Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15165 

180.940(a) and 180.960 to add Oxirane, 

2-methyl-, polymer with oxirane, monoC9-11-isoalkyl ethers, C10-rich, 

phosphates, potassium salts (CAS Reg. 

No. 2275654–37–8). The petitioner 

believes no analytical method is needed 

because it is not required for an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance. Contact: RD. 

D. New Tolerance Exemptions for NonInerts (Except PIPS) 

1. PP 1F8895. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0157). Biotalys NV, Technologiepark 94, 

9052 Ghent, Belgium (c/o SciReg, Inc., 

12733 Director’s Loop, Woodbridge, VA 

22192), requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the fungicide ASFBIOF01– 

02 in or on all food commodities when 

used for preharvest and postharvest 

disease control in accordance with good 

agricultural practices. The petitioner 

believes no analytical method is needed 

because the requirement is not 

applicable. Contact: BPPD. 

2. PP 0F8823. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2020– 

0481). NewLeaf Symbiotics, 1005 North 

Warson Rd., Ste. 102, St. Louis, MO 

63132, requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the fungicide 

Methylorubrum populi strain NLS0089 

in or on food commodities. The 

petitioner believes no analytical method 

is needed because it is expected that, 

when used as proposed, Methylorubrum 

populi strain NLS0089 would not result 

in residues that are of toxicological 

concern. Contact: BPPD. 

3. PP 0F8844. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2020– 

0736). Chr. Hansens Laboratory Inc., 

9015 W Maple St., Milwaukee, WI 

53214, requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the fungicide and 

nematicide Bacillus subtilis strain 

CH3000 in or on all food commodities. 

The petitioner believes no analytical 

method is needed because it is not 

applicable. Contact: BPPD. 

4. PP 0F8843. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2020– 

0737). Chr. Hansens Laboratory Inc., 

9015 W Maple St., Milwaukee, WI 

53214, requests to establish an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the fungicide and 

nematicide Bacillus paralicheniformis 

strain CH2970 in or on all food 

commodities. The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because it 

is not applicable. Contact: BPPD. 

E. New Tolerances for Non-Inerts 

1. PP 0E8871. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0045). The Interregional Research 

Project Number 4 (IR–4), IR–4 Project 

Headquarters, Rutgers, The State 

University of New Jersey, 500 College 

Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 

08450, requests to establish tolerances 

in 40 CFR 180.622 for residues of the 

fungicide ethaboxam, (N-(cyano-2- 

thienylmethyl)-4-ethyl-2-(ethylamino)- 

5-thiazolecarboxamide) in or on 

Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4–16B 

at 7 parts per million (ppm) and 

Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, 

group 5–16 at 3 ppm. The ‘‘Independent 

Laboratory Validation of Method RM– 

49C, Determination of Ethaboxam in 

Crops’’ is used to measure and evaluate 

the chemical Contact: RD. 

2. PP 9F8817. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0066). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, 

P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419, 

requests to establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

insecticide emamectin benzoate, 4′-epimethylamino-4′-deoxyavermectin B1 

benzoate (a mixture of a minimum of 

90% 4′-epi-methylamino-4′- 

deoxyavermectin B1a and a maximum 

of 10% 4′-epi-methlyamino4′deoxyavermectin B1b benzoate), and 

its metabolites 8,9 isomer of the B1a and 

B1b component of the parent insecticide 

in or on the raw agricultural commodity 

soybeans at 0.01 parts per million 

(ppm). The HPLC-fluorescence method 

is used to measure and evaluate the 

chemical emamectin benzoate. Contact: 

RD. 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a. 

Dated: March 10, 2021. 

Delores Barber, 

Director, Information Technology and 

Resources Management Division, Office of 

Program Support. 

[FR Doc. 2021–05692 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1 and 54 

[WC Docket No. 18–89; FCC 21–26; FRS 

17535] 

Protecting Against National Security 

Threats to the Communications Supply 

Chain Through FCC Programs 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In the document, the 

Commission seeks comment on several 

proposals to modify its Secure and 

Trusted Communications Networks 

Reimbursement Program 

(Reimbursement Program) rules to help 

protect the safety and security of U.S. 

communications networks. The 

proposals seek to modify these rules to 

align with the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2021 (CAA), 

which appropriated $1.895 billion to 

remove, replace, and dispose of 

communications equipment and 

services that pose a national security 

threat. Specifically, the Commission 

seeks comments on a proposal to raise 

the cap on eligibility for participation in 

the Reimbursement Program to 

providers of advanced communications 

service with 10 million or fewer 

customers and modifying the scope of 

the equipment and services eligible 

under the Reimbursement Program to 

align with the July 30, 2020 orders 

designating Huawei Technologies 

Company (Huawei) and ZTE 

Corporation (ZTE) as national security 

threats. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

April 12, 2021, and reply comments are 

due on or before April 26, 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 document, you should advise the 

contact listed in the following as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 

1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 

1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. 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 ECFS: https://

www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. 

Filings can be sent by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. Due 

to the COVID–19 pandemic, the 

Commission closed its hand-delivery 

filing location at FCC Headquarters 

effective March 19, 2020. As a result, 

hand or messenger delivered filings in 

response to this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking will not be accepted. 

Parties are encouraged to take full 

advantage of the Commission’s various 

electronic filing systems for filing 

applicable documents. Except when the 

filer requests that materials be withheld 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
15166 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

from public inspection, any document 

may be submitted electronically through 

the Commission’s ECFS. Persons that 

need to submit confidential filings to 

the Commission should follow the 

instructions provided in the 

Commission’s March 31, 2020 public 

notice regarding the procedures for 

submission of confidential materials. 

All filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 

20701. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 45 L Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20554. 

Comments and reply comments must 

include a short and concise summary of 

the substantive arguments raised in the 

pleading. Comments and reply 

comments must also comply with § 1.49 

and all other applicable sections of the 

Commission’s rules. The Commission 

directs all interested parties to include 

the name of the filing party and the date 

of the filing on each page of their 

comments and reply comments. All 

parties are encouraged to use a table of 

contents, regardless of the length of 

their submission. The Commission also 

strongly encourages parties to track the 

organization set forth in the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in order to 

facilitate the Commission’s internal 

review process. 

People With Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 

418–0432 (tty). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, please contact 

Brian Cruikshank, Competition Policy 

Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, 

at Brian.Cruikshank@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Third 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(FNPRM) in WC Docket No. 18–89, 

adopted on February 17, 2021, and 

released on February 18, 2021. The full 

text of this document is available for 

public inspection on the Commission’s 

website at: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/ 

attachments/FCC-21-26A1.pdf. 

I. Introduction 

1. In this proceeding, the Commission 

takes steps to advance Congressional 

and Commission objectives to secure the 

nation’s communications networks. 

Through the CAA, Congress 

appropriated $1.9 billion to the 

Commission to implement the Secure 

and Trusted Communications Networks 

Act of 2019 (Secure Networks Act), of 

which $1.895 billion must be used to 

remove and replace communications 

equipment and services that pose a 

national security risk and reimburse 

eligible providers for the cost of doing 

so. The FNPRM proposes to modify the 

Commission’s rules consistent with the 

CAA to expedite removal of harmful 

equipment and services from our 

nation’s communications networks. 

2. In particular, the Commission 

proposes to raise the cap on eligibility 

for participation in the Reimbursement 

Program consistent with the 

requirements of the CAA. The 

Commission also proposes to modify the 

acceptable use of reimbursement funds 

and to amend its rules to allow 

recipients to use reimbursement funds 

to remove, replace, or dispose of 

equipment or services that were 

purchased, rented, leased, or otherwise 

obtained on or before June 30, 2020. The 

Commission proposes to replace the 

prioritization scheme adopted in the 

Commission’s Supply Chain Second 

Report and Order, 86 FR 2904, January 

13, 2021, with the prioritization 

categories set forth in the CAA. Finally, 

the Commission takes this opportunity 

to align the definition of ‘‘provider of 

advanced communications service’’ in 

its rules with the broader definition set 

forth in the CAA. 

3. Now more than ever, the stability 

of the U.S. economy depends on the 

reliability, security, and integrity of the 

nation’s networks. The COVID–19 

pandemic has increased our nation’s 

reliance on the internet, and the rapid 

shift to online work, school, and health 

care has elevated the risk of cyber 

threats to our country. Moreover, the 

damage from recent and highly 

sophisticated supply chain attacks, such 

as the SolarWinds software breach, has 

further emphasized the need for a 

multifaceted and strategic approach to 

protecting our networks from all threats. 

The targeted actions the Commission 

takes in this document are consistent 

with congressional efforts in the CAA to 

hasten the removal of insecure 

equipment and services from our 

networks, which is an important 

element of secure communications. 

II. Third Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

4. The Commission seeks comment on 

how to incorporate the provisions of the 

CAA into the Commission’s rules. 

Specifically, the Commission seeks 

comment on changes to its rules 

regarding eligibility for participation in 

the Reimbursement Program, acceptable 

uses of Reimbursement Program 

disbursements, the eligibility of certain 

equipment and services for the 

Reimbursement Program, and a 

prioritization paradigm in the event 

applications for the Reimbursement 

Program exceed the $1.895 billion 

appropriated by Congress. 

5. The Commission proposes to raise 

the cap on eligibility for participation in 

the Reimbursement Program to 

providers of advanced communications 

services with 10 million or fewer 

customers and seek comment on this 

proposal. Prior to enactment of the 

CAA, section 4(b)(1) of the Secure 

Networks Act restricted eligibility under 

the Reimbursement Program to 

providers of advanced communication 

service with two million or fewer 

customers, and in the Supply Chain 

Second Report and Order, the 

Commission so restricted the program. 

In the CAA, however, Congress 

amended section 4(b)(1) of the Secure 

Networks Act to increase the eligibility 

criteria to those providers with 10 

million or fewer customers. The 

Commission proposes to change its 

rules and allow providers with 10 

million or fewer customers to 

participate in the Reimbursement 

Program. The Commission seeks 

comment on the proposal and any 

implications that it may have for 

participation in the Reimbursement 

Program. 

6. The Commission next proposes to 

modify the acceptable use of 

Reimbursement Program funds to 

include only the removal, replacement, 

and disposal of equipment and services 

subject to the final designations of 

Huawei and ZTE (collectively, the 

Designation Orders), consistent with the 

CAA. 

7. Before it was amended by the CAA, 

section 4(c) of the Secure Networks Act 

specified that a participant in the 

Reimbursement Program may only use 

Reimbursement Program funding to 

remove, replace, and dispose of 

‘‘covered communications equipment or 

services’’ published on the list of 

covered communications equipment 

and services (Covered List). In the 

Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 

the Commission adopted a rule 

prohibiting Reimbursement Program 

funding recipients from ‘‘using 

reimbursement funds to remove, 

replace, or dispose of covered 

communications equipment or service 

purchased, rented, leased, or otherwise 

obtained after these statutory cutoff 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15167 

dates.’’ The Supply Chain Second 

Report and Order, consistent with the 

Secure Networks Act before 

amendment, defined covered 

communications equipment or services 

as those published on the Covered List. 

To be published on the Covered List, 

equipment and services must fulfill 

three requirements. First, they must be 

communications equipment, which the 

Commission defined in the Supply 

Chain Second Report and Order as all 

equipment and services used in fixed 

and mobile broadband networks, 

provided they include or use electronic 

components. Second, the equipment 

and services must be identified as 

posing ‘‘an unacceptable risk to the 

national security of the United States or 

the security and safety of United States 

persons’’ to by specifically enumerated 

sources listed in section 2(c) of the 

Secure Networks Act. Finally, the 

equipment and services must be capable 

of the criteria in section 2(b)(2)(A)–(C) 

of the Secure Networks Act. On the 

other hand, the Designation Orders 

encompassed all equipment and 

services produced or provided by 

Huawei and ZTE. In the Supply Chain 

Second Report and Order, the 

Commission acknowledged that some 

equipment and services covered by the 

Designation Orders would not be 

eligible for reimbursement, even though 

they were subject to the Universal 

Service Fund (USF) prohibition in 

§ 54.9 of the Commission’s rules. 

8. In section 901 of the CAA, 

however, Congress amended section 4(c) 

of the Secure Networks Act to limit the 

use of reimbursement funds: 

Solely for the purposes of permanently 

removing covered communications 

equipment or services purchased, rented, 

leased or otherwise obtained as defined in 

the Report and Order of the Commission in 

the matter of Protecting Against National 

Security Threats to the Communications 

Supply Chain Through FCC Programs (FCC 

19–121; WC Docket No. 18–89; adopted 

November 22, 2019) . . . or as determined to 

be covered by both the process of the [Supply 

Chain] First Report and Order and the 

Designations Orders of the Commission on 

June 30, 2020 (DA 20–690; PS Docket No. 19– 

351; adopted June 30, 2020) (DA 20–691; PS 

Docket No. 19–352; adopted June 30, 2020). 

9. The Commission believes this 

amendment demonstrates Congressional 

intent to change the scope of equipment 

and services eligible for reimbursement 

from the equipment and services on the 

Covered List to the equipment and 

services subject to the Designation 

Orders. The Commission seeks 

comment on this interpretation. Do the 

amendments revise the eligibility 

criteria for reimbursement such that all 

equipment and services produced or 

provided by Huawei and ZTE are now 

eligible for reimbursement, consistent 

with the scope of § 54.9 of the 

Commission’s rules? Would limiting the 

use of Reimbursement Program funds 

solely for the purposes of removing, 

replacing, or disposing of 

communications equipment or services 

produced or provided by Huawei or 

ZTE or their subsidiaries, parents, and 

affiliates align with the language of the 

CAA? Consistent with the Commission’s 

reasoning in the Supply Chain First 

Report and Order 85 FR 230, January 3, 

2020, would reimbursement for all 

Huawei and ZTE equipment better 

ensure the security of U.S. 

communications networks than a 

narrower scope of reimbursement? After 

the amendments, are equipment or 

services published on the Covered List 

pursuant to section 2 of the Secure 

Networks Act but manufactured by 

companies not subject to the 

Designation Orders eligible for 

reimbursement? If other companies are 

designated as posing a national security 

threat to the integrity of 

communications networks or the 

communications supply chain between 

now and the conclusion of the 

Reimbursement Program, would those 

companies’ equipment and services be 

eligible under the Reimbursement 

Program? 

10. The Commission seeks comment 

on alternative interpretations. Did 

Congress intend to limit the use of 

Reimbursement Program funds to 

removal, replacement, and disposal of 

equipment and services subject to both 

the Designation Orders and the Covered 

List, rather than including all 

equipment and services subject to the 

Designation Orders? Are there other 

potential interpretations of the statutory 

language? 

11. Remove-and-Replace Rule. The 

Commission also proposes to modify the 

remove-and-replace rule adopted by the 

Commission in the Supply Chain 

Second Report and Order to change the 

scope of the equipment and services 

covered from those on the Covered List 

to those subject to the Designation 

Orders. The Commission seeks 

comment on the proposal. 

12. In adopting the remove-andreplace rule in the Supply Chain Second 

Report and Order, the Commission 

explained that it intended to align the 

scope of equipment and services subject 

to the remove-and-replace rule 

contained in § 54.11 of the 

Commission’s rules with the scope of 

equipment and services eligible for 

reimbursement under the 

Reimbursement Program. As the CAA 

appears to modify the equipment and 

services eligible for reimbursement from 

those on the Covered List to those 

subject to the Designation Orders, the 

Commission proposes to accordingly 

revise the equipment and services 

subject to removal to encompass all 

equipment and services produced or 

provided by Huawei and ZTE. To do so 

would be consistent with the 

Commission’s findings in the Supply 

Chain First Report and Order about the 

potential vulnerabilities of all types of 

equipment. Are there other aspects of 

the remove-and-replace rule that should 

be modified in light of the CAA or other 

considerations? 

13. The Commission proposes to 

amend its rules to allow Reimbursement 

Program recipients to use such funds to 

remove, replace, or dispose of any 

equipment or services that was 

purchased, rented, leased, or otherwise 

obtained on or before June 30, 2020. The 

Commission seeks comment on the 

proposal. 

14. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Secure 

Networks Act prohibited 

Reimbursement Program recipients from 

using such funds to ‘‘remove, replace, or 

dispose of any covered communications 

equipment or service purchased, rented, 

leased, or otherwise obtained on or 

after, in the case of covered any 

communications equipment or service 

that is on the initial list published under 

section 2(a), August 14, 2018, or in the 

case of any covered communications 

equipment that is not on the initial list 

published under section 2(a), the date 

that is 60 days after the date on which 

the Commission places such equipment 

or service on the list . . . .’’ In the 

Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 

the Commission adopted a rule 

prohibiting Reimbursement Program 

funding recipients from ‘‘using 

reimbursement funds to remove, 

replace, or dispose of covered 

communications equipment or service 

purchased, rented, leased, or otherwise 

obtained after these statutory cutoff 

dates.’’ 

15. In the CAA, Congress amended 

section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Secure 

Networks Act to prohibit 

Reimbursement Fund recipients from 

using such funds to ‘‘remove, replace, or 

dispose of any covered communications 

equipment or service purchased, rented, 

leased, or otherwise obtained on or after 

publication of the [Supply Chain First 

Report and Order]; or in the case of any 

covered communications equipment 

that only became covered pursuant to 

the Designations Orders, June 30, 2020 

. . . .’’ Consistent with the statutory 

language and the statutory language 

discussed in this document that appears 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
15168 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

to make all equipment and services 

subject to the Designation Orders 

eligible for reimbursement, the 

Commission proposes to amend its rules 

to make all equipment and services 

obtained on or before June 30, 2020 to 

be eligible for reimbursement. Are there 

are other potential interpretations of this 

language. 

16. The Commission proposes to 

replace the prioritization scheme 

adopted in the Supply Chain Second 

Report and Order with the prioritization 

categories adopted in the CAA. The 

Commission seeks comment on that 

proposal. Additionally, the Commission 

seeks comment on whether it can 

further prioritize reimbursement within 

the prioritization subcategories. 

17. Before enactment of the CAA, the 

Secure Networks Act was silent on 

whether or how reimbursement funds 

should be prioritized in the event 

requests for reimbursement funding 

exceeded the appropriated money 

available for such reimbursement. In the 

Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 

the Commission established a 

‘‘prioritization paradigm in the event 

the estimated costs for replacement 

submitted by the providers during the 

initial or any subsequent filing window 

in the aggregate exceed the total amount 

of funding available as appropriated by 

Congress for reimbursement requests.’’ 

The Commission adopted a scheme that 

first allocates funding to eligible 

providers that are ETCs subject to a 

remove-and-replace requirement under 

the Commission’s rules and, if funding 

is insufficient to meet the total demand 

from that group of ETCs, the program 

will prioritize funding for transitioning 

the core networks of these eligible 

providers before allocating funds to 

non-core network related expenses. If, 

however, funding is still available after 

all demand from ETCs in the first 

category is satisfied, the Commission’s 

rules allocate funding to non-(eligible 

telecommunications carriers) ETCs 

eligible providers, prioritizing those 

non-ETCs that provided cost estimate 

data in response to the Commission’s 

Supply Chain Security Information 

Collection over other non-ETCs. Finally, 

the Commission’s rules further 

prioritize funding for core network 

transition costs over non-core network 

transition costs within each non-ETC 

category. 

18. The CAA, however, established a 

prioritization paradigm for the 

Reimbursement Program that differs 

from the model the Commission 

adopted in the Supply Chain Second 

Report and Order. Under the CAA, ‘‘the 

Commission shall allocate sufficient 

reimbursement funds first, to approved 

applications that have 2,000,000 or 

fewer customers . . . , [then] to 

approved applicants that are accredited 

public or private non-commercial 

educational institutions providing their 

own facilities-based educational 

broadband services . . . , [then] to any 

remaining applicants determined to be 

eligible for reimbursement under the 

[Reimbursement] Program.’’ 

19. The Commission proposes to 

adopt the CAA’s prioritization scheme 

as an overarching replacement to the 

prioritization scheme adopted in the 

Supply Chain Second Report and Order. 

Thus, the Commission proposes to first 

allocate funds to approved applications 

with 2 million or fewer customers. Once 

applications meeting that requirement 

are funded, the Commission proposes to 

allocate funds to approved applicants 

that are accredited public or private 

non-commercial educational 

institutions providing their own 

facilities-based educational broadband 

services. After those applicants are fully 

funded, the Commission proposes to 

allocate funds to any remaining 

applicants determined to be eligible for 

reimbursement under the 

Reimbursement Program. The 

Commission seeks comment on this 

proposal. 

20. While the Commission proposes 

to change the three reimbursement 

prioritization categories consistent with 

the CAA, the CAA is silent on how the 

Commission should further prioritize 

funding within the three main 

categories. If funding within a particular 

category is insufficient to meet demand, 

how should the Commission allocate 

funding within that particular category? 

Can the Commission still prioritize 

certain equipment or providers within 

an individual category if funding is 

insufficient to fund all applications 

within that prioritization category? 

When the Commission adopted the 

prioritization scheme in the Supply 

Chain Second Report and Order, the 

Commission found that replacing the 

core network is the logical first step in 

a network transition and may have the 

greatest impact on eliminating a 

national security risk from the network. 

This is unlikely to have changed since 

the Commission adopted the Supply 

Chain Second Report and Order on 

December 10, 2020. The Commission 

seeks comment on whether the language 

of the CAA allow the Commission to 

maintain a prioritization for core 

network transition costs over non-core 

network transitions costs the categories 

established by the CAA? The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

reducing funding on a pro rata basis for 

all recipients within a prioritization 

category as defined by the CAA. Are 

there any other methods of allocating 

funding equitably across a specific 

category if remaining funding is 

insufficient to fund all of the remaining 

requests? 

21. Similarly, the Commission seeks 

comment on other potential subprioritization categories. Recognizing 

the national security threats to 

communications networks or the 

communications supply chain that 

remain even while the Commission 

works to remove covered equipment 

and services, the Commission seeks 

comment on prioritizing, within each 

category, the removal and 

reimbursement of certain equipment or 

services at particular locations 

identified as posing an elevated national 

security risk by the Commission or other 

federal agencies or interagency bodies as 

defined in section 2(c) of the Secure 

Networks Act. The Commission believes 

prioritizing equipment and services at 

particular locations with an elevated 

national security risk is consistent with 

the CAA, because the Commission 

would only prioritize equipment and 

services within the same prioritization 

category. Building on this idea, can the 

Commission prioritize equipment and 

services at locations that pose a 

heightened national security risk in a 

lower priority category ahead of any 

equipment and services in a higher 

prioritization category? Are there other 

methods for prioritizing any other 

equipment or services within a 

reimbursement prioritization category? 

The Commission seeks comment on any 

other methods consistent with the CAA 

prioritization structure. 

22. In the Secure Networks Act, 

Congress defined ‘‘provider of advanced 

communications service’’ as ‘‘a person 

who provides advanced 

communications service to United 

States customers.’’ Congress amended 

this definition in the CAA to ‘‘include[ ] 

. . . accredited public or private noncommercial educational institutions 

providing their own facilities-based 

educational broadband service as 

defined in § 27.4 of the Commission’s 

rules,’’ and ‘‘health care providers and 

libraries providing advanced 

communications service.’’ In the Supply 

Chain Second Report and Order, the 

Commission explained that ‘‘for 

purposes of the Reimbursement 

Program, a school, library, or health care 

provider, or consortium thereof, may 

also qualify as a provider of advanced 

communications service, and therefore 

be eligible to participate in the 

Reimbursement Program . . .’’ 

23. Consistent with the CAA, the 

Commission proposes to change the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15169 

definition of provider of advanced 

communications service to incorporate 

the new, broader definition. The 

Commission seeks comment on this 

proposal. While the Commission 

believes its interpretation in the Supply 

Chain Second Report and Order is 

consistent with the amendments to the 

Secure Networks Act, the Commission 

proposes to update its rules to follow 

Congress’ direction in the CAA. The 

Commission also seeks comment on 

whether the term ‘‘educational 

broadband service as defined under Part 

27 of the Commission’s rules’’ is 

intended to solely reference licensees in 

the Commission’s Education Broadband 

Service, or whether this term has a 

different meaning. Consistent with the 

Supply Chain Second Report and Order, 

the Commission proposes to modify the 

definition of ‘‘provider of advanced 

communications service’’ only for 

purposes of the Reimbursement Program 

and not for any other provision of the 

Secure Networks Act or the 

Commission’s rules. The Commission 

seeks comment on this proposal. 

24. Finally, the Commission seeks 

comment on whether the amendments 

to the Secure Networks Act enacted by 

Congress in the CAA require revision to 

any other provisions or rules adopted by 

the Commission in the Supply Chain 

Second Report and Order. Are other 

changes to the Commission’s rules 

mandated or necessary as a result of the 

CAA? 

25. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

proposals to implement the 

requirements of the CAA, and the 

Commission has no discretion to ignore 

such congressional direction. In 

addition, the CAA provides funding to 

reimburse eligible providers for their 

costs to remove and replace harmful 

equipment and services from their 

networks. Moreover, the Commission 

already completed an Information 

Collection to determine the costs to 

ETCs to remove and replace Huawei and 

ZTE equipment and services from their 

networks. Accordingly, the Commission 

tentatively concludes that its proposals 

in the FNPRM will impose no 

additional costs to those who are 

required to participate in the 

reimbursement program. The 

Commission seeks comment on this 

tentative conclusion. 

III. Procedural Matters 

26. This document contains proposed 

new and modified information 

collection requirements. The 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burdens, will 

invite the general public and the Office 

of Management and Budget to comment 

on the information collection 

requirements contained in this 

document, as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 

13. In addition, pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks 

specific comment on how it might 

further reduce the information 

collection burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 

27. Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 

(RFA), which has been amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), the 

Commission has prepared this Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 

of the possible significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities by the policies and rules 

proposed in the FNPRM. Written 

comments are requested on this IRFA. 

Comments must be identified as 

responses to the IRFA and must be filed 

by the deadlines for comments on the 

FNPRM provided on the first page of the 

item. The Commission will send a copy 

of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA). 

In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

28. Consistent with the Commission’s 

obligation to be responsible stewards of 

the public funds used in the USF 

programs and increasing concern about 

ensuring communications supply chain 

integrity, the FNPRM proposes and 

seeks comment on rules to implement 

Division N, Title IX, section 901 of the 

CAA and their applicability to the 

Commission’s ongoing efforts to secure 

the communications supply chain. 

29. Specifically, the Commission 

proposes to amend the rules regarding 

provider eligibility for participation in 

the Reimbursement Program, the 

equipment and services eligible for 

Reimbursement Program disbursements, 

and the prioritization of Reimbursement 

Program Funds. 

30. The proposed action is authorized 

under sections 4(i), 201(b), 214, 254, 

303(r), 403, and 503 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 201(b), 214, 

254, 303(r), 403 and 503, Division N, 

Title IX, section 901 of the CAA, 47 

U.S.C. 1603 and 1608. 

31. The RFA directs agencies to 

provide a description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities that may be affected by 

the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA 

generally defines the term ‘‘small 

entity’’ as having the same meaning as 

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small 

organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term 

‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning 

as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ 

under the Small Business Act. Pursuant 

to the RFA, the statutory definition of a 

small business applies ‘‘unless an 

agency, after consultation with the 

Office of Advocacy of the SBA and after 

opportunity for public comment, 

establishes one or more definitions of 

such term which are appropriate to the 

activities of the agency and publishes 

such definition(s) in the Federal 

Register.’’ A small business concern is 

one that: (1) Is independently owned 

and operated; (2) is not dominant in its 

field of operation; and (3) satisfies any 

additional criteria established by the 

SBA). 

32. Small Businesses, Small 

Organizations, Small Governmental 

Jurisdictions. The Commission’s actions, 

over time, may affect small entities that 

are not easily categorized at present. 

The Commission therefore describes 

here, at the outset, three broad groups of 

small entities that could be directly 

affected herein. First, while there are 

industry specific size standards for 

small businesses that are used in the 

regulatory flexibility analysis, according 

to data from the SBA’s Office of 

Advocacy, in general a small business is 

an independent business having fewer 

than 500 employees. These types of 

small businesses represent 99.9% of all 

businesses in the United States which 

translates to 28.8 million businesses. 

33. Next, the type of small entity 

described as a ‘‘small organization’’ is 

generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise 

which is independently owned and 

operated and is not dominant in its 

field.’’ Nationwide, as of Aug 2016, 

there were approximately 356,494 small 

organizations based on registration and 

tax data filed by nonprofits with the 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Data 

from the Urban Institute, National 

Center for Charitable Statistics (NCCS) 

reporting on nonprofit organizations 

registered with the IRS was used to 

estimate the number of small 

organizations. Reports generated using 

the NCCS online database indicated that 

as of August 2016 there were 356,494 

registered nonprofits with total revenues 

of less than $100,000. Of this number, 

326,897 entities filed tax returns with 

65,113 registered nonprofits reporting 

total revenues of $50,000 or less on the 

IRS Form 990–N for Small Exempt 

Organizations and 261,784 nonprofits 

reporting total revenues of $100,000 or 

less on some other version of the IRS 

Form 990 within 24 months of the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
15170 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

August 2016 data release date. You can 

access http://nccsweb.urban.org/ 

tablewiz/bmf.php where the report 

showing this data can be generated by 

selecting the following data fields: 

Show: ‘‘Registered Nonprofit 

Organizations’’; By: ‘‘Total Revenue 

Level (years 1995, Aug to 2016, Aug)’’; 

and For: ‘‘2016, Aug’’ then selecting 

‘‘Show Results.’’ 

34. Finally, the small entity described 

as a ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction’’ 

is defined generally as ‘‘governments of 

cities, counties, towns, townships, 

villages, school districts, or special 

districts, with a population of less than 

fifty thousand.’’ U.S. Census Bureau 

data from the 2017 Census of 

Governments indicate that there were 

90,075 local governmental jurisdictions 

consisting of general purpose 

governments and special purpose 

governments in the United States. The 

Census of Governments survey is 

conducted every five (5) years 

compiling data for years ending with 

‘‘2’’ and ‘‘7’’. Of this number there were 

36,931 general purpose governments 

(county, municipal and town or 

township) with populations of less than 

50,000 and 12,040 special purpose 

governments—independent school 

districts with enrollment populations of 

less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on 

the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments 

data, the Commission estimates that at 

least 48,971 entities fall into the 

category of ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdictions.’’ Local governmental 

jurisdictions are made up of general 

purpose governments (county, 

municipal and town or township) and 

special purpose governments (special 

districts and independent school 

districts). There were 2,105 county 

governments with populations less than 

50,000. This category does not include 

subcounty (municipal and township) 

governments. There were 18,729 

municipal and 16,097 town and 

township governments with populations 

less than 50,000. There were 12,040 

independent school districts with 

enrollment populations less than 

50,000. While the special purpose 

governments category also includes 

local special district governments, the 

2017 Census of Governments data does 

not provide data aggregated based on 

population size for the special purpose 

governments category. Therefore, only 

data from independent school districts 

is included in the special purpose 

governments category. This total is 

derived from the sum of the number of 

general purpose governments (county, 

municipal and town or township) with 

populations of less than 50,000 (36,931) 

and the number of special purpose 

governments—independent school 

districts with enrollment populations of 

less than 50,000 (12,040), from the 2017 

Census of Governments—Organizations 

Tables 5, 6, and 10. 

35. Small entities potentially affected 

by the proposals herein include eligible 

schools and libraries, eligible rural nonprofit and public health care providers, 

and the eligible service providers 

offering them services, including 

telecommunications service providers, 

internet Service Providers (ISPs), and 

vendors of the services and equipment 

used for telecommunications and 

broadband networks. 

36. The FNPRM proposes rules that: 

Raise the eligibility threshold in the 

Reimbursement Program for providers 

of advanced communications service 

from two million to ten million 

customers, restrict the use of 

Reimbursement Program funds to 

equipment or services produced or 

provided by any company deemed to 

pose a national security threat to the 

integrity of communications networks 

or the communications supply chain, 

make equipment and services obtained 

on or before June 30, 2020 eligible for 

reimbursement, and revise a 

prioritization scheme to award 

Reimbursement Program funding. The 

Commission seeks comment on these 

proposals, and their likely costs and 

benefits, as well as on alternative 

approaches and any other steps it 

should consider taking. 

37. The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant, specifically 

small business, alternatives that it has 

considered in reaching its proposed 

approach, which may include the 

following four alternatives (among 

others): ‘‘(1) the establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance and reporting requirements 

under the rule for such small entities; 

(3) the use of performance rather than 

design standards; and (4) an exemption 

from coverage of the rule, or any part 

thereof, for such small entities.’’ 

38. In compliance with the CAA, the 

FNPRM proposes to increase the pool of 

eligible participants in the 

Reimbursement Program to all providers 

of advanced communications services 

with ten million or fewer customers, 

limit the use of Reimbursement Program 

funding to remove, replace, and dispose 

of to allow Reimbursement Program 

allocations to be used to remove, 

replace, and dispose of equipment or 

services produced or provided by any 

company deemed to pose a national 

security threat to the integrity of 

communications networks or the 

communications supply chain, make 

equipment and services obtained on or 

before June 30, 2020 eligible for 

reimbursement, and revise the 

prioritization scheme to prioritize 

advanced communications service 

providers with two million or fewer 

customers, then public or private noncommercial educational institutions 

providing their own facilities-based 

educational broadband services, and 

then to any remaining eligible 

applicants. 

39. The Commission expects to take 

into account the economic impact on 

small entities, as identified in comments 

filed in response to the FNPRM and this 

IRFA, in reaching the Commission’s 

final conclusions and promulgating 

rules in this proceeding. The FNPRM 

generally seeks comment on how to 

adopt enacted legislation that mandates 

action by the Commission and seeks 

specific comment on how to mitigate 

the impact on small entities. 

40. Ex Parte Presentations. This 

proceeding is a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ 

proceeding in accordance with the 

Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons 

making ex parte presentations must file 

a copy of any written presentation or a 

memorandum summarizing any oral 

presentation within two business days 

after the presentation (unless a different 

deadline applicable to the Sunshine 

period applies). Persons making oral ex 

parte presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentation must (1) list all persons 

attending or otherwise participating in 

the meeting at which the ex parte 

presentation was made, and (2) 

summarize all data presented and 

arguments made during the 

presentation. If the presentation 

consisted in whole or in part of the 

presentation of data or arguments 

already reflected in the presenter’s 

written comments, memoranda, or other 

filings in the proceeding, the presenter 

may provide citations to such data or 

arguments in his or her prior comments, 

memoranda, or other filings (specifying 

the relevant page and/or paragraph 

numbers where such data or arguments 

can be found) in lieu of summarizing 

them in the memorandum. Documents 

shown or given to Commission staff 

during ex parte meetings are deemed to 

be written ex parte presentations and 

must be filed consistent with rule 

1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 

rule 1.49(f) or for which the 

Commission has made available a 

method of electronic filing, written ex 

parte presentations and memoranda 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 15171 

summarizing oral ex parte 

presentations, and all attachments 

thereto, must be filed through the 

electronic comment filing system 

available for that proceeding, and must 

be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, 

.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants 

in this proceeding should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

IV. Ordering Clauses 

41. Accordingly, it is ordered that, 

pursuant to the authority contained in 

sections 4(i), 201(b), 214, 254, 303(r), 

403, and 503 of the Communications 

Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 

154(i), 201(b), 214, 254, 303(r), 403 and 

503, sections 2, 3, 4, and 9 of the Secure 

Networks Act, 47 U.S.C. 1601, 1602, 

1603, and 1608, Division N, Title IX, 

sections 901 and 906 of the CAA, and 

§§ 1.1 and 1.412 of the Commission’s 

rules, 47 CFR 1.1 and 1.412, the FNPRM 

is adopted. 

List of Subjects 

47 CFR Part 1 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Civil rights, Claims, 

Communications, Communications 

common carriers, Communications 

equipment, Cuba, Drug abuse, 

Environmental impact statements, Equal 

access to justice, Equal employment 

opportunity, Federal buildings and 

facilities, Government employees, 

Historic preservation, Income taxes, 

Indemnity payments, Individuals with 

disabilities, internet, Investigations, 

Lawyers, Metric system, Penalties, 

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Satellites, Telecommunications, 

Telephone, Television, Wages. 

47 CFR Part 54 

Communications common carriers, 

Health facilities, Infants and children, 

internet, Libraries, Puerto Rico, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Schools, 

Telecommunications, Telephone, Virgin 

Islands. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene Dortch, 

Secretary. 

Proposed Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communication 

Commission proposes to amend 47 parts 

1 and 54 as follows: 

PART 1—PRACTICE AND 

PROCEDURE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. chs. 2, 5, 9, 13; 28 

U.S.C. 2461, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Amend § 1.50004 by revising 

paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(1) 

and (2), (f), and paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and 

(ii) and adding (q) to read as follows: 

§ 1.50004 Secure and Trusted 

Communications Networks Reimbursement 

Program. 

(a) Eligibility. Providers of advanced 

communications service with ten 

million or fewer customers are eligible 

to participate in the Reimbursement 

Program to reimburse such providers 

solely for costs reasonably incurred for 

the permanent replacement, removal, 

and disposal of covered 

communications equipment or services: 

(1) As defined in the Report and 

Order of the Commission in the matter 

of Protecting Against National Security 

Threats to the Communications Supply 

Chain Through FCC Programs (FCC 19– 

121; WC Docket No. 18–89; adopted 

November 22, 2019 (in this section 

referred to as the ‘Report and Order’); or 

(2) As determined to be covered by 

both the process of the Report and Order 

and the Designation Orders of the 

Commission on June 30, 2020 (DA 20– 

690; PS Docket No. 19–351; adopted 

June 30, 2020) (DA 20–691; PS Docket 

No. 19–352; adopted June 30, 2020) (in 

this section collectively referred to as 

the ‘Designation Orders’); 

* * * * * 

(f) Prioritization of support. The 

Wireline Competition Bureau shall issue 

funding allocations in accordance with 

this section after the close of a filing 

window. After a filing window closes, 

the Wireline Competition Bureau shall 

calculate the total demand for 

Reimbursement Program support 

submitted by all eligible providers 

during the filing window period. If the 

total demand received during the filing 

window exceeds the total funds 

available, then the Wireline 

Competition Bureau shall allocate the 

available funds consistent with the 

following priority schedule: 

Priority 1 

Advanced communication service 

providers with 2 million or fewer 

customers. 

Priority 2 

Advanced communications service 

providers that are accredited public or 

private non-commercial educational 

institutions providing their own 

facilities-based educational broadband 

service, as defined in 47 CFR 27.4. 

Priority 3 

Any remaining approved applicants 

determined to be eligible for 

reimbursement under the Program. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) On or after publication of the 

Report and Order; or 

(ii) In the case of any covered 

communications equipment that only 

became covered pursuant to the 

Designation Orders, June 30, 2020; or 

* * * * * 

(q) Provider of advanced 

communications services. For purposes 

of the Secure and Trusted 

Communications Networks 

Reimbursement Program, provider of 

advanced communications services is 

defined as: 

(1) A person who provides advanced 

communications service to United 

States customers; and includes: 

(i) Accredited public or private noncommercial educational institutions, 

providing their own facilities-based 

educational broadband service, as 

defined in 47 CFR 27.4; and 

(ii) Health care providers and libraries 

providing advanced communications 

service. 

(2) [RESERVED] 

PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 54 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 

205, 214, 219, 220, 229, 254, 303(r), 403, 

1004, and 1302, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 4. Amend § 54.11 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 54.11 Requirement to remove and 

replace. 

* * * * * 

(b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of 

this section, covered communications 

equipment or services means any 

communications equipment or service 

produced or provided by a covered 

company posing a national security 

threat to the integrity of 

communications networks or the 

communications supply chain. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–04692 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS