Federal Communications Commission fcc 13-50 Before the Federal Communications Commission
Filing and Processing of Petitions for Declaratory Rulings
Download 0.66 Mb.
|
Filing and Processing of Petitions for Declaratory RulingsThe Commission proposed in the NPRM to continue to place section 310(b)(4) petitions on public notice as accepted for filing after International Bureau staff has reviewed the petition for completeness; ensure that the appropriate Executive Branch agencies receive a copy of the petition; and act on the petition after the agencies have completed their review and in light of any comments or objections that the agencies or other interested parties file for the record.277 The Commission stated that it would continue to act on section 310(b)(4) petitions by public notice or formal written order, and, unless otherwise specified in the ruling, the ruling would be issued subject to the standard terms and conditions adopted in this proceeding and codified in the Commission’s rules.278 At the same time, the Commission sought comment on whether the Commission should extend its current “streamlined” processing procedures to include a broader range of section 310(b)(4) petitions.279 The Commission also asked whether there may be additional ways to accelerate the section 310(b)(4) review process.280 In the Foreign Participation Order, the Commission adopted “streamlined” processing procedures for certain types of section 310(b)(4) petitions, including any petition for declaratory ruling that it would not serve the public interest to deny (1) a Title III common carrier license to a particular entity; (2) permission for an existing common carrier radio licensee to exceed 25 percent indirect foreign ownership; and (3) permission to increase a licensee’s level of non-controlling indirect foreign ownership when permission to exceed 25 percent has already been granted.281 The Commission stated that it would not streamline petitions that also involve an assignment of license or a transfer of control or any initial licensing applications, which involve service-specific rules and other portions of Title III of the Act.282 Commission staff retained the discretion to deem a petition ineligible for streamlined processing either because it raises market power concerns or because an Executive Branch agency raises concerns with respect to issues within its expertise.283 The Commission observed in the NPRM that, as a practical matter, very few section 310(b)(4) petitions are eligible for streamlined processing under the standards established in the Foreign Participation Order because most petitions are filed in connection with an application for an initial license or to assign or transfer control of a license, or in connection with a spectrum leasing arrangement.284 Many industry commenters ask that we extend our streamlined processing procedures and further modify our procedures to reduce the period of time between the filing of a petition and Commission action on it. SIA supports extending the current streamlined procedures to all section 310(b)(4) petitions, with further review permitted in the event the Executive Branch raises national security concerns.285 Vodafone recommends, as part of its proposed “notice framework,” that all notices of foreign ownership be deemed automatically approved 30 days after receipt, unless the Commission blocks the investment or indicates that Commission action will be delayed because of concerns raised by the Executive Branch.286 USTelecom asks that we establish a specific timeline, such as 90 days, for Executive Branch review.287 The Departments ask that any extension of the streamlined procedures be accompanied by “an extended timeframe which would allow the Departments adequate time, as necessary, to seek further information from petitioners and to properly evaluate that information.”288 The Departments state that they otherwise may not be able to meet shorter deadlines despite their best efforts.289 We are concerned that the proposed changes offered by industry commenters would compromise the ability of the Commission and relevant Executive Branch agencies to engage in a meaningful review of petitions for national security and law enforcement concerns and to remedy those concerns as needed. We find that several considerations weigh in favor of retaining the Commission’s current approach to streamlining section 310(b)(4) petitions and extending that approach to petitions filed under our section 310(b)(3) forbearance approach. First, we anticipate that adoption of the rules set out in this Second Report and Order will reduce the number of petitions that licensees will need to file after issuance of an initial ruling and reduce the amount of information required to be submitted in petitions.290 Thus, we expect that, overall, the effect of the rules adopted in this Second Report and Order will be to reduce substantially the costs and burdens, including the regulatory delay, associated with foreign investment in common carrier and aeronautical licensees. Second, where a petition is filed in connection with an application for an initial license or a transfer/assignment of license, we believe it would be imprudent to allow for automatic grant of the petition 14 days after issuing public notice under our streamlined procedures.291 The pleading cycle in the licensing proceeding may extend beyond the 14-day pleading period for streamlined petitions, and comments or oppositions filed in the licensing proceeding may raise issues relevant to the petition. Third, we believe it would be difficult and unreasonable for the Commission to adopt a uniform period within which the Commission must act on a petition regardless of whether the Executive Branch has completed its review. As the Departments state, the review process involves the participation of the relevant Executive Branch agencies as well as the petitioners, which, we note, may require varying amounts of time to respond to the agencies’ request for additional information.292 And, we note that each case presents particular circumstances that may require negotiation of a security agreement among the parties. We therefore will maintain our current streamlining procedures for processing section 310(b)(4) petitions and the existing categories of section 310(b)(4) petitions subject to streamlined processing. We will also apply the same procedures to the processing of petitions for declaratory ruling under our section 310(b)(3) forbearance approach. As a final matter, we adopt a general rule to provide guidance as to a licensee’s obligation to obtain a section 310(b)(3) ruling when it has already received a section 310(b)(4) ruling and vice versa. Section 1.990 of the rules will provide that, where a common carrier licensee obtains a section 310(b)(4) ruling to allow foreign ownership of its U.S. parent to exceed 25 percent, but then seeks to accept foreign investment that would be held in the licensee through U.S.-organized entities that do not control the licensee, the licensee must file a petition for declaratory ruling under our section 310(b)(3) forbearance approach before such additional foreign interests, aggregated with any foreign interests held directly in the licensee, exceed 20 percent of the licensee’s equity and/or voting interests.293 Conversely, where the licensee first obtains a foreign ownership ruling under our section 310(b)(3) forbearance approach and then, for example, a foreign-organized company seeks to acquire all of the capital stock of the licensee’s controlling U.S. parent, the licensee must file (in conjunction with a section 310(d) application) a petition to obtain prior approval for its U.S. parent’s foreign ownership under section 310(b)(4).294 Directory: edocs public -> attachmatch attachmatch -> Commissioner ajit pai attachmatch -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D attachmatch -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D attachmatch -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D attachmatch -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D attachmatch -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D attachmatch -> Federal Communications Commission fcc 15-77 Before the Federal Communications Commission attachmatch -> Statement of commissioner ajit pai Download 0.66 Mb. Share with your friends:
|