Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 13 / Friday, January 22, 2021 / Notices 6645 

indoor access point to be received by 

the client device with a particular signal 

level? Apple, Broadcom et al. suggested 

¥99 dBm/MHz: Is this level 

appropriate? If not, what signal level 

would be appropriate for this purpose? 

How can a specific signal level be 

correlated with the current requirement 

that the client device be under the 

control of an access point? For example, 

under such an approach, should the 

enabling signal level be of such a 

strength to effectively require that the 

signal levels between the access point 

and client device be sufficiently strong 

to permit bi-directional communications 

between the client devices and the 

access point, thereby ensuring that both 

client devices are sufficiently close to 

the access point? How frequently should 

a client device be required to receive an 

enabling signal to continue transmitting 

to another client device? 

5. If permitted, should the client 

devices be limited to receiving an 

enabling signal from the same access 

point or could client-to-client 

communications be permitted so long as 

each client device receives an enabling 

signal from any authorized access point? 

Apple, Broadcom et al.’s suggestion 

would potentially permit two client 

devices to communicate even if they 

receive enabling signals from two 

different access points. For example, 

client devices in two different buildings 

receiving enabling signals from different 

low-power indoor access points could 

attempt to communicate with each 

other. Would permitting this to occur 

increase the potential for the client 

devices to cause harmful interference to 

licensed services? How would a 

requirement for both devices to receive 

an enabling signal from the same access 

point be implemented? Or should other 

configurations be permitted? For 

example, could a client device 

controlled by a standard power access 

point be permitted to communicate with 

a client device controlled by a lowpower indoor access point? Could 

client-to-client communications be 

permitted between devices when both 

clients are controlled by a standard 

power access point? If so, are any 

changes needed to the AFC systems? 

Must the enabling signal be received on 

the same channel for each device under 

any of the scenarios contemplated? 

Under any envisioned client-to-client 

communication scenario, commenters 

should provide detailed descriptions of 

how such communications can be 

enabled including how such 

communications fit under the current 

rules that limit client devices to 

operating only under the control of a 

standard power access point or a lowpower indoor access point or whether, 

and which, rules would need to be 

modified. Commenters should provide 

detailed analysis of how any client-toclient communication configurations 

they prefer would protect incumbent 

operations from harmful interference. 

Finally, commenters should provide any 

other information they believe relevant 

to evaluating whether direct client-toclient communications consistent with 

the rationale of the Commission in the 

6 GHz Order should be permitted, 

including any alternative methods or 

necessary rule changes not directly 

noted above. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Ronald T. Repasi, 

Acting Chief, Office of Engineering and 

Technology. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01404 Filed 1–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

[OMB 3060–0686; FRS 17401] 

Information Collection Being Reviewed 

by the Federal Communications 

Commission Under Delegated 

Authority 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort 

to reduce paperwork burdens, and as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC or 

Commission) invites the general public 

and other Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collections. 

Comments are requested concerning: 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimate; ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; ways to minimize 

the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology; and ways to 

further reduce the information 

collection burden on small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 

The FCC may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

PRA that does not display a valid OMB 

control number. 

DATES: Written PRA comments should 

be submitted on or before March 23, 

2021. If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to 

Cathy Williams, FCC, via email to PRA@

fcc.gov and to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information about the 

information collection, contact Cathy 

Williams at (202) 418–2918. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control No.: 3060–0686. 

Title: International Section 214 

Process and Tariff Requirements, 47 

CFR Sections 63.10, 63.11, 63.13, 63.18, 

63.19, 63.21, 63.22, 63.24, 63.25 and 

1.1311. 

Form No.: International Section 214— 

New Authorization; International 

Section 214 Authorization—Transfer of 

Control/Assignment; International 

Section 214—Special Temporary 

Authority and International Section 

214—Foreign Carrier Affiliation 

Notification. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities. 

Number of Respondents: 268 

respondents; 455 responses. 

Estimated Time per Response: 1 

hour–20 hours. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion, 

annual and quarterly reporting 

requirements, third party disclosure 

requirement, and recordkeeping 

requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Required to 

obtain or retain benefits. The statutory 

authority for Part 1 of this information 

collection is contained in 47 U.S.C 151, 

154(i), 154(j), 155, 225, 303(r), 309, and 

325(e). The statutory authority for Part 

63 of this information collection is 

contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 10, 11, 

201–205, 214, 218, 403, and 651 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, and 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 

154(j), 160, 201–205, 214, 218, 403, and 

571. The statutory authority for this 

information collection is also contained 

in the Cable Landing License Act, 

Executive Order 10530 and the Coastal 

Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1456. 

Total Annual Burden: 1,677 hours. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
6646 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 13 / Friday, January 22, 2021 / Notices 

Annual Cost Burden: $419,390. 

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: 

In general, there is no need for 

confidentiality. 

Needs and Uses: This collection will 

be submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) as an 

extension after this 60-day comment 

period in order to obtain the full threeyear clearance. 

The information is used by the 

Federal Communications Commission 

(Commission) staff in carrying out its 

duties under the Communications Act. 

The information collections pertaining 

to Part 1 of the rules are necessary to 

determine whether the Commission 

should grant a license for proposed 

submarine cables landing in the United 

States. Pursuant to Executive Order No. 

10530, the Commission has been 

delegated the President’s authority 

under the Cable Landing License Act to 

grant cable landing licenses, provided 

that the Commission obtains the 

approval from the State Department and 

seeks advice from other government 

agencies as appropriate. The 

information collections pertaining to 

Part 63 are necessary largely to 

determine the qualifications of 

applicants to provide common carrier 

international telecommunications 

service, including applicants that are 

affiliated with foreign carriers, and to 

determine whether and under what 

conditions the authorizations are in the 

public interest, convenience, and 

necessity. 

If the collections are not conducted or 

are conducted less frequently, 

applicants will not be able to obtain the 

authorizations necessary to provide 

telecommunications services, and the 

Commission will be unable to carry out 

its mandate under the Communications 

Act of 1934 and the Cable Landing 

License Act. In addition, without the 

information collections, the United 

States would jeopardize its ability to 

fulfill the U.S. obligations as negotiated 

under the World Trade Organization 

(WTO) Basic Telecom Agreement 

because these collections are imperative 

to detecting and deterring 

anticompetitive conduct. They are also 

necessary to preserve the Executive 

Branch agencies’ and the Commission’s 

ability to review foreign investments for 

national security, law enforcement, 

foreign policy, and trade concerns. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene Dortch, 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01367 Filed 1–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

TIME AND DATE: 10:22 a.m. on Tuesday, 

January 19, 2021. 

PLACE: The meeting was held via video 

conference on the internet. 

STATUS: Closed. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: In calling 

the meeting, the Board determined, on 

motion of Director Martin J. Gruenberg, 

seconded by Director Kathleen L. 

Kraninger (Director, Consumer 

Financial Protection Bureau), and 

concurred in by Director Blake Paulson 

(Acting Comptroller of the Currency), 

and Chairman Jelena McWilliams, that 

Corporation business required its 

consideration of the matters which were 

to be the subject of this meeting on less 

than seven days’ notice to the public; 

that no earlier notice of the meeting was 

practicable; that the public interest did 

not require consideration of the matters 

in a meeting open to public observation; 

and that the matters could be 

considered in a closed meeting by 

authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), 

(c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) of 

the ‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ 

(5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), 

(c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B). 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Requests for further information 

concerning the meeting may be directed 

to Ms. Debra A. Decker, Deputy 

Executive Secretary of the Corporation, 

at 202–898–8748. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01545 Filed 1–19–21; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice of 

Meeting To Be Held With Less Than 

Seven Days Advance Notice 

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, 

January 19, 2021. 

PLACE: The meeting was held via video 

conference on the internet and was 

webcast to the public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Pursuant to 

the provisions of the Government in the 

Sunshine Act, notice is hereby given 

that the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation’s Board of Directors met in 

open session at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, 

January 19, 2021, to consider the 

following matters: 

Summary Agenda 

Disposition of Minutes of a Board of 

Directors’ Meeting Previously 

Distributed. 

Memorandum and resolution re: Final 

Rule on Role of Supervisory Guidance. 

Memorandum and resolution re: 

Notice of Proposed Rule on Rescission 

and Removal of Transferred OTS 

Regulations, Definitions for Regulations 

Affecting All State Savings Associations 

(Part 390 Subpart Q). 

Memorandum and resolution re: 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on 

Removal of Transferred OTS 

Regulations Regarding Securities 

Offerings of State Savings Associations, 

Rescission of Statement of Policy on the 

Use of Offering Circulars, Proposed 

Rulemaking Regarding Securities 

Offerings by State Nonmember Banks 

and State Savings Associations, and 

Other, Technical Amendments. 

Report of actions taken pursuant to 

authority delegated by the Board of 

Directors. 

Discussion Agenda 

Memorandum and resolution re: 

Revisions to the FDIC’s Guidelines for 

Appeals of Material Supervisory 

Determinations. 

In calling the meeting, the Board 

determined, on motion of Director 

Martin J. Gruenberg, seconded by 

Director Kathleen Kraninger (Director, 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), 

concurred in by Director Blake Paulson 

(Acting Comptroller of the Currency), 

and Chairman Jelena McWilliams, that 

Corporation business required its 

consideration of the matters on less than 

seven days’ notice to the public; and 

that no earlier notice of the meeting 

than that previously provided on 

January 15, 2021, was practicable. 

Dated this the 19th day of January, 2021. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01544 Filed 1–19–21; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

[NOTICE 2021—01] 

Filing Dates for the Louisiana Special 

Election in the 2nd Congressional 

District Special Election 

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of filing dates for special 

election. 

SUMMARY: Louisiana has scheduled a 

Special General Election on March 20, 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES