition for 
    rural telephone companies implemented in the Fifth Report & Order, PP 
    Docket No. 93-253, 59 FR 37566 (July 22, 1994), for broadband PCS. 
    Rural telephone companies would be defined as local exchange carriers 
    having 100,000 or fewer access lines, including all affiliates. The 
    Commission seeks comment on this proposal.
    E. Other Provisions
        49. Reduced Upfront Payments. The Commission proposes not to adopt 
    a reduced upfront payment option in the 900 MHz SMR service for 
    designated entities. The other provisions adopted here render a reduced 
    upfront payment option unnecessary and, in the absence of an 
    entrepreneurs' block, may be too costly to administer in the 900 MHz 
    SMR service. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. Also, if 
    the Commission adopts provisions for minority and women-owned entities, 
    should the Commission apply a reduced upfront payment provision to 
    those entities only?
        50. Set-aside Spectrum. In the Fifth Report & Order, PP Docket No. 
    93-253, 59 FR 37566 (July 22, 1994), the Commission established 
    entrepreneurs' blocks on which only qualified entrepreneurs, including 
    designated entities, could bid. See also 47 CFR 24.709. The Commission 
    tentatively concludes not to adopt an entrepreneurs' block for the 900 
    MHz SMR auction. First, the large numbers of licenses available and 
    relatively small spectrum allocations in the 900 MHz SMR service should 
    allow for extensive small business participation. Second, the 
    effectiveness of bidding credits and other provisions will be diluted, 
    due to the smaller capital outlay anticipated for this service. Third, 
    it may be impractical to choose particular blocks to set aside for 
    bidding solely by entrepreneurs due to incumbent 900 MHz SMR operators 
    in 19 of the 46 DFAs. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. 
    Are the capital requirements of this service anticipated to be so 
    substantial that the Commission should insulate certain blocks from 
    very large bidders in order to provide meaningful opportunities for 
    designated entities?
    
    III. Procedural Matters
    
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by Section 603 
    of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared an 
    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the expected impact 
    on small entities of the policies and rules proposed in this Further 
    Notice of Proposed Rule Making. Written public comments are requested 
    on the IRFA.
        Reason for Action: This rule making proceeding was initiated to 
    secure comment on proposals for establishing a flexible regulatory 
    scheme for the 900 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) service that 
    would promote efficient licensing and enhance the service's competitive 
    potential in the commercial mobile radio marketplace. The proposals 
    advanced in the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making are also 
    designed to implement Congress's goal of regulatory symmetry in the 
    regulation of competing commercial mobile radio services as described 
    in Sections 3(n) and 332 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 153(n), 
    332, as amended by Title VI of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
    1993 (Budget Act). The Commission also seeks to adopt rules regarding 
    competitive bidding in the 900 MHz SMR service based on Section 309(j) 
    of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 309(j), which delegates authority 
    to the Commission to use auctions to select among mutually exclusive 
    initial applications in certain services, including 900 MHz SMR.
        Objectives: The Commission proposes to adopt rules for the 900 MHz 
    SMR service that are intended to promote the growth of incumbent 900 
    MHz SMR systems, and emerging MTA SMR licensees, and to enhance the 
    ability of all SMR providers to compete in the larger commercial mobile 
    services market. The Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making seeks to 
    establish competitive bidding procedures and a new licensing mechanism 
    for the 900 MHz SMR service that will expedite service to the public 
    and promote competition in the CMRS marketplace.
        Legal Basis: The proposed action is authorized under the Budget 
    Act, Pub. L. No. 103-66, Title VI, 6002, and Sections 2(a), 3(n), 4(i), 
    302, 303(g), 303(r), 309(i), 309(j), 332(a), 332(c), and 332(d) of the 
    Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 152(a), 153(n), 154(i), 302, 
    303(g), 303(r), 309(i), 309(j), 332(a), 332(c) and 332(d), as amended.
        Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements: Under 
    the proposal contained in the Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 
    SMR licensees who obtain MTA-based licenses may be required to report 
    information regarding location of their facilities and coverage of 
    their service areas. SMR applicants seeking treatment as ``designated 
    entities'' may also be subject to reporting and recordkeeping 
    requirements to demonstrate compliance with the Commission's 
    competitive bidding rules.
        Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These 
    Rules: None.
        Description, Potential Impact, and Number of Small Entities 
    Involved: The Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making potentially 
    affects numerous small entities already operating 900 MHz SMR systems 
    in Designated Filing Areas that will co-exist with 900 MHz SMR MTA 
    licensees. The competitive bidding proposals contained in the Further 
    Notice of Proposed Rule Making also could affect small entities seeking 
    initial licenses in the 900 MHz SMR service. The Further Notice of 
    Proposed Rule Making proposes special provisions in the Commission's 
    auction rules to benefit ``designated entity'' applicants, including 
    small businesses. After evaluating comments filed in response to the 
    Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, the Commission will examine 
    further the impact of all rule changes on small entities and set forth 
    its findings in the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
        Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities 
    Consistent with the Stated Objectives: This Further Notice of Proposed 
    Rule Making solicits comment on a variety of alternatives. Any 
    additional significant alternatives presented in the comments will also 
    be considered.
        IRFA Comments: The Commission requests written public comment on 
    the foregoing Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Comments must 
    have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to 
    the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines provided above.
    
    [[Page 22031]]
    
    List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90
    
        Radio.
    
    Federal Communications Commission,
    William F. Caton,
    Acting Secretary.
    
    Amendatory Text
    
        Part 90 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
    is proposed to be amended as follows:
        1. The authority citation for Part 90 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 309 and 332.
    
        2. A new Subpart U consisting of Secs. 90.801 through 90.814 is 
    proposed to be added to Part 90 to read as follows:
    
    PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
    
    Subpart U--Competitive Bidding Procedures for 900 MHz Specialized 
    Mobile Radio
    
    Sec.
    90.801  900 MHz SMR subject to competitive bidding.
    90.802  Competitive bidding for 900 MHz SMR licensing..
    90.803  Competitive bidding mechanisms.
    90.804  Aggregation of 900 MHz SMR licenses.
    90.805  Withdrawal, default and disqualification payments.
    90.806  Bidding application (FCC Form 175 and 175-S Short-form).
    90.807  Submission of upfront payments and down payments.
    90.808  Long-form applications.
    90.809  License grant, denial, default, and disqualification.
    90.810  Bidding credits for small businesses.
    90.811  Reduced down payment for licenses won by small businesses.
    90.812  Installment payments for licenses won by small businesses.
    90.813  Procedures for partitioned licenses.
    90.814  Definitions.
    
    
    Sec. 90.801  900 MHz SMR subject to competitive bidding.
    
        Mutually exclusive initial applications to provide 900 MHz SMR 
    service are subject to competitive bidding procedures. The general 
    competitive bidding procedures found in 47 CFR Part 1, Subpart Q will 
    apply unless otherwise provided in this part.
    
    
    Sec. 90.802  Competitive bidding design for 900 MHz SMR licensing.
    
        The Commission will employ a simultaneous multiple round auction 
    design when choosing from among mutually exclusive initial applications 
    to provide 900 MHz SMR service, unless otherwise specified by the 
    Wireless Telecommunications Bureau before the auction.
    
    
    Sec. 90.803  Competitive bidding mechanisms.
    
        (a) Sequencing. The Commission will establish and may vary the 
    sequence in which 900 MHz SMR licenses will be auctioned.
        (b) Grouping. All 900 MHz SMR licenses for each of the MTAs will be 
    auctioned simultaneously, unless the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 
    announces, by Public Notice prior to the auction, an alternative 
    auction scheme.
        (c) Minimum Bid Increments. The Commission will, by announcement 
    before or during an auction, require minimum bid increments in dollar 
    or percentage terms.
        (d) Stopping Rules. The Commission will establish stopping rules 
    before or during multiple round auctions in order to terminate an 
    auction within a reasonable time.
        (e) Activity Rules. The Commission will establish activity rules 
    which require a minimum amount of bidding activity. In the event that 
    the Commission establishes an activity rule in connection with a 
    simultaneous multiple round auction, each bidder will be entitled to 
    request and will be automatically granted a certain number of waivers 
    of such rule during the auction.
    
    
    Sec. 90.804  Aggregation of 900 MHz SMR licenses.
    
        The Commission will license each 10-channel block in the 900 MHz 
    SMR spectrum separately. Applicants may aggregate across spectrum 
    blocks within the limitation specified in Sec. 20.6(b) of this Chapter.
    
    
    Sec. 90.805  Withdrawal, default and disqualification payments.
    
        (a) During the course of an auction conducted pursuant to 
    Sec. 90.802, the Commission will impose payments on bidders who 
    withdraw high bids during the course of an auction, who default on 
    payments due after an auction closes, or who are disqualified.
        (b) Bid withdrawal prior to close of auction. A bidder who 
    withdraws a high bid during the course of an auction will be subject to 
    a payment equal to the difference between the amount bid and the amount 
    of the winning bid the next time the license if offered by the 
    Commission. No withdrawal payment would be assessed if the subsequent 
    winning bid exceeds the withdrawn bid. This payment amount will be 
    deducted from any upfront payments or down payments that the 
    withdrawing bidder has deposited with the Commission.
        (c) Default or disqualification after close of auction. If a high 
    bidder defaults or is disqualified after the close of such an auction, 
    the defaulting bidder will be subject to the payment in paragraph (a) 
    of this section plus an additional penalty equal to three (3) percent 
    of the subsequent winning bid. If the subsequent winning bid exceeds 
    the defaulting bidder's bid amount, the 3 percent payment will be 
    calculated based on the defaulting bidder's bid amount. These amounts 
    will be deducted from any upfront payments or down payments that the 
    defaulting or disqualified bidder has deposited with the Commission.
    
    
    Sec. 90.806  Bidding application (FCC Form 175 and 175-S Short-form).
    
        All applicants to participate in competitive bidding for 900 MHz 
    SMR licenses must submit applications on FCC Forms 175 and 175-S 
    pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 1.2105 of this Chapter. The Wireless 
    Telecommunications Bureau will issue a Public Notice announcing the 
    availability of 900 MHz SMR licenses and, in the event that mutually 
    exclusive applications are filed, the date of the auction for those 
    licenses. This Public Notice also will specify the date on or before 
    which applicants intending to participate in a 900 MHz SMR auction must 
    file their application in order to be eligible for that auction, and it 
    will contain information necessary for completion of the application as 
    well as other important information such as the materials which must 
    accompany the Forms, any filing fee that must accompany the application 
    or any upfront payment that will need to be submitted, and the location 
    where the application must be filed. In addition to identifying its 
    status as a small business or rural telephone company, each applicant 
    must indicate whether it is a minority-owned entity, as defined in 
    Sec. 90.814(g) and/or a women-owned entity.
    
    
    Sec. 90.807  Submission of upfront payments and down payments.
    
        (a) Bidders in the 900 MHz SMR auction will be required to submit 
    an upfront payment of $0.02 per pop per MHz, in accordance with 
    Sec. 1.2106 of this Chapter.
        (b) Winning bidders in a 900 MHz SMR auction must submit a down 
    payment to the Commission in an amount sufficient to bring their total 
    deposits up to 20 percent of their winnings bids, and in accordance 
    with Sec. 1.2107(b) of this chapter, except for small businesses that 
    are winning bidders, which are governed by Sec. 90.811. [[Page 22032]] 
    
    
    Sec. 90.808  Long-form applications.
    
        Each winning bidder will be required to submit a long-form 
    application on FCC Form 600 within ten (10) business days after being 
    notified by Public Notice that it is the winning bidder. Applications 
    on FCC Form 600 shall be submitted pursuant to the procedures set forth 
    in 90.119 of this Part and any associated Public Notices. Only auction 
    winners (and rural telephone companies seeking partitioned licenses 
    pursuant to agreements with auction winners under Sec. 90.813) will be 
    eligible to file applications on FCC Form 600 for initial 900 MHz SMR 
    licenses in the event of mutual exclusivity between applicants filing 
    Form 175.
    
    
    Sec. 90.809  License grant, denial, default, and disqualification.
    
        (a) Except with respect to entities eligible for installment 
    payments (see Sec. 90.812) each winning bidder will be required to pay 
    the balance of its winning bid in a lump sum payment within five (5) 
    business days following Public Notice that the license is ready for 
    grant. The Commission will grant the license within ten (10) business 
    days after receipt of full and timely payment of the winning bid 
    amount.
        (b) A bidder who withdraws its bid subsequent to the close of 
    bidding, defaults on a payment due, or is disqualified, will be subject 
    to the payments specified in Sec. 90.805 or Sec. 1.2109 of this 
    Chapter, as applicable.
        (c) MTA licenses pursued through competitive bidding procedures 
    will be granted pursuant to the requirements specified in Sec. 90.166.
    
    
    Sec. 90.810  Bidding credits for small businesses.
    
        (a) A winning bidder that qualifies as a small business or a 
    consortium of small businesses, (as defined in Sec. 90.814) may use a 
    bidding credit of 10 percent to lower the cost of its winning bid on 
    any of the blocks identified in Sec. 90.617(d), Table 4B.
        (b) Unjust Enrichment. (1) If a licensee that utilizes a bidding 
    credit under this section seeks to assign or transfer control of its 
    license to an entity not meeting the eligibility standards for bidding 
    credits or seeks to make any other change in ownership that would 
    result in the licensee no longer qualifying for bidding credits under 
    this section, the licensee must seek Commission approval of such 
    assignment, transfer or other ownership change.
        (2) If a licensee that utilizes a bidding credit under this section 
    seeks to assign or transfer control of its license to an entity meeting 
    the eligibility standards for lower bidding credits or seeks to make 
    any other change in ownership that would result in the licensee 
    qualifying for a lower bidding credit under this section, the licensee 
    must seek Commission approval and reimburse the government for the 
    difference between the amount of the bidding credit obtained by the 
    licensee and the bidding credit for which the assignee, transferee or 
    licensee is eligible under this section as a condition of the approval 
    of such assignment, transfer or other ownership change.
    
    
    Sec. 90.811  Reduced down payment for licenses won by small businesses.
    
        Each winning bidder that qualifies as a small business shall make a 
    down payment equal to ten percent of its winning bid (less applicable 
    bidding credits); a winning bidder shall bring its total amount on 
    deposit with the Commission (including upfront payment) to five percent 
    of its net winning bid within five (5) business days after the auction 
    closes, and the remainder of the down payment (five percent) shall be 
    paid within five (5) business days following Public Notice that the 
    license is ready for grant. The Commission will grant the license 
    within ten (10) business days after receipt of the remainder of the 
    down payment.
    Sec. 90.812  Installment payments for licenses won by small businesses.
    
        (a) Each licensee that qualifies as a small business may pay the 
    remaining 90 percent of the net auction price for the license in 
    installment payments pursuant to Sec. 1.210(e) of this chapter.
        (b) Interest shall be imposed based on the rate for ten-year U.S. 
    Treasury obligations applicable on the date the license is granted, 
    plus 2.5 percent; payments shall include interest only for the first 
    two years and payments of interest and principal amortized over the 
    remaining eight years of the license term.
        (c) Unjust Enrichment. (1) If a licensee that utilizes installment 
    financing under this section seeks to assign or transfer control of its 
    license to an entity not meeting the eligibility standards for 
    installment payments, the licensee must make full payment of the 
    remaining unpaid principal and any unpaid interest accrued through the 
    date of assignment or transfer as a condition of approval.
        (2) If a licensee that utilizes installment financing under this 
    section seeks to make any change in ownership structure that would 
    result in the licensee losing eligibility for installment payments, the 
    licensee shall first seek Commission approval and must make full 
    payment of the remaining unpaid principal and any unpaid interest 
    accrued through the date of such change as a condition of approval.
    
    
    Sec. 90.813  Procedures for partitioned licenses.
    
        (a) Notwithstanding Sec. 90.661, an applicant that is rural 
    telephone company, as defined in Sec. 90.814, may be granted a 900 MHz 
    SMR license that is geographically partitioned from a separately 
    licensed MTA, so long as the MTA applicant or licensee has voluntarily 
    agreed (in writing) to partition a portion of the license to the rural 
    telephone company.
        (b) If partitioned licenses are being applied for in conjunction 
    with a license(s) to be awarded through competitive bidding 
    procedures--
        (1) The applicable procedures for filing short-form applications 
    and for submitting upfront payments and down payments contained in this 
    Part and Part 1 of this Chapter shall be followed by the applicant, who 
    must disclose as part of its short-form application all parties to 
    agreement(s) with or among rural telephone companies to partition the 
    license pursuant to this section, if won at auction (see 47 CFR 
    Sec. 1.2105(a)(2)(viii) of this Chapter);
        (2) Each rural telephone company that is a party to an agreement to 
    partition the license shall file a long-form application for its 
    respective, mutually agreed-upon geographic area together with the 
    application for the remainder of the MTA filed by the auction winner.
        (c) If the partitioned license is being applied for as a partial 
    assignment of the MTA license following grant of the initial license, 
    request for authorization for partial assignment of a license shall be 
    made pursuant to Sec. 90.153.
        (d) Each application for a partitioned area (long-form initial 
    application or partial assignment application) shall contain a 
    partitioning plan that must propose to establish a partitioned area to 
    be licensed that meets the following criteria:
        (1) Conforms to established geopolitical boundaries (such as county 
    lines);
        (2) Includes the wireline service area of the rural telephone 
    company applicant; and
        (3) Is reasonable related to the rural telephone company's wireline 
    service area.
    
        Note: A partitioned service area will be presumed to be 
    reasonably related to the rural telephone company's wireline service 
    area if the partitioned service area contains no more than twice the 
    population overlap between the rural telephone company's 
    [[Page 22033]] wireline service area and the partitioned area.
    
        (e) Each licensee in each partitioned area will be responsible for 
    meeting the construction requirements in its area (see Sec. 90.665).
    
    
    Sec. 90.814  Definitions.
    
        (a) Scope. The definitions in this section apply to Secs. 90.810 
    through 90.813, unless otherwise specified in those sections.
        (b) Small Business: Consortium of Small Businesses. (1) A small 
    business is an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or 
    entities that hold attributable interests in such entity and their 
    affiliates, have average gross revenues for the three preceding years 
    of less than $3 million.
        (2) A small business consortium is conglomerate organization formed 
    as a joint venture between or among mutually-independent business 
    firms, each of which individually satisfies the definition of a small 
    business in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
        (c) Rural Telephone Company. A rural telephone company is a local 
    exchange carrier having 100,000 or fewer access lines, including all 
    affiliates.
        (d) Gross Revenues. Gross revenues shall mean all income received 
    by an entity, whether earned or passive, before any deductions are made 
    for costs of doing business (e.g., cost of goods sold), as evidenced by 
    audited financial statements for the relevant number of calendar years 
    preceding January 1, 1994, or, If audited financial statements were not 
    prepared on a calendar-year basis, of the most recently completed 
    fiscal years preceding the filing of the applicant's short-form 
    application (Form 175). For applications filed after December 31, 1994, 
    gross revenues shall be evidenced by audited financial statements for 
    the preceding relevant number of calendar or fiscal years. If an entity 
    was not in existence for all or part of the relevant period, gross 
    revenues shall be evidenced by the audited financial statements of the 
    entity's predecessor-in-interest or, if there is no identifiable 
    predecessor-in-interest, unaudited financial statements certified by 
    the applicant as accurate.
        (e) Business Owned by Members of Minority Groups and/or Women. A 
    business owned by members of minority groups and/or women is one in 
    which minorities and/or women who are U.S. citizens control the 
    applicant, have at least 50.1 percent equity ownership and, in the case 
    of a corporate applicant, a 50.1 percent voting interest. For 
    applicants that are partnerships, every general partner either must be 
    a minority and/or woman (or minorities and/or women) who are U.S. 
    citizens and who individually or together own at least 50.1 percent of 
    the partnership equity, or an entity that is 100 percent owned and 
    controlled by minorities and/or women who are U.S. citizens. The 
    interest of minorities and women are to be calculated on a fully-
    diluted basis; agreements such as stock options and convertible 
    debentures shall be considered to have a present effect on the power to 
    control an entity and shall be treated as if the rights thereunder 
    already have been fully exercised. However, upon a demonstration that 
    options or conversion rights held by non-controlling principals will 
    not deprive the minority and female principals of a substantial 
    financial stake in the venture or impair their rights to control the 
    designated entity, a designated entity may seek a waiver of the 
    requirement that the equity of the minority and female principals must 
    be calculated on a fully-diluted basis.
        (f) Members of Minority Groups. Members of minority groups includes 
    Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Asians, and 
    Pacific Islanders.
        (g) Nonattributable Equity. Nonattributable equity shall mean:
        (1) For corporations, voting stock or non-voting stock that 
    includes no more than 25 percent of the total voting equity, including 
    the right to vote such stock through a voting trust or other 
    arrangement;
        (2) For partnerships, joint ventures and other non-corporate 
    entities, limited partnership interests and similar interests that do 
    not afford the power to exercise control of the entity.
        (h) Affiliate. (1) Basis for Affiliation. An individual or entity 
    is an affiliate of an applicant or of a person holding an attributable 
    interest in an applicant (both referred to herein as ``the applicant'') 
    if such individual or entity:
        (i) Directly or indirectly controls or has the power to control the 
    applicant, or
        (ii) Is directly or indirectly controlled by the applicant, or
        (iii) Is directly or indirectly controlled by a third party or 
    parties that also controls or has the power to control the applicant, 
    or
        (iv) Has an ``identity of interest'' with the applicant.
        (2) Nature of control in determining affiliation.
        (i) Every business concern is considered to have one or more 
    parties who directly or indirectly control or have the power to control 
    it. Control may be affirmative or negative and it is immaterial whether 
    it is exercised so long as the power to control exists.
    
        Example for paragraph (h)(2)(i). An applicant owning 50 percent 
    of the voting stock of another concern would have negative power to 
    control such concern since such party can block any action of the 
    other stockholders. Also, the bylaws of a corporation may permit a 
    stockholder with less than 50 percent of the voting to block any 
    actions taken by the other stockholders in the other entity. 
    Affiliation exists when the applicant has the power to control a 
    concern while at the same time another person, or persons, are in 
    control of the concern at the will of the party or parties with the 
    power of control.
    
        (ii) Control can arise through stock ownership; occupancy of 
    director, officer or key employee positions; contractual or other 
    business relations; or combinations of these and other factors. A key 
    employee is an employee who, because of his/her position in the 
    concern, has a critical influence in or substantive control over the 
    operations or management of the concern.
        (iii) Control can arise through management positions where a 
    concern's voting stock is so widely distributed that no effective 
    control can be established.
    
        Example for paragraph (h)(2)(iii). In a corporation where the 
    officers and directors own various size blocks of stock totaling 40 
    percent of the corporation's voting stock, but no officer or 
    director has a block sufficient to give him or her control or the 
    power to control and the remaining 60 percent is widely distributed 
    with no individual stockholder having a stock interest greater than 
    10 percent, management has the power to control. If persons with 
    such management control of the other entity are persons with 
    attributable interests in the applicant, the other entity will be 
    deemed an affiliate of the applicant.
    
        (3) Identity of interest between and among persons. Affiliation can 
    arise between or among two or more persons with an identity of 
    interest, such as members of the same family or persons with common 
    investments. In determining if the applicant controls or is controlled 
    by a concern, persons with an identity of interest will be treated as 
    though they were one person.
    
        Example 1 for paragraph (h)(3) introductory text. Two 
    shareholders in Corporation Y each have attributable interests in 
    the same SMR application. While neither shareholder has enough 
    shares to individually control Corporation Y, together they have the 
    power to control Corporation Y. The two shareholders with these 
    common investments (or identity of interest) are treated as though 
    they are one person and Corporation Y would be deemed an affiliate 
    of the applicant.
        Example 2 for paragraph (h)(3) introductory text. One 
    shareholder in [[Page 22034]] Corporation Y, shareholder A, has an 
    attributable interest in a SMR application. Another shareholder in 
    Corporation Y, shareholder B, has a nonattributable interest in the 
    same SMR application. While neither shareholder has enough shares to 
    individually control Corporation Y, together they have the power to 
    control Corporation Y. Through the common investment of shareholders 
    A and B in the SMR application, Corporation Y would still be deemed 
    an affiliate of the applicant.
    
        (i) Spousal Affiliation. Both spouses are deemed to own or control 
    or have the power to control interests owned or controlled by either of 
    them, unless they are subject to a legal separation recognized by a 
    court of competent jurisdiction in the United States.
        (ii) Kinship Affiliation. Immediate family members will be presumed 
    to own or control or have the power to control interests owned or 
    controlled by other immediate family members. In this context 
    ``immediate family member'' means father, mother, husband, wife, son, 
    daughter, brother, sister, father- or mother-in-law, son- or daughter-
    in-law, brother- or sister-in-law, step-father, or -mother, step-
    brother, or -sister, step-son, or -daughter, half brother or sister. 
    This presumption may be rebutted by showing that
        (A) The family members are estranged,
        (B) The family ties are remote, or
        (C) The family members are not closely involved with each in 
    business matters.
    
        Example for paragraph (h)(3)(ii). A owns a controlling interest 
    in Corporation X. A's sister-in-law, B, has an attributable interest 
    in an SMR application. Because A and B have a presumptive kinship 
    affiliation, A's interest in Corporation X is attributable to B, and 
    thus to the applicant, unless B rebuts the presumption with the 
    necessary showing.
    
        (4) Affiliation through stock ownership. (i) An applicant is 
    presumed to control or have the power to control a concern if he or she 
    owns or controls or has the power to control 50 percent or more of its 
    voting stock.
        (ii) An applicant is presumed to control or have the power to 
    control a concern even though he or she owns, controls or has the power 
    to control less than 50 percent of the concern's voting stock, if the 
    block of stock he or she owns, controls or has the power to control is 
    large as compared with any other outstanding block of stock.
        (iii) If two or more persons each owns, controls or has the power 
    to control less than 50 percent of the voting stock of a concern, such 
    minority holdings are equal or approximately equal in size, and the 
    aggregate of these minority holdings is large as compared with any 
    other stock holding, the presumption arises that each one of these 
    persons individually controls or has the power to control the concern; 
    however, such presumption may be rebutted by a showing that such 
    control or power to control, in fact, does not exist.
        (5) Affiliation arising under stock options, convertible 
    debentures, and agreements to merge. Stock options, convertible 
    debentures, and agreements to merge (including agreements in principle) 
    are generally considered to have a present effect on the power to 
    control the concern. Therefore, in making a size determination, such 
    options, debentures, and agreements will generally be treated as though 
    the rights held thereunder had been exercised. However, neither an 
    affiliate nor an applicant can use such options and debentures to 
    appear to terminate its control over another concern before it actually 
    does so.
    
        Example 1 for paragraph (h)(5). If company B holds an option to 
    purchase a controlling interest in company A, who holds an 
    attributable interest in an SMR application, the situation is 
    treated as though company B had exercised its rights and had become 
    owner of a controlling interest in company A. The gross revenues of 
    company B must be taken into account in determining the size of the 
    applicant.
        Example 2 for paragraph (h)(5). If a large company, BigCo, holds 
    70% (70 of 100 outstanding shares) of the voting stock of company A, 
    who holds an attributable interest in an SMR application, and gives 
    a third party, SmallCo, an option to purchase 50 of the 70 shares 
    owned by BigCo, BigCo will be deemed to be an affiliate of company, 
    and thus the applicant, until SmallCo actually exercises its options 
    to purchase such shares. In order to prevent BigCo from 
    circumventing the intent of the rule which requires such options to 
    be considered on a fully diluted basis, the option is not considered 
    to have present effect in this case.
        Example 3 for paragraph (h)(5). If company A has entered into an 
    agreement to merge with company B in the future, the situation is 
    treated as though the merger has taken place.
    
        (6) Affiliation under voting trusts. (i) Stock interests held in 
    trust shall be deemed controlled by any person who holds or shares the 
    power to vote such stock, to any person who has the sole power to sell 
    such stock, and to any person who has the right to revoke the trust at 
    will or to replace the trustee at will.
        (ii) If a trustee has a familial, personal or extra-trust business 
    relationship to the grantor or the beneficiary, the stock interests 
    held in trust will be deemed controlled by the grantor or beneficiary, 
    as appropriate.
        (iii) If the primary purpose of a voting trust, or similar 
    agreement, is to separate voting power from beneficial ownership of 
    voting stock for the purpose of shifting control of or the power to 
    control a concern in order that such concern or another concern may 
    meet the Commission's size standards, such voting trust shall not be 
    considered valid for this purpose regardless of whether it is or is not 
    recognized within the appropriate jurisdiction.
        (7) Affiliation through common management. Affiliation generally 
    arises where officers, directors, or key employees serve as the 
    majority or otherwise as the controlling element of the board of 
    directors and/or the management of another entity.
        (8) Affiliation through common facilities. Affiliation generally 
    arises where one concern shares office space and/or employees and/or 
    other facilities with another concern, particularly where such concerns 
    are in the same or related industry or field of operations, or where 
    such concerns were formerly affiliated, and through these sharing 
    arrangements one concern has control, or potential control, of the 
    other concern.
        (9) Affiliation through contractual relationships. Affiliation 
    generally arises where one concern is dependent upon another concern 
    for contracts and business to such a degree that one concern has 
    control, or potential control, of the other concern.
        (10) Affiliation under joint venture arrangements. (i) A joint 
    venture for size determination purposes is an association of concerns 
    and/or individuals, with interests in any degree or proportion, formed 
    by contract, express or implied, to engage in and carry out a single, 
    specific business venture for joint profit for which purpose they 
    combine their efforts, property, money, skill and knowledge, but not on 
    a continuing or permanent basis for conducting business generally. The 
    determination whether an entity is a joint venture is based upon the 
    facts of the business operation, regardless of how the business 
    operation may be designated by the parties involved. An agreement to 
    share profits/losses proportionate to each party's contribution to the 
    business operation is a significant factor in determining whether the 
    business operation is a joint venture.
        (ii) The parties to a joint venture are considered to be affiliated 
    with each other.
    
    [FR Doc. 95-11010 Filed 5-2-95; 12:52 pm]
    BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
    
    

Document Information

Published:
05/04/1995
Department:
Federal Communications Commission
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
95-11010
Dates:
Comments must be filed on or before May 24, 1995, and reply comments must be filed on or before June 1, 1995.
Pages:
22023-22034 (12 pages)
Docket Numbers:
PR Docket No. 89-553, GN Docket No. 93-252, PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 95-159
PDF File:
95-11010.pdf
CFR: (18)
47 CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(viii)
47 CFR 90.814(g)
47 CFR 309(j)(4)(D)
47 CFR 1.2106
47 CFR 90.801
More ...