BB Final Rule

37121

Rules and Regulations

Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 111
Thursday, June 9, 2016

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Utilities Service
7 CFR Part 1738
RIN 0572–AC06

Rural Broadband Access Loans and
Loan Guarantees
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule; confirmation.
AGENCY:

The Rural Utilities Service
(RUS), hereinafter referred to as the
Agency, is confirming the interim final
rule published in the Federal Register
on July 30, 2015, which amends its
regulation for the Rural Broadband
Access Loan and Loan Guarantee
Program (Broadband Loan Program).
DATES: Effective June 9, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keith Adams, Assistant Administrator,
Telecommunications Program, Rural
Utilities Program, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue
SW., STOP 1590, Room 5151–S,
Washington, DC 20250–1590.
Telephone number: (202) 720–9554,
Facsimile: (202) 720–0810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since the
inception of the Broadband Loan
Program, the Agency has faced, and
continues to face, significant challenges
in delivering the program due to the
following factors: (1) The significant
number of applicants proposing to offer
broadband service that are start-ups
with limited resources; (2) the continual
evolution of telecommunications
technology; and (3) the associated
higher costs of serving rural
communities. With the enactment of the
Agricultural Act of 2014 (the 2014 Farm
Bill), the Broadband Loan Program has
been significantly modified, and was
suspended while the Agency revised
this regulation. Given that the program
was unable to operate during the

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

14:17 Jun 08, 2016

Jkt 238001

revision, the Agency published an
interim rule on July 30, 2015 in the
Federal Register (80 FR 45397) so that
the program could immediately reopen.
The Agency invited comments to guide
its efforts in drafting the new
procedures implementing the 2014
Farm Bill and received comments from
the National Cable &
Telecommunications Association, WTAAdvocates for Rural Broadband and Mr.
James Cook. These comments and the
Agency’s responses are summarized as
follows:
Broadband Service and Broadband
Lending Speed Definitions
Comment: Respondents commented
that the definitions for Broadband
Service, which sets the eligibility
standard for an area, and Broadband
Lending Speed, which sets the
construction standard, are too low and
should be raised to higher standards to
be more in line with the current Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
definition for broadband of 25 megabits
downstream and 3 megabits upstream.
Response: As the respondents noted
in their comments, the regulation
establishes a process to change these
definitions by publishing new
requirements when a NOSA/NOFA is
published opening up an application
window. The Agency agrees that higher
definitions would be beneficial to rural
residents. However, when these
definitions are set, it is not only the
bandwidth requirement for rural areas
that is considered but also the amount
of funding that is available for any given
application window. If a higher
definition for bandwidth is used, more
of the country then becomes eligible for
funding. When limited funding is
available, the Agency has to ensure that
those funds are directed to the most
unserved rural areas. The Agency will
re-evaluate these requirements every
time a NOSA/NOFA is published and
set the standards accordingly.
Overbuilding
Comment: Respondents commented
that the RUS investment should go into
unserved areas and that the Agency
count all terrestrial providers in the
proposed service territory when
determining area eligibility.
Response: RUS agrees that unserved
areas should be the target of the
program. To ensure that all terrestrial
broadband providers are counted in an

PO 00000

Frm 00001

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

area where an application is being
considered, RUS has developed a multilayer approach to locate them. First,
when an application is submitted, the
proposed service territory maps will be
posted online utilizing the RUS
Mapping Tool and existing service
providers may respond to the public
notice. If three or more existing
providers are identified in the area and
they meet the minimum eligibility
speeds, then that area is considered
ineligible for funding. If no providers
respond to the public notice, then the
Agency will have its field staff visit the
proposed service area and locate all
broadband providers in the area. The
field staff will contact these providers
and request that they respond to the
public notice.
Area Eligibility
Comment: One respondent suggested
that instead of three incumbents making
a service area ineligible for funding, that
the requirement be changed to two
incumbents. The respondent also
suggested that the definition of
broadband service be raised to the
current FCC definition for broadband of
25 megabits downstream and three
megabits upstream.
Response: Although there is merit in
using a higher bandwidth definition to
determine area eligibility, the
requirement that three incumbents in an
area make that area ineligible is a
statutory requirement and cannot be
changed. The regulation does allow for
the eligibility definition to be changed
and the Agency will consider higher
speeds whenever a NOSA/NOFA is
published. As stated previously, the
Agency must also recognize the amount
of funding that is available each time an
application window is opened and will
set the eligibility definition accordingly.
Affordable Rates
Comment: One commenter reiterated
that broadband service in rural areas
needs to be affordable.
Response: Applicants must complete
a market survey and a competitive
analysis of all providers in the proposed
service area as part of the application.
This ensures that price points are set at
the proper level for the area in question
and that the operation is sustainable.
There is a balance between providing
high quality broadband service and
charging the appropriate rate. It must be
recognized that in less dense population

E:\FR\FM\09JNR1.SGM

09JNR1

37122

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 111 / Thursday, June 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

areas, it may be necessary to charge a
higher rate to ensure the viability of the
operation.
Affiliated Companies
Comment: One commenter proposed
that affiliate or affiliated companies
providing broadband service in the
same proposed funded service area
should be recognized as one incumbent
service provider when considering if an
area is eligible for funding.
Response: Each company that is
providing broadband service in an area
and meets the definition of an
incumbent service provider will be
counted as an incumbent service
provider in determining the eligibility of
an area. RUS cannot treat legally
established companies properly acting
as independent companies as the same
entity.

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES

Broadband Usage Restrictions
Comment: One commenter
recommended that if a company has
capped the amount of bandwidth that is
allowed for a given period, that
additional standards should be
established in determining if this
provider would be counted as an
incumbent service provider when
determining service eligibility.
Response: The Agency appreciates
this suggestion and will consider it
during the next revision to the
regulation. The main goal of the
program is to provide funding to areas
that do not have any broadband service.
Most companies that cap bandwidth
have options where a consumer can buy
more bandwidth at an additional cost.
Wireless Broadband Service
Comment: One commenter
recommended that wireless solutions
for broadband service should be
validated during busy hour/busy time
when determining if the wireless
provider meets the definition for an
incumbent service provide when
determining area eligibility.
Response: There are many levels of
providing broadband service and a
number of ways for determining this.
The Agency has elected to use
advertised broadband rates that are
being sold and to validate that this level
of service is being provided in an area.
We will consider implementing
additional tests the next time the
regulation is revised. If tests of this
nature are implemented for wireless
service providers then corresponding
tests will have to be implemented for
wireline service providers.
The Agency appreciates the interest of
the commenters and thanks them for
their comment submissions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

14:17 Jun 08, 2016

Jkt 238001

The Rural Utilities Service did not
receive any significant adverse
comments during the public comment
period on the interim rule, and therefore
confirms the rule without change.
PART 1738—RURAL BROADBAND
ACCESS LOANS AND LOAN
GUARANTEES
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 7 CFR part 1738 which was
published at 80 FR 45397 on July 30,
2015, is adopted as a final rule without
change.
Dated: May 26, 2016.
Brandon McBride,
Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–13302 Filed 6–8–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–4233; Directorate
Identifier 2016–CE–003–AD; Amendment
39–18540; AD 2016–11–13]
RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BLANIK
LIMITED Gliders
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:

We are superseding
airworthiness directive (AD) 99–19–33
for BLANIK LIMITED Models L–13
Blanik and L–13 AC Blanik gliders (type
certificate previously held by LET
Aeronautical Works). This AD results
from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as lack of distinct color
marking of the elevator drive. We are
issuing this AD to require actions to
address the unsafe condition on these
products.
DATES: This AD is effective July 14,
2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain other publication listed in
this AD as of November 8, 1999 (64 FR
50440, September 17, 1999).
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

4233; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact BLANIK LIMITED, 2nd
Floor Beaux Lane House, Mercer Street
Lower, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland;
phone: +420 733 662 194; email: info@
blanik.aero; Internet: http://
www.blanik.aero/
%EF%BB%BFcustomer_support. You
may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call (816) 329–4148. It is also available
on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
Docket No. FAA–2016–4233.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer, 901
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4165; fax: (816) 329–4090; email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would
apply to BLANIK LIMITED Models L–13
Blanik and L–13 AC Blanik gliders. That
NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on March 4, 2016 (81 FR
11473), and proposed to supersede AD
99–19–33, Amendment 39–11320 (64
FR 50440; September 17, 1999) (‘‘AD
99–19–33’’).
The NPRM proposed to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified
products and was based on mandatory
continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country. The MCAI
states that:
Colour marking of elevator drive is not
inspected or re-painted during sailplane
operation. The elevator drive is asymmetrical
and improper installation causes significant
elevator deflection changes.

The MCAI can be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at: https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2016-42330003.
A review of records since issuance of
AD 99–19–33 revealed that the FAA
inadvertently did not address this MCAI
for the EVEKTOR, spol. s.r.o. Models L
13 SEH VIVAT and L 13 SDM VIVAT
gliders and the BLANIK LIMITED
Model L–13 AC Blanik gliders. This AD
would supersede AD 99–19–13 to add

E:\FR\FM\09JNR1.SGM

09JNR1