Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11497 

2 80 FR 13,304 (Mar. 13, 2015) (RIN 1506–AB30). 

FinCEN publicly announced the finding and NPRM 

on March 10, 2015. 

3Press Release, AREB, AREB Assumes the 

Tutelage of BPA, April 27, 2015, (http://areb.ad/ 

images/areb/comunicats/ 

27042015_AREB_ENG.pdf) 

4Press Release, AREB, AREB Will Create a ‘Good 

Bank’ with Legitimate Assets and Liabilities 

Segregated from BPA, June 15, 2015, (http:// 

areb.ad/images/areb/comunicats/ 

15062015_AREB_ENG.pdf) 

comment.2 Specifically, FinCEN 

proposed to prohibit covered financial 

institutions from establishing, 

maintaining, administering, or 

managing in the United States any 

correspondent account for, or on behalf 

of, BPA. FinCEN also proposed to 

require a covered financial institution to 

apply special due diligence to all of its 

foreign correspondent accounts that is 

reasonably designed to guard against 

processing transactions involving BPA. 

Among other things, covered financial 

institutions would have been required 

to notify those foreign correspondent 

account holders that the covered 

financial institutions know or have 

reason to know provide services to BPA 

that such correspondents may not 

provide BPA with access to the 

correspondent account maintained at 

the covered financial institution. 

III. Subsequent Developments 

Significant developments regarding 

BPA have occurred since FinCEN 

announced its finding and related 

NPRM regarding BPA, as described 

below. As a result, BPA is no longer 

operating as a financial institution that 

poses a money laundering threat to the 

U.S. financial system. 

On March 11, 2015, the Institut 

Nacional Andorra` de Finances 

(‘‘INAF’’), the Andorran regulator and 

supervisor of financial institutions, 

appointed two INAF representatives to 

oversee BPA’s operations. On March 12, 

2015, the INAF suspended the authority 

of BPA’s board of directors, the chief 

executive officer and two other senior 

managers and appointed special 

administrators to assume full control of 

BPA. On March 13, 2015, Andorran law 

enforcement arrested BPA’s chief 

executive officer in Andorra on 

suspicion of money laundering. 

The next month, in April 2015, the 

Andorran parliament enacted a law 

regarding the restructuring and 

resolution of banks, which created a 

new government agency, Age`ncia 

Estatal de Resolucio ́ d’Entitats Banca`ries 

(‘‘AREB’’), for that purpose. On April 

27, 2015, AREB took over control of 

BPA.3 In June 2015, AREB approved a 

resolution plan for BPA, under which 

the bank’s ‘‘good’’ and ‘‘bad’’ assets, 

liabilities, and clients would be 

separated. Under the resolution plan, 

the ‘‘good’’ assets, liabilities, and clients 

are to be transferred to a bridge bank, 

and the bridge bank sold.4 In July 2015, 

AREB announced the creation of the 

bridge bank, named Vall Banc, to 

receive the transfer of BPA’s legitimate 

assets, liabilities, and clients. Vall Banc 

is wholly-owned by AREB, is registered 

with the INAF, and is supervised by 

Andorran banking supervisory 

authorities. Vall Banc will not employ 

the high-level BPA managers described 

in FinCEN’s Notice of Finding. In 

addition, any other person who has 

been or may be identified as related to 

the issues described in the Notice of 

Finding will not be employed at Vall 

Banc. 

After the good assets, liabilities, and 

clients are transferred from BPA to Vall 

Banc, BPA will remain under the 

control of AREB. FinCEN understands 

that BPA will not be reactivated as an 

operational financial institution at any 

point except to facilitate the finalization 

of the resolution process. AREB, in 

coordination with other authorities in 

Andorra, ultimately intends to liquidate 

BPA following the resolution of judicial 

proceedings in Andorra and other 

jurisdictions. 

IV. Withdrawal of the NPRM 

Because of these subsequent 

developments, BPA no longer operates 

in a manner that poses a money 

laundering threat to the U.S. financial 

system. FinCEN has determined that the 

steps taken by the authorities in 

Andorra sufficiently protect the U.S. 

financial system from the money 

laundering risks previously associated 

with BPA. FinCEN therefore has 

determined that BPA no longer is a 

primary money laundering concern and 

will not impose any special measures 

under Section 311 with respect to BPA. 

For these reasons, FinCEN hereby 

withdraws its NPRM published on 

March 13, 2015, and announced on 

March 10, 2015, seeking to impose the 

fifth special measure regarding BPA. 

Jamal El-Hindi, 

Deputy Director, Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04768 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–02–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2015–0353, FRL–9943–24– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Alaska: 

Updates to Incorporation by Reference 

and Miscellaneous Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to approve 

certain State Implementation Plan 

revisions submitted by Alaska on May 

12, 2015. The revisions updated the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

Federal provisions, revised rules to 

reflect changes to Federal permitting 

requirements and the 2013 

redesignation of the Mendenhall Valley 

area of Juneau, and made minor 

clarifications. We note that the May 12, 

2015 submission also addressed 

transportation conformity and 

infrastructure requirements. These 

requirements are not being addressed in 

this action. We approved the 

transportation conformity revisions in a 

previous action on September 8, 2015 

and we intend to address the 

infrastructure requirements in a 

separate, future action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 4, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2015–0353, at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from http://

www.regulations.gov. The EPA may 

publish any comment received to its 

public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 

video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 

written comment. The written comment 

is considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e. on the web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11498 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information the disclosure of which is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA 

Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Hall at (206) 553–6357 or 

hall.kristin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Analysis of Rule Updates 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) governs the process by which a 

state submits air quality requirements to 

the EPA for approval into the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is a 

state’s plan to implement, maintain and 

enforce the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) set by the 

EPA. Alaska’s air quality regulations are 

set forth at Alaska Administrative Code 

Title 18 Environmental Conservation, 

Chapter 50 Air Quality Control (18 AAC 

50). Alaska regularly revises these and 

other rules to implement, maintain and 

enforce the standards. 

We note that Alaska incorporates by 

reference portions of certain Federal 

regulations directly into the Alaska SIP. 

Alaska generally submits an annual 

update to the EPA to ensure that its 

rules stay consistent with Federal 

requirements. On May 12, 2015, Alaska 

submitted such an update, and included 

other revisions to account for changes to 

Federal permitting rules and the 2013 

redesignation of the Mendenhall Valley 

area of Juneau. Alaska also included 

some minor rule clarifications and edits. 

We note that the May 12, 2015 

submission also addressed 

transportation conformity and 

infrastructure-related requirements. 

These requirements are not being 

addressed in this action. We previously 

approved the transportation conformity 

revisions on September 8, 2015 (80 FR 

53735). We intend to address the 

infrastructure requirements in a 

separate, future action. 

II. Analysis of Rule Updates 

Ambient Air Quality Standards—18 

AAC 50.010 

In the Ambient Air Quality Standards 

rule section, Alaska revised paragraph 

(1)(A) to reference the appropriate 

Federal interpretation method for 

determining compliance with the 24- 

hour standard for particulate matter 

with an aerodynamic diameter less than 

or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 

(PM10). The interpretation method is 

specified at 40 CFR part 50, Appendix 

K, and Alaska incorporates this 

provision by reference into the Alaska 

SIP at 18 AAC 50.035(b). We are 

proposing to approve this revision. 

We note that, consistent with our 

September 19, 2014 action, we are not 

approving paragraphs (7) and (8) of this 

section, which establish state ambient 

air quality standards for reduced sulfur 

compounds and ammonia (79 FR 

56268). These are not NAAQS 

established under section 109 of the 

CAA and Alaska has not relied on these 

provisions to demonstrate attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS or to meet 

other specific requirements of section 

110 of the CAA. 

Air Quality Designations—18 AAC 

50.015 

Alaska revised paragraphs (b)(2) and 

(e) of the Air Quality Designations, 

Classifications, and Control Regions 

rule section to reflect the redesignation 

of the Mendenhall Valley area of Juneau 

to attainment for the 24-hour PM10

NAAQS. The EPA approved Alaska’s 

maintenance plan and request to 

redesignate the area on May 9, 2013 (78 

FR 27071). We are proposing to approve 

the update to this rule section to reflect 

the redesignation. 

Baseline Dates and Maximum Allowable 

Increases—18 AAC 50.020 

Alaska updated Table 2 in paragraph 

(a) of the Baseline Dates and Maximum 

Allowable Increases rule section to set 

the minor source baseline date for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) for the 

Northern Alaska Intrastate Air Quality 

Control Region. This baseline date is 

calculated based on a trigger date set in 

Federal major source permitting 

regulations. The baseline date is 

calculated as the date on which the first 

complete Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) permit application 

is received after the EPA trigger date— 

which for PM2.5 is October 20, 2011. For 

this region of Alaska, the minor source 

baseline date is November 2, 2012. 

Emission changes at sources after this 

date consume the PM2.5 PSD increment. 

We are proposing to approve this rule 

revision. 

Documents, Procedures and Methods 

Adopted by Reference—18 AAC 50.035 

Alaska submitted revisions to 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of the Documents, 

Procedures and Methods Adopted by 

Reference rule section to include the 

Quality Assurance Handbook for Air 

Pollutant Measurement Systems and the 

Federal reference method for measuring 

carbon monoxide in ambient air. Alaska 

also repealed the section’s reference to 

a Federal monitoring provision that was 

likewise repealed. The revisions update 

the incorporation by reference of 

specific Federal procedures and 

methods into the Alaska SIP, as of 

February 27, 2014. We are proposing to 

approve the submitted revisions. 

We note that, consistent with our 

September 19, 2014 action, we are not 

approving paragraph (a)(6) of this rule 

section because the provision 

implements requirements of title V of 

the CAA and not requirements of 

section 110 of title I of the CAA. We are 

also not approving paragraph (b)(4) 

which specifies test methods related to 

40 CFR part 63 because it is not related 

to attainment or maintenance of the 

NAAQS or other specific requirements 

of section 110 of the CAA (79 FR 

56268). 

Federal Standards Adopted by 

Reference—18 AAC 50.040 

Alaska submitted revisions to 

paragraphs (f) and (h) of the Federal 

Standards Adopted by Reference rule 

section to update the citation dates for 

the adoption by reference of the Federal 

Guideline on Air Quality Models at 

paragraph (f) and the Federal PSD 

permitting requirements at paragraph 

(h). We are proposing to approve the 

changes to 18 AAC 50.040(f) and (h) 

because they update the Alaska SIP to 

reflect recent changes to Federal 

requirements, including the EPA’s final 

rule to remove specific screening 

provisions from PSD regulations that 

were vacated by a court and 

subsequently repealed by the EPA, as 

discussed below. 

On January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia, 

in Sierra Club v. EPA, 703 F.3d 458 

(D.C. Cir. 2013), issued a judgment that, 

among other things, vacated the 

provisions adding the PM2.5 Significant 

Monitoring Concentration (SMC) to the 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11499 

Federal regulations, at 40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c), 

that were promulgated as part of the 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) for Particulate Matter Less than 

2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and 

Significant Monitoring Concentration 

(SMC); Final Rule,’’ (75 FR 64864, 

October 10, 2010) (2010 PSD PM2.5

Implementation Rule). 

In its decision, the court held that the 

EPA did not have the authority to use 

SMCs to exempt permit applicants from 

statutory requirements related to PSD. 

Although the PM2.5 SMC was not a 

required element of a state’s PSD 

program, were a state PSD program that 

contains such a provision to rely on that 

provision to issue new permits without 

requiring ambient PM2.5 monitoring 

data, such application of the vacated 

SMC would be inconsistent with the 

court’s opinion and the requirements of 

the CAA. 

This decision also—at the EPA’s 

request—vacated and remanded to the 

EPA for further consideration the 

portions of the 2010 PSD PM2.5

Implementation Rule that revised 

certain Federal regulations related to 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) for 

PM2.5. The EPA requested this vacatur 

and remand of two of the three 

provisions in the EPA regulations that 

contain SILs for PM2.5, because the 

wording of these two SIL provisions (40 

CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 40 CFR 

52.21(k)(2)) is inconsistent with the 

explanation of when and how SILs 

should be used by permitting authorities 

that we provided in the preamble to the 

Federal Register publication when we 

promulgated these provisions. The third 

SIL provision (40 CFR 51.165(b)(2)) was 

not vacated and remains in effect. The 

court’s decision does not affect the PSD 

increments for PM2.5 promulgated as 

part of the 2010 PSD PM2.5

Implementation Rule. 

The EPA amended its regulations to 

remove the vacated PM2.5 SILs and SMC 

provisions from PSD regulations on 

December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73698). In 

addition, the EPA is initiating a separate 

rulemaking regarding the PM2.5 SILs that 

will address the court’s remand. 

In the May 12, 2015 submission, 

Alaska updated the citation date for the 

incorporation by reference of Federal 

PSD permitting rules to December 9, 

2013, to capture the EPA’s removal of 

the vacated SILs and SMC provisions. In 

addition, Alaska submitted changes to 

the Ambient Air Quality Analysis 

Methods rule section at 18 AAC 50.215 

to address the court vacatur. These 

changes are discussed below. We are 

proposing to approve the changes to 18 

AAC 50.040(h) and 18 AAC 50.215 as 

being consistent with the court decision 

and revised EPA regulations for the 

PM2.5 SMC and SILs. 

Ambient Air Quality Analysis 

Methods—18 AAC 50.215 

Alaska revised paragraph (a)(3) of the 

Ambient Air Quality Analysis Methods 

rule section to include a reference to the 

Quality Assurance Project Plan for the 

State of Alaska Air Monitoring and 

Quality Assurance Program (QAPP) for 

meteorological data, as adopted by 

reference in 18 AAC 50.030. We are 

proposing to approve the revision 

because the EPA has reviewed and 

approved the QAPP through a separate 

quality assurance/quality control review 

process. 

Alaska revised paragraph (d) of this 

section, intending to align the rule 

language with the explanation of when 

and how SILs should be used by 

permitting authorities that the EPA 

provided in the preamble to the Federal 

Register publication when the 

provisions were originally promulgated 

(October 20, 2010, 75 FR 64864). Alaska 

also updated the SILs table in paragraph 

(d), adding SILs for the annual and 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and for 1-hour 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen 

dioxide (NO2) NAAQS. The SILs values 

in the table are consistent with the 

EPA’s implementing regulations at 40 

CFR 51.165(b) and the EPA’s NO2 and 

SO2 guidance and recommended 

interim SILs for the 1-hour NO2 and 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS. We are proposing to 

approve the revisions as being 

consistent with the January 22, 2013, 

court decision vacating the PM2.5 SILs 

and SMC discussed above. 

Consistent with our previous actions 

on the Alaska SIP, the EPA is proposing 

not to approve paragraph (a)(4), which 

authorizes the Alaska Department of 

Environmental Conservation to approve 

any alternative method that it 

determines is ‘‘representative, accurate, 

verifiable, capable of replication.’’ In 

essence, this subparagraph allows the 

department to modify requirements 

relied on to attain and maintain the 

NAAQS without a SIP revision. For 

additional discussion, please see the 

technical support documents for our 

previous actions on September 19, 2014 

(79 FR 56268) and on August 14, 2007 

(72 FR 45378). See also 78 FR 12460, 

12485–86 (Feb. 22, 2013). 

III. Proposed Action 

We are proposing to approve and 

incorporate by reference into the Alaska 

SIP the following revised provisions, 

state effective April 17, 2015: 

• 18 AAC 50.010 Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, except paragraphs 

(7) and (8); 

• 18 AAC 50.015 Air Quality 

Designations, Classifications, and 

Control Regions; 

• 18 AAC 50.020 Baseline Dates and 

Maximum Allowable Increases; 

• 18 AAC 50.035 Documents, 

Procedures and Methods Adopted by 

Reference, except paragraphs (a)(6) and 

(b)(4); 

• 18 AAC 50.040 Federal Standards 

Adopted by Reference, except (a), (b), 

(c), (d), (e), (g), (i), (j), and (k); and 

• 18 AAC 50.215 Ambient Air 

Quality Analysis Methods, except (a)(4). 

We note that we previously approved 

the submitted rule revisions related to 

transportation conformity at 18 AAC 

50.700 through 18 AAC 50.750 and 18 

AAC 50.990 on September 8, 2015 (80 

FR 53735). 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, we are proposing to 

include in a final rule regulatory text 

that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the provisions described above in 

Section VI. Proposed Action. 

The EPA has made, and will continue 

to make, these documents generally 

available electronically through http://

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11500 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

it does not involve technical standards; 

and 

• does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: February 17, 2016. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04753 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 63 

[IB Docket Nos. 11–80, 10–95, 05–254, RM– 

11322; FCC 16–13] 

International Settlements Policy 

Reform 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, based on 

recent State Department guidance, the 

Federal Communications Commission 

(Commission) proposes to remove the 

nondiscrimination prong of the 

International Settlements Policy (ISP) 

on the U.S.-Cuba route and the 

nondiscrimination requirement 

condition placed on the waiver of 

benchmark settlements for the U.S.- 

Cuba route by the TeleCuba Waiver 

Order. Removal of these 

nondiscrimination requirements would 

allow U.S. carriers to enter into 

individualized contracts with the Cuban 

carrier. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

April 4, 2016, and replies on or before 

April 18, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket Nos. 11–80, 10–95, 

05–254 and RM–11322, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s ECFS Web site: http://

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People With Disabilities: Contact 

the FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email to FCC504@

fcc.gov, phone: 202–418–0530 (voice), 

tty: 202–418–0432. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Krech or Jodi Cooper, 

Telecommunications and Analysis 

Division, International Bureau, FCC, 

(202) 418–1480 or via email to 

David.Krech@fcc.gov, Jodi.Cooper@

fcc.gov. On PRA matters, contact Cathy 

Williams, Office of the Managing 

Director, FCC, (202) 418–2918 or via 

email to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Further 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB 

Docket Nos. 11–80, 10–95, 05–254 and 

RM–11322, FCC 16–13, adopted on 

February 10, 2016 and released on 

February 12, 2016. The full text of this 

document is available for inspection 

and copying during normal business 

hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 

12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

The document also is available for 

download over the Internet at https://

apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/

FCC-16-13A1.pdf. 

Comment Filing Procedures 

Pursuant to §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested 

parties may file comments and reply 

comments on or before the dates 

indicated above. Comments may be filed 

using the Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS). See 

Electronic Filing of Documents in 

Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 

(1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the Commission’s ECFS Web 

site at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St. SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand 

deliveries must be held together with 

rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes and boxes must be disposed 

of before entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington DC 20554. 

Summary of Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

1. The Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (FNPRM) proposes to 

remove the nondiscrimination 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS