Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11141 

10Once the WBSA vendor securely returns or 

destroys the ePHI (as determined by its 

arrangements with the covered health care 

provider), the WBSA vendor is no longer a business 

associate to that covered health care provider. 

11See 45 CFR 164.502(a)(5)(B)(2). 

12OCR’s Notifications of Enforcement Discretion 

and other materials relating to the COVID–19 public 

health emergency are available at https://

www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/specialtopics/hipaa-covid19/index.html. 

III. What are reasonable safeguards 

that covered health care providers and 

their business associates should 

consider implementing? 

OCR encourages covered health care 

providers and their business associates 

using WBSAs in good faith for the 

scheduling of individual appointments 

for COVID–19 vaccination to implement 

reasonable safeguards to protect the 

privacy and security of individuals’ PHI. 

OCR recommends that covered health 

care providers and their business 

associates consider the following 

recommended reasonable safeguards: 

• Using and disclosing only the 

minimum PHI necessary for the purpose 

(e.g., an individual’s name and phone 

number may be the minimum necessary 

PHI for scheduling the appointment). 

• Using encryption technology to 

protect PHI. 

• Enabling all available privacy 

settings (e.g., adjusting WSBA calendar 

display settings, as needed, to hide 

names or show only individuals’ initials 

instead of full names on calendar 

screens). 

• Ensuring that storage of any PHI 

(including metadata that constitutes 

PHI) by the vendor is only temporary 

(e.g., the PHI is returned to the covered 

health care provider or destroyed as 

soon as practicable, but no later than 30 

days after the appointment).10

• Ensuring the WBSA vendor does 

not use or disclose ePHI in a manner 

that is inconsistent with the HIPAA 

Rules (e.g., does not engage in the sale 

of ePHI 11 collected from individuals 

using the WBSA to schedule a COVID– 

19 vaccination). 

Although covered health care 

providers and business associates are 

encouraged to implement these 

reasonable safeguards when using a 

WBSA to schedule individuals for 

appointments for COVID–19 

vaccination, OCR will exercise its 

enforcement discretion and not impose 

penalties for noncompliance with the 

regulatory requirements under the 

HIPAA Rules against covered health 

care providers or their business 

associates in connection with the good 

faith provision of COVID–19 

vaccination during the COVID–19 

nationwide public health emergency. 

Failure to implement the recommended 

reasonable safeguards above will not, in 

itself, cause OCR to determine that a 

covered health care provider or its 

business associate failed to act in good 

faith for purposes of this Notification. 

Covered health care providers and 

their business associates that seek 

additional privacy protections for ePHI 

collected while using WBSAs are 

encouraged to use application vendors 

that represent that their WBSAs support 

compliance with the HIPAA Rules and 

that the vendors will enter into BAAs in 

connection with the use of their 

WBSAs. 

Note: OCR does not endorse, certify, or 

recommend specific technology, software, 

applications, or products. 

IV. Who/what is not covered under this 

Notification? 

This Notification does not apply to 

activities of a covered health care 

provider and its business associates 

other than the scheduling of COVID–19 

vaccinations. Other activities, such as 

the handling of PHI unrelated to the 

scheduling of COVID–19 vaccinations, 

are not included within the scope of this 

exercise of enforcement discretion. 

Potential HIPAA penalties still apply to 

all other HIPAA-covered operations of 

the covered health care provider and its 

business associates, unless otherwise 

stated by OCR.12

Additionally, this Notification does 

not apply to a covered health care 

provider or business associate when it 

fails to act in good faith. For example, 

OCR will not consider a covered health 

care provider or business associate to be 

acting in good faith with respect to the 

use of a WBSA for the scheduling of 

individual appointments for COVID–19 

vaccination where the covered health 

care provider or business associate uses 

a WBSA: 

• Whose terms of service prohibit the 

use of the WBSA for scheduling health 

care services or state that the WBSA 

may sell personal information that it 

collects. 

• To conduct services other than 

scheduling appointments for COVID–19 

vaccination (e.g., to determine 

individuals’ eligibility for COVID–19 

vaccination). 

• Without reasonable security 

safeguards (e.g., access controls) to 

prevent the PHI from being readily 

accessed or viewed by unauthorized 

persons. 

• To screen individuals for COVID– 

19 prior to individuals’ in-person health 

care visits. 

V. Collection of Information 

Requirements 

This Notification of Enforcement 

Discretion creates no legal obligations 

and no legal rights. Because this notice 

imposes no information collection 

requirements, it need not be reviewed 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Dated: February 12, 2021. 

Robinsue Frohboese 

Acting Director and Principal Deputy 

Director, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services. 

[FR Doc. 2021–03348 Filed 2–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4153–01–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

45 CFR Parts 2522 and 2540 

RIN 3045–AA69 

National Service Criminal History 

Check 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (CNCS) revised 

existing National Service Criminal 

History Check (NSCHC) regulations 

under the National and Community 

Service Act of 1990, as amended. These 

revisions will clarify and simplify the 

NSCHC requirements. 

DATES: This rule is effective May 1, 

2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Borgstrom at the Corporation for 

National and Community Service, 250 E 

Street SW, Washington, DC 20525, 

aborgstrom@cns.gov, phone 202–422– 

2781. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

CNCS, which operates as AmeriCorps, 

is updating its National Service 

Criminal History Check (NSCHC) 

regulations. The agency first established 

its NSCHC regulation in 2007. In 2009, 

Congress codified NSCHC requirements 

in Section 189D of the National and 

Community Service Act of 1990 

(NCSA), as amended by the Serve 

America Act. The agency issued 

regulations in 2009 and 2012 

implementing the Serve America Act 

NSCHC provisions. 

Grant recipient and subrecipient 

compliance with the NSCHC 

requirements has been an ongoing 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11142 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

challenge. Successful implementation of 

the NSCHC process by grant recipients 

has been frustrated, in part, by variable 

access to state sources of criminal 

history record information, 

requirements of state law, and 

restrictions on sharing information. As 

such, Congressional hearings and the 

agency’s Office of the Inspector General 

(OIG) reports have highlighted grantee 

noncompliance with this important 

statutory requirement. 

Improving the agency’s core 

functions—including eliminating 

barriers to compliance—is a primary 

goal of the agency’s Transformation and 

Sustainability Plan. In pursuit of that 

goal, the agency approved vendors that 

grant recipients may use to obtain the 

required NSCHC components. Since 

November 2018, grant recipients and 

subrecipients have been able to 

establish accounts and obtain the 

required National Sex Offender Public 

website (NSOPW.gov), state, and FBI 

components of the NSCHC through the 

approved vendors. Additionally, to help 

ensure grantee compliance with NSCHC 

requirements, the agency made grant 

funds available so that grant recipients 

could recheck persons who needed to 

have an NSCHC conducted. And for 

those grant recipients who took the 

opportunity to ensure compliance by 

rechecking persons in covered 

positions, the agency announced that it 

would not, except in limited 

circumstances, take enforcement action 

for past noncompliance. As of July 2020, 

grant recipients have conducted over 

233,000 check components through the 

agency-approved vendors. 

Grant recipients must ensure that they 

identify individuals who need an 

NSCHC and ensure that it is done on 

time. The NSCHC must be conducted as 

a matter of law, and as a condition of 

receiving grant funds for individuals in 

covered positions working or serving 

under: operational grants provided by 

AmeriCorps State and National, Foster 

Grandparent Program Grants, Retired 

and Senior Volunteer Program Grants, 

Senior Companion Program Grants, 

AmeriCorps Seniors Demonstration 

Program Grants that receive funding 

from CNCS, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 

of Service Grants, September 11th Day 

of Service Grants, Social Innovation 

Fund Grants, Volunteer Generation 

Fund Grants, AmeriCorps VISTA 

Program Grants, or AmeriCorps VISTA 

Support Grants. Section 189D of the 

NCSA and these regulations do not 

apply to AmeriCorps NCCC and or 

AmeriCorps VISTA members, who serve 

in Federally-operated programs that 

have separate criminal history check 

requirements. For the purpose of the 

NSCHC, individuals in covered 

positions are: The staff working under 

these grants, AmeriCorps State and 

National members, AmeriCorps Seniors 

volunteers in the Foster Grandparent 

and Senior Companion programs who 

receive a stipend. 

II. Discussion of the Final Rule 

The agency published a notice of 

proposed Federal rulemaking in the 

Federal Register on January 8, 2020, 85 

FR 859. The final rule reflects the 

agency’s consideration of the comments 

received and clarifies several 

requirements. In addition, the rule 

reflects technical corrections to the 

proposed language. 

Agency-approved vendors provide 

grant recipients a path to obtaining the 

required NSCHC components. As stated 

in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

preliminary analysis of the agency’s FY 

2019 Improper Payments Elimination 

and Recovery Act (IPERA) test 

transactions demonstrated that use of 

the CNCS-approved NSCHC vendors by 

grantees resolved the NSCHC 

component of the improper payment 

transactions in 88% of the transactions 

for which the NSCHC component 

rendered the payment improper. The 

intent of the final rule is to emphasize 

the impact and availability of agencyapproved vendors and to clarify and 

simplify the NSCHC requirements. 

The final rule does not require grant 

recipients to establish accounts and 

conduct checks through the agencyapproved vendors. However, the 

vendors remain a proven pathway for 

timely NSCHC compliance. Many 

commenters stated that they had access 

to affordable NSCHC component checks, 

other than those provided by the 

agency-approved vendors. The agency 

strongly encourages the use of the 

agency-approved vendors because use of 

the vendors allows grant recipients to 

reliably demonstrate compliance and 

eligibility. In addition, the final rule 

clarifies that individuals who turn 18 

while working or serving in a covered 

position must get an NSCHC if they 

serve a consecutive term. 

The final rule retains many of the 

other proposed changes. As proposed, 

the final rule establishes a single set of 

NSCHC check components, regardless of 

whether an individual has recurring 

access to vulnerable populations. The 

final rule also establishes that the 

NSCHC must be completed before an 

individual works or serves in a covered 

position. Further, it establishes a 

requirement that, by November 1, 2021, 

staff, members, or volunteers who 

remain on or after November 1, 2021 in 

a position for which an NSCHC is 

required under the final rule complete 

an NSCHC that complies with the final 

rule. 

III. Comments and Responses 

The agency published the proposed 

rule on January 8, 2020 (84 FR 859), in 

the Federal Register with a 60-day 

comment period and received over 280 

comments. More than 75 percent of the 

commenters indicated they were current 

AmeriCorps State and National or 

AmeriCorps Seniors grant recipients 

subject to the rule. 

Generally, the commenters opposed 

the proposed mandatory use of the 

agency-approved vendors to obtain the 

NSCHC component checks—the 

nationwide NSOPW check of all 

jurisdictions, including Tribes, states, 

and territories; state criminal history 

repository checks; and fingerprint-based 

FBI checks. While timely use of the 

vendor would ensure grant recipients’ 

statutory compliance and, accordingly, 

reduce the agency’s improper payment 

rate, commenters articulated how 

mandatory use of the vendors 

complicated their processes, and, in 

response to those comments, the agency 

has decided not to make agencyapproved vendors the sole option for 

grant recipients and subrecipients to 

obtain NSCHC components. 

Some commenters suggested that the 

agency decouple NSCHC from its 

Improper Payments Elimination and 

Recovery Act (IPERA) testing. The 

agency has never linked or targeted 

NSCHC compliance as a specific line of 

inquiry in its Improper Payments 

Elimination and Recovery Act (IPERA) 

testing. The guidance for executing 

IPERA is established by the Office of 

Management and Budget. Under that 

guidance and the IPERA statutes, 

payments to covered individuals who 

have incomplete or missing NSCHC 

checks when they received a payment 

that is included within an IPERA 

sample qualify as improper payments, 

as eligibility cannot be established at the 

time of payment (even if the individuals 

involved are later cleared in compliant 

checks). The frequency of NSCHC-based 

IPERA findings arises from the fact that 

a large portion of the agency’s grant 

funds are used to make compensation 

and other payments to covered 

individuals. Nothing that the agency 

could write in its NSCHC regulations 

would alter the frequency that use of 

grant funds trigger NSCHC 

requirements, or that incomplete, 

incorrect or undocumented NSCHC 

checks will be considered improper 

payments under IPERA. 

Commenters generally reflected an 

appreciation for the value of a criminal 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11143 

history background check as part of a 

comprehensive screening process. And 

many commenters articulated how they 

are subject to several background check 

requirements from various sources and 

have tailored their screening and vetting 

procedures to conform with those 

required by state law or best practices or 

site requirements. The commenters 

asserted that the agency’s requirements 

are yet another burden and suggested 

that the agency remove the requirement 

or broaden exemptions. The agency’s 

legislation is prescriptive and creates an 

obligation to ensure that grant recipients 

comply with the law. The agency wants 

to ensure that grant recipients meet the 

basic requirements of the rule and can 

easily document compliance with the 

requirements. Commenters expressed a 

desire for ease of administration and 

minimal duplication of process. 

However, the IPERA data reflects that 

many grant recipients could not 

demonstrate that they conducted the 

required components on time, and the 

agency does not find a sufficient basis 

to embrace the relaxed approach 

suggested by some commenters. 

Commenters supported elimination of 

the requirement for staff to obtain 

criminal history checks under planning 

grants, non-profit capacity building 

grants, and on fixed-award grants, again, 

with some commenters expressing 

support for expansion of categories of 

exemptions. In addition, commenters 

expressed support for the elimination of 

the requirement to conduct criminal 

history checks of individuals under the 

age of 18 at the time they start service 

or employment. And, commenters also 

expressed support for extending the 

time period for which a grant recipient 

must re-check a person after a break in 

service or employment with the same 

organization from 120 days to 180 days. 

The final rule has been modified in 

response to the comments provided. 

The comments and CNCS’s responses 

are set forth below: 

Comment: CNCS received positive 

comments on eliminating the 

requirement for grant recipients to 

conduct criminal history checks on 

employees of organizations with 

planning grants and staff on fixedamount grants. Some commenters 

requested that exemptions from 

NSCHCs extend to additional CNCS 

grants such as the Volunteer Generation 

Fund, and the Martin Luther King and 

9/11 Day of Service grants. 

Response: The agency balanced the 

statutory requirements articulated in 42 

U.S.C. 12645g to protect vulnerable 

populations being served by programs, 

the needs of the agency to efficiently 

monitor programs, and the 

administration of the requirements by 

grant recipients. Fixed-amount grant 

recipients receive a fixed amount per 

member service year and do not identify 

specific staff positions on a grant 

budget. Relying on information 

provided in the narrative text of fixedamount grant applications to identify 

persons for whom the NSCHC was 

required, led, at times, to requiring 

checks for persons who would never be 

included if the program were funded 

under a cost reimbursement grant. It 

also led to uncertainty in determining 

whether a position was covered or not. 

Fixed-amount grants are intended to 

optimize efficiency in grantmaking. 

Fixed-amount grant recipients are 

provided a sum of money that is 

significantly less than what is needed to 

implement the program. The additional 

resources required to implement the 

program are the responsibility of the 

recipient. Fixed-amount grant recipients 

are not required to track spending or a 

specified percentage of matching funds, 

and federal agencies focus on grant 

recipient performance rather than grant 

recipient accounting. To require fixedamount grantees to track funds in the 

same manner that cost reimbursement 

grant recipients do, for the purpose of 

determining whether or not a person is 

covered by the rule, would disrupt the 

statutory scheme of fixed-amount 

grants. In order to eliminate ambiguity 

and create a rule that can be easily 

applied with parity, the agency 

determined that the staff who 

implement fixed-amount grants should 

be exempt from the criminal history 

check requirement, under its authority 

to exempt individuals from the 

requirements for good cause under 

section 189D. While the agency 

encourages organizations to implement 

criminal history checks as part of a 

comprehensive screening procedure to 

reduce risk to vulnerable populations, 

which could include staff who 

implement fixed-amount grant 

activities, the agency finds that 

clarifying the applicability of the rule 

resolves the current ambiguous state. 

The agency considered the comments 

regarding eliminating the applicability 

of the NSCHC to other grants, such as 

the Martin Luther King, Jr. and 

September 11th Day of Service grants 

and Volunteer Generation Fund grants. 

The agency declines to exempt these 

grants from the NSCHC requirements, as 

the grants issued are used to pay the 

salaries of persons reflected on a grant 

award who are implementing a day of 

service grant or otherwise covered grant 

program and the agency did not find a 

sufficient basis to exclude them from 

the statutory requirements. 

Comment: The agency received 

positive comments about not requiring 

an NSCHC for individuals under the age 

of 18 at the start of their service. Some 

commenters expressed a desire for the 

agency to expand exemptions to 

participants and employees who may 

already receive criminal history checks 

because of their profession. 

Response: The agency finds that good 

cause exists to exempt those under the 

age of 18 from the NSCHC requirements 

and establishes the person’s start date as 

the operative date for determining the 

person’s age. Congress specified that a 

check for those serving with vulnerable 

populations applied only for those who 

were 18 or older, but did not specify the 

age requirement for being subject to the 

NSCHC for persons who serve with 

nonvulnerable populations, leaving it 

subject to the regulations and 

requirements established by the agency. 

Because Congress provided language in 

the statute that stated additional NSCHC 

components were required only for 

those 18 or older, the agency finds the 

age specified in the legislation to be a 

reasonable basis to establish parity in 

the age at which a baseline NSCHC is 

required. The agency encourages grant 

recipients to ask all applicants about 

any disqualifying criminal history and 

conduct an NSOPW search, but in the 

interest of clarity and consistency in 

application of the final rule, finds that 

an NSCHC for those under 18 years of 

age is not required by the regulation. 

The agency has considered 

exemptions for certain professions in 

the past, and understands that there 

may be a reasonable basis to exempt 

certain professions from the NSCHC 

requirement. However, due to the 

variability of states’ standards for 

rendering clearance decisions, and in 

pursuit of clarity in application and ease 

of monitoring, the agency has decided 

against including profession-based 

exceptions in the final rule. For 

situations where grant recipients 

demonstrate that an administrative 

modification to the rule is necessary, the 

final rule includes a waiver provision. 

Rather than codifying exemptions, the 

agency may evaluate facts and 

circumstances, in a particular case or in 

a class of cases, that necessitate 

administrative modifications to the 

process through the waiver provision. 

Comment: Some commenters 

expressed support for requiring 

programs to obtain criminal history 

check results through designated 

vendors because it simplified the 

process and provided a consistent, 

timely and reliable method. However, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11144 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

many commenters expressed objections 

to the requirement for mandatory use of 

designated vendors based on 

administrative burden, geographical and 

technical challenges, asserted 

inadequacy of the information provided, 

challenges with the service, added costs 

to programs and challenges in 

establishing accounts with vendors. For 

commenters who acknowledged the 

benefit of the vendor, some indicated 

that while use of agency-approved 

vendors may satisfy the statutory 

requirements, grant recipients also use 

the criminal history check results to 

make determination of suitability in 

addition to eligibility. Agency-approved 

vendor criminal history check results— 

which, in the case of the FBI check 

provides a ‘‘cleared’’ or ‘‘not cleared’’ 

recommendation based on whether or 

not the individual has been convicted of 

murder or an offense requiring 

registration as a sex offender, rather 

than providing a list of arrests and 

convictions—do not help a grant 

recipient determine suitability based on 

other criteria (e.g., a program that 

involves driving wanting to know if a 

person had recent DUI convictions). As 

a result, grant recipients must conduct 

duplicate or supplemental criminal 

history checks at additional expense, 

which is an allowable cost under grants, 

in order to meet local requirements. 

Commenters also noted that no criminal 

history check vendor has complete 

coverage or access to all state criminal 

history record repositories, creating 

coverage gaps for locations excluded 

from vendor access. In these 

circumstances, the vendor check may 

not satisfy local clearance requirements. 

In other instances, commenters noted 

that, for them, getting results through a 

state repository may be more 

economical and convenient than 

working through agency-approved 

vendors. Commenters also articulated 

that using agency-approved vendors 

required a level of technological 

savviness or accessibility that some 

grantee organizations or some people 

working or serving under the grants 

might not have. Commenters also noted 

that in some areas, vendor fingerprint 

collection locations may be 

prohibitively inconvenient for persons 

who do not have transportation or who 

need a location that is accessible to 

those with disabilities. Several 

commenters suggested that having both 

agency-approved vendors and state 

repositories as options for obtaining 

NSCHC components was satisfactory. 

Response: The agency strongly 

encourages use of the approved vendors, 

though use of the approved vendors is 

not the sole method through which a 

grant recipient or subrecipient may 

obtain NSCHC components. The grant 

recipient community dramatically 

improved NSCHC compliance through 

use of the vendors, as reflected in the 

agency’s IPERA analysis. Use of the 

vendors allows for timely compliance 

monitoring, which reduces the risk of 

adverse enforcement action. However, 

after careful consideration of the 

comments and the expression by 

commenters that they are able to obtain 

NSCHC checks that more closely meet 

their specific needs using methods other 

than the agency-approved vendors, the 

agency decided not to include the 

requirement to use the agency-approved 

vendors in the final rule. The agency 

will continue to implement effective 

enforcement to ensure grant recipients 

demonstrate timely compliance with the 

requirements of the final rule. 

Comment: The agency received 

comments on the requirement to 

conduct, review, and adjudicate a 

person’s criminal history check results 

before the person may start service or 

work under a grant. Some commenters 

expressed that it was inconvenient to 

complete the background checking 

process before the start of service or 

employment because, at times, there 

may be delays or lack of responsiveness 

on the part of criminal history 

repositories, vendors, or because of 

other aspects of their onboarding 

process. Commenters stated they believe 

the new requirement would result in 

delayed startup and was unnecessary, as 

most programs conduct training and 

orientation in the first few days of 

service, which limits access to 

vulnerable populations. Further, some 

commenters stated that the agency’s 

timing of grant awards makes 

compliance unduly burdensome, as they 

are unable to take steps to enroll 

members, including the NSCHC, under 

the grant until it is awarded. 

Response: The agency considered the 

challenges posed by potential delayed 

return of criminal history results and 

determined that establishing a clear 

requirement would eliminate 

longstanding confusion about when the 

NSCHC needs to be performed, how 

accompaniment of individuals with 

pending checks should be documented, 

and whether an individual has been 

determined to be eligible prior to a grant 

recipient incurring costs. Further, 

determining by the day before a person 

begins work or service on the grant that 

they do not have a disqualifying 

conviction protects program 

beneficiaries and the community from 

potential harm. The desire to resolve 

any uncertainty related to NSCHCs 

outweighs the impact on programs that 

desire to start employees or participants 

before they are cleared. Some of the 

commenters also suggested that because 

the statute does not require the check to 

be completed prior to service, the 

agency should not specify a time by 

which NSCHCs should be completed. 

The agency declines to adopt the 

proposed change because the value of 

the NSCHC is in knowing in advance 

whether a person has been convicted of 

murder or a sex offense requiring 

registration. Some commenters stated 

that there is not an ineligibility problem 

in the agency’s programs—meaning that 

the rate at which ineligible individuals 

are discovered through the NSCHC 

process is so low as to make the process 

unnecessary. Commenters implied that 

not having a significant number of 

ineligible individuals in covered 

positions should be a basis to have a 

rule flexible enough for individuals in 

covered positions to fulfill the NSCHC 

requirements on the last day of service 

or even after service ends. However, the 

agency views the fact that most persons 

who apply to serve through the agency’s 

programs are eligible as a reason to 

continue to ensure that minimal 

screening takes place prior to service, to 

ensure that ineligible individuals do not 

serve. The agency encourages grant 

recipients who have onboarding 

challenges related to the timing of a 

grant being awarded to contact the 

agency. The agency will work with the 

grantee to ensure that timing of the grant 

award does not unreasonably prevent a 

grant recipient from taking timely action 

to comply with the rule. 

Comment: Commenters objected to 

the requirement to check, within 180 

days, any covered individuals not 

previously cleared through the 

designated vendors. Many commenters 

expressed this was burdensome and 

unnecessary. Some commenters asserted 

that to require individuals cleared under 

a prior rule was contrary to law, as the 

agency had limited authority to change 

a condition of the grant after it was 

awarded. 

Response: After considering the 

comments, the agency decided to retain 

the requirement that within 180 days of 

the effective date of the rule, any 

individual who continues in a covered 

position must have an NSCHC that 

complies with the final rule, in order to 

establish clarity and consistency in the 

NSCHC requirements. That is, each 

person in a covered position who 

continues to work or serve on or after 

November 1, 2021 must have a check 

that complies with this regulation. They 

must be able to show that all three 

required components—the NSOPW, the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11145 

state check(s), and the FBI check—were 

conducted and reviewed before 

November 1, 2021. While the November 

1, 2021 date is slightly more than 180 

days from the effective date, the agency 

believes that the additional three 

calendar days and first of the month 

start date will allow for easier 

administration. By providing this 

extended compliance window, it is 

expected that most individuals in 

covered positions who remain in work 

or service in a covered position who did 

not have a three-part check will be able 

to obtain the missing state(s) or FBI 

check, as applicable, by the deadline. 

This requirement is prospective in 

applicability, not retroactive. That is, no 

action is required by individuals who 

do not continue to work or serve in a 

covered position. The rule establishes 

the future condition for continued 

service and establishes a uniform set of 

requirements that must be met by a 

future date certain. A defined date 

supports clarity of applicability and 

uniformity in monitoring. For entities 

that participated in the exemption 

period and conducted all three 

component checks, additional action 

may not be required for most 

individuals. 

Comment: Many commenters objected 

to the requirement to conduct three-part 

checks for all covered individuals, 

regardless of their access to vulnerable 

populations. A number of commenters 

asserted that the agency had exceeded 

its legal authority in imposing this 

requirement and that two-part checks 

were satisfactory for covered persons 

who do not have access to vulnerable 

populations. Other commenters said it 

was excessively burdensome for covered 

persons and grantees to obtain an extra 

level of clearance when it is not 

required by the statute, especially since 

it had to be completed prior to service 

starting. 

Response: The agency declines to 

modify the rule to have a distinction 

between checks for those serving 

vulnerable populations and those 

without recurring access to vulnerable 

populations. The need to establish 

consistency across grant programs and 

to simplify the requirements, as well as 

concerns for the safety of vulnerable 

populations, outweighed concerns about 

grant recipient preference. Commenters 

asserted that the statutory language is 

plain and does not give the agency 

discretion regarding the NSCHC 

component checks for those not working 

with vulnerable populations; the statute, 

they argue, gives the choice of NSCHC 

components to the grant recipient. The 

agency does not take this view. 

Section 189D(a) of the NCSA states 

that entities ‘‘shall, subject to the 

regulations and requirements 

established by the Corporation, conduct 

criminal history background checks’’ on 

specified individuals. (Emphasis 

added). Section 189D(b) states that the 

criminal history background check 

under section (a) ‘‘shall, except in cases 

approved for good cause by the 

Corporation, include’’ a name-based sex 

offender check, and state checks for the 

state of service and state of residence at 

time of application, or a fingerprintbased FBI check. 

Section 189D(b) establishes the 

minimum requirements that the agency 

must consider in exercising its authority 

under 189D(a) and understands the ‘‘or’’ 

in 189D (b)(2) to be read as permitting 

the agency to establish an NSCHC that 

permits a state component, an FBI 

component, or both. 

The agency’s regulatory requirement 

aligns with the statute. A check of all 

three components meets the statutory 

requirement that the agency not require 

less than a sex offender check and either 

the state or FBI checks. The operative 

phrase in 189D(b) is ‘‘shall . . . 

include.’’ It is permissive and, read in 

the context of 189D(a), vests 

implementation to the discretion of the 

agency. 

The scope of agency discretion would 

be different had the language said ‘‘shall 

consist of’’ or ‘‘shall be limited to’’ or 

‘‘shall not exceed,’’ or other such 

discretion-limiting language. Section 

189D(b) requires the agency to include 

the specified components, but does not 

require the agency to limit itself to those 

components. 

Congress similarly specified the 

requirements for those serving 

vulnerable populations. At minimum, 

all three components must be present in 

the agency’s requirements for those who 

work with vulnerable populations. The 

agency retains discretion—that is, what 

is required for the NSCHC is still 

‘‘subject to the requirements and 

regulations established by the 

Corporation’’—and could require 

additional components, although the 

agency has opted to establish a check 

that mirrors the statutory language for 

those who work or serve with 

vulnerable populations. 

Comment: Several commenters felt 

that replacing the current Alternative 

Search Procedure process with a new 

waiver process lacked clarity. They 

expressed concern because there has 

been a widespread history of needing 

Alternative Search Procedures to resolve 

situations where programs lacked 

access, or timely access, to criminal 

history check results and they were 

unsure how the proposed waiver 

process was intended to work. 

Response: The agency believes that 

with agency-approved vendors 

available, there should be less need for 

alternative procedures or to waive 

elements of the requirements for 

criminal history checks. However, the 

agency recognizes that circumstances 

change, and new factual situations may 

emerge, and expects to use the waiver 

process to address those situations. 

Those who would like a waiver may 

request it through the specified email 

address and the agency will provide a 

written response. 

Comment: The agency noted that the 

proposed rule may have created 

confusion about the role of the budget 

in determining applicability of the 

NSCHC in section 201(a)(4). That 

section specified that an individual had 

to be paid a salary and on the budget. 

Response: The statutory requirement 

to conduct an NSCHC applies to persons 

who serve under a grant award— 

whether they are paid directly from 

federal funds or if their time and effort 

are reflected on the grant as match 

under a cost reimbursement award. The 

budget document, historically, has been 

a strong indicator of persons who would 

be subject to the rule, but the budget 

document at the time of application, 

alone, does not determine who is in a 

position that requires an NSCHC. 

Persons whose activities are attributed 

to funding on a CNCS grant or subgrant 

are always covered. 

Comment: Several commenters 

expressed a desire for more frequent and 

impactful training for grant recipients to 

help them be more compliant. Many 

commenters provided suggestions for 

ways to improve training and training 

materials. 

Response: The agency welcomes the 

suggestions for improving training and 

will consider them when it develops 

training programs or supporting 

materials. 

Comment: The agency received 

several comments regarding its 

approach to enforcement. Commenters 

expressed disapproval of an 

enforcement scheme that required grant 

recipients to return grant funds to the 

agency when the grant recipients did 

not comply with the regulatory 

requirements. 

Response: The agency did not propose 

making its enforcement guidance part of 

this rulemaking, as enforcement for 

noncompliance with grants is addressed 

under 2 CFR 200.338. With the agencyapproved vendors, all grant recipients 

have an established pathway to 

compliance and the costs of the NSCHC 

and any other checks required for 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11146 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

persons in covered positions remain 

allowable under grants. With the added 

clarity provided by the final rule, the 

expectation remains that grant 

recipients will obtain the required 

checks in a complete and timely 

manner. Accordingly, the agency 

appreciates the feedback regarding its 

approach to enforcement, and declines 

to respond to specific comments, as they 

are beyond the scope of the rulemaking. 

IV. Effective Date 

The final rule is effective on May 1, 

2021. 

IV. Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866 

This rule is not an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule within the meaning of 

E.O. 12866 because it is not likely to 

result in: (1) An annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or an 

adverse and material effect on a sector 

of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or state, local, or 

tribal government or communities; (2) 

the creation of a serious inconsistency 

or interference with an action taken or 

planned by another agency; (3) a 

material alteration in the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) 

the raising of novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in E.O. 12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605 

(b)), the agency certifies that this rule, 

if adopted, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This 

regulatory action will not result in (1) an 

annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more; (2) a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, state, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; or (3) significant 

adverse effects on competition, 

employment, investment, productivity, 

innovation, or on the ability of United 

States-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises in 

domestic and export markets. Therefore, 

the agency has not performed the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis that is 

required under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) for 

major rules that are expected to have 

such results. 

Unfunded Mandates 

For purposes of Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, as well as 

Executive Order 12875, this regulatory 

action does not contain any Federal 

mandate that may result in increased 

expenditures in either Federal, state, 

local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate, or impose an annual burden 

exceeding $100 million on the private 

sector. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule specifies that specific pieces 

of information must be obtained and 

maintained in order to demonstrate 

compliance with the regulatory 

procedures. 

This requirement constitutes one set 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 507 et 

seq. OMB, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, has 

previously approved information 

collections for the NSCHC requirement. 

The OMB Control Number is 3045– 

0145. 

Under the PRA, an agency may not 

conduct or sponsor a collection of 

information unless the collections of 

information display valid control 

numbers. This rule’s collections of 

information are contained in 45 CFR 

2540.204 and .206. 

This information is necessary to 

ensure that only eligible individuals 

serve in covered positions under agency 

grants. 

The likely respondents to these 

collections of information are persons 

interested in, or seeking to serve in, 

covered positions, and grant recipients. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism, 

prohibits an agency from publishing any 

rule that has Federalism implications if 

the rule imposes substantial direct 

compliance costs on state and local 

governments and is not required by 

statute, or the rule preempts state law, 

unless the agency meets the 

consultation and funding requirements 

of section 6 of the Executive Order. This 

rule does not have any Federalism 

implications, as described above. 

List of Subjects 

45 CFR 2522 

Grant programs—social programs, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volunteers. 

45 CFR Part 2540 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Grant programs—social 

programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volunteers. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, under the authority of 42 

U.S.C. 12651c(c), the Corporation for 

National and Community Service 

amends chapter XXV, title 45 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 2522—AMERICORPS 

PARTICIPANTS, PROGRAMS, AND 

APPLICANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 2522 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12571–12595; 

12651b–12651d; E.O. 13331, 69 FR 9911. 

Subpart B—Participant Eligibility, 

Requirements, and Benefits 

■ 2. Revise § 2522.205 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2522.205 To whom must I apply 

eligibility criteria relating to criminal 

history? 

You must apply eligibility criteria 

relating to criminal history to 

individuals specified in 45 CFR 

2540.201. 

PART 2540—GENERAL 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 2540 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: E.O. 13331, 69 FR 9911; 18 

U.S.C. 506, 701, 1017; 42 U.S.C. 12653, 

12631–12637, 12645g; 42 U.S.C. 5065. 

Subpart B—Requirements Directly 

Affecting the Selection and Treatment 

of Participants 

■ 4. Revise § 2540.200 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.200 Which entities are required to 

comply with the National Service Criminal 

History Check requirements in this 

subpart? 

The National Service Criminal History 

Check is a requirement for entities that 

are recipients or subrecipients of the 

following grants: 

(a) Operational grants provided by 

AmeriCorps State and National; 

(b) Foster Grandparent Program 

Grants; 

(c) Retired and Senior Volunteer 

Program Grants; 

(d) Senior Companion Program 

Grants; 

(e) Senior Demonstration Program 

Grants that receive funding from CNCS; 

(f) Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of 

Service Grants; 

(g) September 11th Day of Service 

Grants; 

(h) Social Innovation Fund Grants; 

(i) Volunteer Generation Fund Grants; 

(j) AmeriCorps VISTA Program 

Grants; 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11147 

(k) AmeriCorps VISTA Support 

Grants. 

■ 5. Revise § 2540.201 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.201 Which individuals require a 

National Service Criminal History Check? 

(a) A National Service Criminal 

History Check must be conducted for 

individuals in covered positions. 

Individuals in covered positions are 

individuals selected, under a CNCS 

grant specified in 2540.200, by the 

recipient, subrecipient, or service site to 

work or serve in a position under a 

CNCS grant specified in § 2540.200: 

(1) As an AmeriCorps State and 

National member, as described in 42 

U.S.C. 12511(30)(A)(i); 

(2) As a Foster Grandparent who 

receives a stipend; 

(3) As a Senior Companion who 

receives a stipend; or 

(4) In a position in which they will 

receive a salary, directly or reflected as 

match, under a cost reimbursement 

grant. 

(b) A National Service Criminal 

History Check is not required for those 

individuals listed in paragraph (a) of 

this section who are under the age of 18 

on the first day of work or service in a 

covered position. 

(c) A National Service Criminal 

History Check is not required for 

individuals whose activity is entirely 

included in the grant recipient’s indirect 

cost rate. 

■ 6. Revise § 2540.202 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.202 What eligibility criteria apply to 

an individual for whom a National Service 

Criminal History Check is required? 

An individual shall be ineligible to 

work or serve in a position specified in 

§ 2540.201(a) if the individual— 

(a) Refuses to consent to a criminal 

history check described in § 2540.204; 

(b) Makes a false statement in 

connection with a criminal history 

check described in § 2540.204; 

(c) Is registered, or is required to be 

registered, on a state sex offender 

registry or the National Sex Offender 

Registry; or 

(d) Has been convicted of murder, as 

defined in 18 U.S.C. 1111. 

■ 7. Revise § 2540.203 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.203 May a grant recipient or 

subrecipient or service site establish and 

apply suitability criteria for individuals to 

work or serve in a position specified in this 

subpart? 

Grant recipients and subrecipients, or 

service sites, may establish suitability 

criteria, consistent with state and 

Federal Civil Rights and 

nondiscrimination laws, for individuals 

working or serving in a position 

specified in § 2540.201(a). While 

members may be eligible to work or 

serve in a position specified in 

§ 2540.201(a) based on the eligibility 

requirements of § 2540.202, a grant 

recipient, subrecipient, or service site 

may determine that an individual is not 

suitable to work or serve in such a 

position based on criteria that the grant 

recipient or subrecipient or service site 

establishes. 

■ 8. Revise § 2540.204 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.204 What are the components of a 

National Service Criminal History Check? 

(a) Unless CNCS approves a waiver 

under § 2540.207, for each individual in 

a position specified in § 2540.201, 

grantees or subgrantees must, obtain: 

(1) A nationwide check of the 

National Sex Offender Public website 

through NSOPW.gov; 

(2) A check of the State criminal 

history record repository or agencydesignated alternative for the 

individual’s State of residence and State 

of service; and 

(3) A fingerprint-based check of the 

FBI criminal history record database 

through the State criminal history 

record repository or agency-approved 

vendor. 

(b) One way for grant recipients or 

subrecipients to obtain and document 

the required components of the National 

Service History Check is through the use 

of agency-approved vendors. 

■ 9. Revise § 2540.205 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.205 By when must the National 

Service Criminal History Check be 

completed? 

(a) The National Service Criminal 

History Check must be conducted, 

reviewed, and an eligibility 

determination made by the grant 

recipient or subrecipient based on the 

results of the National Service Criminal 

History Check before a person begins to 

work or serve in a position specified in 

§ 2540.201(a). 

(b) If a person serves consecutive 

terms of service or employment with the 

same organization in a position 

specified in § 2540.201(a) and does not 

have a break in service or employment 

longer than 180 days, then no additional 

National Service Criminal History 

Check is required, as long as the original 

check complied with the requirements 

of § 2540.204. If a National Service 

Criminal History Check was not 

conducted on a person because they 

were under the age of 18 at the time 

they began their prior term(s) of service 

or employment in a covered position, 

pursuant to § 2540.201(b), a National 

Service Criminal History check must be 

conducted prior to the individual 

beginning a subsequent term of work or 

service for which the person is 18 years 

of age or older at the start of work or 

service. 

(c) Persons working or serving in 

positions specified in § 2540.201(a) 

prior to May 1, 2021, who continue 

working or serving in a position 

specified in § 2540.201(a) on or after 

November 1, 2021, must have a National 

Service Criminal History Check 

conducted, reviewed, and an eligibility 

determination made by the grant 

recipient or subrecipient based on the 

results of the National Service Criminal 

History Check completed in accordance 

with this part. For these people, the 

National Service Criminal History 

Check must be completed no later than 

November 1, 2021. 

■ 10. Revise § 2540.206 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.206 What procedural steps are 

required, in addition to conducting the 

National Service Criminal History Check 

described in this subpart? 

(a) In addition to conducting the 

National Service Criminal History 

Check described in § 2540.204, grant 

recipients or subrecipients must: 

(1) Obtain a person’s consent before 

conducting the state and FBI 

components of the National Service 

Criminal History Check; 

(2) Provide notice that selection for 

work or service for a position specified 

in § 2540.201(a) is contingent upon the 

organization’s review of the National 

Service Criminal History Check 

component results; 

(3) Provide a reasonable opportunity 

for the person to review and challenge 

the factual accuracy of a result before 

action is taken to exclude the person 

from the position; 

(4) Take reasonable steps to protect 

the confidentiality of any information 

relating to the criminal history check, 

consistent with authorization provided 

by the applicant; 

(5) Maintain documentation of the 

National Service Criminal History 

Check as grant records; and 

(6) Pay for the cost of the NSCHC. 

Unless specifically approved by CNCS 

under § 2540.207, the person who is 

serving or working in the covered 

position may not be charged for the cost 

of any component of a National Service 

Criminal History Check. 

(b) CNCS-approved vendors may 

facilitate obtaining and documenting the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
11148 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

1A P.O. Box used for the collection of fees is 

referred to as a ‘‘lockbox’’ in our rules and other 

Commission documents. The FCC collects 

application processing fees using a series of P.O. 

Boxes located at U.S. Bank in St. Louis, Missouri. 

See 47 CFR 1.1101–1.1109 (setting forth the fee 

schedule for each type of application remittable to 

the Commission along with the correct lockbox). 

requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (5) of this section. 

■ 11. Revise § 2540.207 to read as 

follows: 

§ 2540.207 Waiver. 

CNCS may waive provisions of 

§§ 2540.200 through.2540.206 for good 

cause, or for any other lawful basis. To 

request a waiver, submit a written 

request to NSCHC Waiver Requests, 250 

E Street SW, Washington DC 20525, or 

send your request to 

NSCHCWaiverRequest@cns.gov. 

Dated: February 12, 2021. 

Lisa Guccione, 

Deputy Chief of Staff. 

[FR Doc. 2021–03247 Filed 2–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 1 

[MD Docket No. 20–64; FCC 20–172; FRS 

17357] 

Closure of FCC Lockbox 979089 Used 

To File Fees for Services Provided by 

the Media Bureau 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC or 

Commission) adopts an Order that 

closes Lockbox 979089 and modifies the 

relevant rule provisions to require 

electronic filing and fee payments. 

DATES: Effective March 26, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Warren Firschein, Office of Managing 

Director at (202) 418–2653 or Roland 

Helvajian, Office of Managing Director 

at (202) 418–0444. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Order, 

FCC 20–172, MD Docket No. 20–64, 

adopted on December 7, 2020 and 

released on December 10, 2020, which 

is the subject of this rulemaking. The 

full text of this document is available for 

public inspection and copying by 

downloading the text from the 

Commission’s website at https://

www.fcc.gov/document/closurelockbox-used-collect-fee-paymentsmedia-bureau. 

I. Procedural Matters 

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

1. Section 603 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, as amended, requires a 

regulatory flexibility analysis in notice 

and comment rulemaking proceedings. 

See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). As we are adopting 

these rules without notice and 

comment, no regulatory flexibility 

analysis is required. 

B. Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 Analysis 

2. This document does not contain 

new or modified information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public 

Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it 

does not contain any new or modified 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees, pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

C. Congressional Review Act 

3. The Commission will not send a 

copy of the Order pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A), because the adopted rules 

are rules of agency organization, 

procedure, or practice that do not 

‘‘substantially affect the rights or 

obligations of non-agency parties. See 5 

U.S.C. 804(3)(C). 

II. Introduction 

4. In the Order, we reduce 

expenditures by the Commission and 

modernize procedures by amending 

§ 1.1104 of our rules, 47 CFR 1.1104, 

which sets forth the application fees for 

services administered by the FCC’s 

Media Bureau (MB). The rule 

amendment reflects the closure of the 

lockbox (P.O. Box) 1 used for such 

manual payment of filing fees for nine 

types of IB services: (1) Commercial TV 

Services; (2) Commercial AM Radio 

Stations; (3) Commercial FM Radio 

Stations; (4) FM Translators; (5) TV 

Translators and LPTV Stations; (6) FM 

Booster Stations; (7) TV Booster 

Stations; (8) Class A TV Services; and 

(9) Cable Television Services. We 

discontinue the option of manual fee 

payments and instead require the use of 

an electronic payment for each service 

listed above. 

5. Section 1.1104 of the Commission’s 

rules, 47 CFR 1.1104, provides a 

schedule of application fees for 

proceedings handled by MB. The rule 

had also directed filers that do not 

utilize the Commission’s on-line filing 

and fee payment systems to send 

manual payments to P.O. Box 979089 at 

U.S. Bank in St. Louis, Missouri. In 

recent years, there have been a 

decreasing number of lockbox filers, and 

it now is rare that the Commission 

receives a lockbox payment. 

6. The Commission has begun to 

reduce its reliance on P.O. Boxes for the 

collection of fees, instead encouraging 

the use of electronic payment systems 

for all application and regulatory fees 

and closing certain lockboxes. We find 

that electronic payment of fees for the 

services processed by MB reduces the 

agency’s expenditures (including 

eliminating the annual fee for the bank’s 

services) and the cost of manually 

processing each transaction, with little 

or no inconvenience to the 

Commission’s regulatees, applicants, 

and the public. 

7. As part of this effort, we are now 

closing P.O. Box 979089 and modifying 

the relevant rule provision that requires 

payment of fees via the closed P.O. Box. 

The rules changes are contained in the 

Appendix of the Order and the Final 

Rules of this document. We make these 

changes without notice and comment 

because they are rules of agency 

organization, procedure, or practice 

exempt from the general notice-andcomment requirements of the 

Administrative Procedure Act, see 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 

8. Implementation. As a temporary 

transition measure, for 90 days after 

publication of this document in the 

Federal Register, U.S. Bank will 

continue to process payments to P.O. 

Box 979089. After that date, payments 

for these MB services must be made in 

accordance with the procedures set 

forth on the Commission’s website, 

https://www.fcc.gov/licensingdatabases/fees/application-processingfees (Media Bureau Fee Filing Guide). 

For now, such payments will be made 

through the Fee Filer Online System 

(Fee Filer), accessible at https://

www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fees/ 

fee-filer. As we assess and implement 

U.S. Treasury initiatives toward an allelectronic payment system, we may 

transition to other secure payment 

systems with appropriate public notice 

and guidance. 

III. Ordering Clauses 

9. Accordingly, it is ordered, that 

pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 158, 208, 

and 224 of the Communications Act of 

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 

154(j), 158, 208, and 224, the Order is 

hereby adopted and the rules set forth 

in the Appendix of the Order are hereby 

amended effective March 26, 2021. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES