Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 38037 

actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled Regulatory 

Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this final rule 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this final rule is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, 

entitled Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 

This final rule does not contain any 

information collections subject to OMB 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., nor does it require any special 

considerations under Executive Order 

12898, entitled Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

This final rule directly regulates 

growers, food processors, food handlers, 

and food retailers, not States or Tribes, 

nor does this action alter the 

relationships or distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

Congress in the preemption provisions 

of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, 

the Agency has determined that this 

action will not have a substantial direct 

effect on States or tribal governments, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

Tribes. Thus, the Agency has 

determined that Executive Order 13132, 

entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 

13175, entitled Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. 

In addition, this final rule does not 

impose any enforceable duty or contain 

any unfunded mandate as described 

under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 

104–4). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

Pursuant to the requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby 

certifies that this final rule will not have 

significant negative economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

In fact, this rule will have no impact 

because it merely corrects an error in 

the propylene oxide tolerance regulation 

that was inserted in the regulation 

without proper authority and thus was 

without legal effect. 

V. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 16, 2011. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. Section 180.491 is amended by 

revising ‘‘Nut, tree, group 14’’ in the 

table in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.491 Propylene oxide; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. (1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Nutmeat, processed, except peanuts ......................................... 300 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Nutmeat, processed, except peanuts ......................................... 10.0 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–16045 Filed 6–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0423; FRL–8879–2] 

Mevinphos; Data Call-in Order for 

Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final order. 

SUMMARY: This order requires the 

submission of various data to support 

the continuation of the tolerances for 

the pesticide mevinphos. Pesticide 

tolerances are established under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA). Following publication of this 

order, persons who are interested in the 

continuation of the mevinphos 

tolerances must notify the Agency by 

completing and submitting the required 

section 408(f) Order Response form 

(available in the docket) within 90 days. 

If the Agency does not receive within 90 

days after publication of the final order 

a section 408(f) Response Form 

identifying a person who agrees to 

submit the required data, EPA will 

revoke the mevinphos tolerances. 

DATES: This final order is effective June 

29, 2011. A section 408(f) Order 

Response form must be received on or 

before September 27, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2010–0423. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

38038 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

Submit your section 408(f) Order 

Response form, identified by docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2010–0423, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal:. 

Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

• Instructions: Direct your section 

408(f) Order Response form to docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0423. 

EPA’s policy is that all information and 

comments received will be included in 

the docket without change and may be 

made available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the information or comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

regulations.gov website is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send information or comments 

via an e-mail directly to EPA without 

going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

information or comment that is placed 

in the docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit information or a 

comment electronically, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your information or 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

information or comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your submission. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

• Docket: All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either in the electronic docket 

at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

hours of operation of this Docket 

Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Bartow, Pesticide Re-evaluation 

Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 603–0065; fax number: 

(703) 308–8090; e-mail address: 

bartow.susan@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR cite at http://ecfr.

gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=

ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_

02.tpl http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. 

To access the harmonized test 

guidelines referenced in this document 

electronically, please go to http:// 

www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test 

Methods and Guidelines.’’ 

II. Background 

A. What action is the agency taking? 

In this document EPA issues an order 

requiring the submission of various data 

to support the continuation of the 

mevinphos tolerances at 40 CFR 180.157 

under section 408 of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (‘‘FFDCA’’), 21 

U.S.C. 346a. 

Mevinphos is not currently registered 

under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(‘‘FIFRA’’), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., and may 

not be sold, distributed, or used in the 

United States. Mevinphos’ FIFRA 

registration was canceled in 1994. 

However, 15 FFDCA tolerances remain 

for residues of mevinphos on the 

following commodities: Broccoli, 

cabbage, cauliflower, celery, spinach, 

strawberries, grapes, lettuce, melons, 

watermelon, peas, peppers, summer 

squash, cucumbers, and tomatoes (40 

CFR 180.157). Since there are currently 

no domestic registrations for 

mevinphos, these tolerances are referred 

to as ‘‘import tolerances.’’ It is these 

tolerances that are addressed by the data 

call-in order. 

B. What is the agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

Under section 408(f) of the FFDCA, 

EPA is authorized to require, by order, 

submission of data ‘‘reasonably required 

to support the continuation of a 

tolerance’’ when such data cannot be 

obtained under the Data Call-In 

authority of FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B), or 

section 4 of the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (‘‘TSCA’’), 15 U.S.C. 2603. 

A FFDCA section 408 data call-in order 

may only be issued following 

publication of notice of the order and a 

60-day public comment provision. 

A section 408(f) Data Call-In order 

must contain the following elements: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 38039 

1. A requirement that one or more 

persons submit to EPA a notice 

identifying the person(s) who commit to 

submit the data required in the order; 

2. A description of the required data 

and the required reports connected to 

such data; 

3. An explanation of why the required 

data could not be obtained under 

section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA or section 4 

of TSCA; and 

4. The required submission date for 

the notice identifying one or more 

interested persons who commit to 

submit the required data and the 

required submission dates for all the 

data and reports required in the order. 

(21 U.S.C. 346a(f)(1)(C)). 

EPA may by order modify or revoke 

the affected tolerances if any one of the 

following submissions are not made in 

a timely manner: 

1. A notice identifying the one or 

more interested persons who commit to 

submit the data; 

2. The data itself; or 

3. The reports required under a 

section 408(f) order are not submitted by 

the date specified in the order. (21 

U.S.C. 346a(f)(2)). 

C. What preliminary steps were taken by 

EPA prior to issuing this final order? 

On July 28, 2010, EPA issued a 

proposed data call-in order for the 

pesticide mevinphos in connection with 

tolerances for that pesticide under 

section 408 of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a. (75 FR 44181). The proposed data 

call-in order included the following 

studies: 

1. Comparative Cholinesterase Assay 

(870.6300); 

2. Immunotoxicity Study (870.7800); 

3. Directions for Use (860.1200); 

4. Crop Field Trials (860.1500)— 

(broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, celery, 

grapes, lettuce, peas, peppers, spinach, 

summer squash, strawberries, and 

tomatoes); and 

5. Processing Study (tomatoes) 

(860.1520). 

III. Summary of Public Comments 

Received and Agency Response to 

Comments 

EPA received no comments in 

response to the July 28, 2010 Federal 

Register notice announcing the 

Agency’s proposed data call-in order for 

mevinphos. In addition, the Agency has 

not received any of the data identified 

in the proposed order as needed to 

support the mevinphos tolerances. 

IV. Final Data Call-in Order 

Because no comments were submitted 

on the proposed order and the data 

deficiencies identified in the proposed 

order remain, EPA is today issuing the 

final data call-in order under FFDCA 

section 408(f)(1)(C) for mevinphos in the 

same form as the proposed order and for 

the reasons set forth in that proposed 

order. Specifically, EPA is requiring: 

1. Notice of intent to submit data. A 

notice identifying the person or persons 

who commit to submit the data and 

reports in accordance with Unit V.2. 

must be submitted to EPA if any person 

wishes to support the mevinphos 

tolerances. The notice must be 

submitted on a section 408(f) Order 

Response form which is available on the 

Federal Government’s electronic docket, 

http:/www.regulations.gov, under 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010– 

0423. 

2. Deadline for submission of notice 

identifying data submitters. The notice 

described in Unit V.1. identifying data 

submitters must be submitted to and 

received by EPA on or before June 29, 

2011. Instructions on methods for 

submitting this notice (referred to in this 

order as a ‘‘section 408(f) Order 

Response form’’) are set out under the 

ADDRESSES heading above. 

3. Required data and reports and 

readlines for submission. The table 

below lists the data and reports required 

to be submitted on mevinphos under 

this order and the deadlines for the 

submission of each study and report. 

The required submission date is 

calculated from the close of the 90-day 

period following Federal Register 

publication of the order for providing 

notice of intent to submit the data. 

Thus, for example, if EPA generally 

allows 12 months to complete a study, 

the required submission date for such a 

study under this order would be 15 

months from the date of publication of 

the order in the Federal Register. 

TABLE—REQUIRED DATA AND REPORTS

Harmonized guideline 

requirement No. Study title 

Timeframe for 

protocol report 

submission 

Timeframe for data 

submission 

870.6300 .................... Comparative Cholinesterase Assay ........................................................ March 29, 2012 ......... October 1, 2012. 

870.7800 .................... Immunotoxicity Study .............................................................................. March 29, 2012 ......... October 1, 2012. 

860.1200 .................... Directions for use .................................................................................... Not required ............... October 1, 2012. 

860.1500 .................... Crop Field Trials (broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, celery, grapes, lettuce, peas, peppers, spinach, summer squash, strawberries, and tomatoes).Not Required ............. September 30, 2013. 

860.1520 .................... Processing studies (tomatoes) ................................................................ Not Required ............. September 30, 2013. 

EPA provided a description of why 

the required data could not be obtained 

under section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA or 

section 4 of TSCA in the proposed order 

and relies on that description in this 

final order. 

V. Failure To Submit Notice of Intent 

To Submit Data or Data and Reports 

If, within 90 days after publication of 

this final order, the Agency does not 

receive a section 408(f) Order Response 

Form identifying a person who agrees to 

submit the required data, EPA will 

revoke the mevinphos tolerances at 40 

CFR 180.157. Such revocation is subject 

to the objection and hearing procedure 

in FFDCA section 408(g)(2) but the only 

material issue in such a procedure is 

whether a submission required by the 

order was made in a timely fashion. 

Additional events that may be the 

basis for modification or revocation of 

mevinphos tolerances include, but are 

not limited to the following: 

1. No person submits on the required 

schedule an acceptable protocol report 

when such report is required to be 

submitted to the Agency for review. 

2. No person submits on the required 

schedule acceptable data as required by 

the final order. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

As required by statute, this action 

requiring submission of data in support 

of tolerances is in the form of an order 

and not a rule. (21 U.S.C. 346a(f)(1)(C)). 

Under the Administrative Procedures 

Act, orders are expressly excluded from 

the definition of a rule. (5 U.S.C. 

551(4)). Accordingly, the regulatory 

assessment requirements imposed on 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

38040 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

rulemaking do not, therefore, apply to 

this action. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 22, 2010. 

Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., 

Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, 

Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–16355 Filed 6–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

WC Docket No. 11–42, CC Docket No. 96– 

45, WC Docket No. 03–109; FCC 11–97] 

Lifeline and Link Up Reform and 

Modernization, Federal-State Joint 

Board on Universal Service, Lifeline 

and Link Up 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) takes immediate action to 

address potential waste in the universal 

service Lifeline and Link Up program 

(Lifeline/Link Up or the program) by 

preventing duplicative program 

payments for multiple Lifelinesupported services to the same 

individual. On March 4, 2011, the 

Commission released a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking to reform and 

modernize Lifeline/Link Up. In the 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the 

Commission underscored its 

commitment to eliminating waste, 

fraud, and abuse in Lifeline/Link Up 

and presented a comprehensive set of 

proposals to better target support to 

needy consumers and maximize the 

number of Americans with access to 

modern communications services. To 

ensure that Lifeline support is limited to 

the amount necessary to provide access 

to telecommunications service to 

qualifying low-income consumers, we 

adopt measures to prevent, detect and 

resolve duplicative Lifeline claims for 

the same consumer. The near-term 

reforms we adopt here will reduce waste 

in the Fund and give the Commission 

flexibility to modernize the Low-Income 

Program in order to align it with 

changes in technology and market 

dynamics, such as the proposal we 

currently are reviewing to support 

broadband pilot projects for low-income 

consumers. 

DATES: Effective July 29, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Scardino, Attorney Advisor, at 

202–418–1442, Telecommunications 

Access Policy Division, Wireline 

Competition Bureau. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Report 

and Order (Order) in WC Docket No. 

11–42, CC Docket No. 96–45, WC 

Docket No. 03–109, FCC 11–97, released 

on June 21, 2011. The full text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection during regular business 

hours in the FCC Reference Center, 

Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

I. Introduction 

1. In this order we take immediate 

action to address potential waste in the 

universal service Lifeline and Link Up 

program (Lifeline/Link Up or the 

program) by preventing duplicative 

program payments for multiple Lifelinesupported services to the same 

individual. On March 4, 2011, the 

Commission released a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking to reform and 

modernize Lifeline/Link Up. In the 2011 

Lifeline and Link Up NPRM, 76 FR 

16482, March 23, 2011, the Commission 

underscored its commitment to 

eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in 

Lifeline/Link Up and presented a 

comprehensive set of proposals to better 

target support to needy consumers and 

maximize the number of Americans 

with access to modern communications 

services. We explained that, while we 

are considering broader reforms to the 

program, which we remain committed 

to complete as soon as possible, it may 

be necessary for the Commission to take 

action to address immediately the harm 

done to the Universal Service Fund 

(Fund) by duplicative claims for Lifeline 

support. To ensure that Lifeline support 

is limited to the amount necessary to 

provide access to telecommunications 

service to qualifying low-income 

consumers, we adopt measures to 

prevent, detect and resolve duplicative 

Lifeline claims for the same consumer. 

The near-term reforms we adopt here 

will reduce waste in the Fund and give 

the Commission flexibility to modernize 

the Low-Income Program in order to 

align it with changes in technology and 

market dynamics, such as the proposal 

we currently are reviewing to support 

broadband pilot projects for low-income 

consumers. 

2. In May 2010, the Commission 

asked the Federal-State Joint Board on 

Universal Service to review the low 

income program to ensure that it is 

effectively reaching eligible consumers 

and that oversight continues to be 

appropriately structured to minimize 

waste, fraud, and abuse. Meanwhile, 

under the Commission’s oversight and 

pursuant to the Commission’s rules, the 

Universal Service Administrative 

Company (USAC) has conducted a 

series of audits to test compliance with 

our low income program rules, 

including audits to determine if there 

was a problem with duplicative claims 

for Lifeline. The audits revealed that 

some low-income subscribers are 

receiving multiple Lifeline benefits 

contrary to our program restrictions. 

The agency already has taken steps to 

address the situation; in particular, the 

Office of the Managing Director (OMD) 

directed USAC to perform a significant 

number of in-depth data validations 

(IDVs), which are streamlined inquiries 

of Lifeline recipients targeted at 

uncovering duplicative claims for 

Lifeline support in select states. To 

ensure prompt action to eliminate 

duplicative Lifeline support, we not 

only make clear that qualifying lowincome consumers may receive no more 

than a single Lifeline benefit; we also 

require an ETC, upon notification from 

USAC, to de-enroll any subscriber that 

is receiving multiple benefits in 

violation of that rule. Further, we direct 

the Wireline Competition Bureau 

(Bureau) to send a letter to USAC to 

implement an administrative process to 

detect and resolve duplicative claims. 

II. Discussion 

3. In this order, we amend §§ 54.401 

and 54.405 of the Commission’s rules to 

codify the restriction that an eligible 

low-income consumer cannot receive 

more than one Lifeline-supported 

service at a time. We also amend 

§ 54.405 of the Commission’s rules to 

provide that, upon a finding by USAC 

that a low-income consumer is the 

recipient of multiple Lifeline subsidies, 

any ETC notified that it has not been 

selected to continue providing Lifelinediscounted service to the consumer 

shall de-enroll that subscriber from 

participation in that ETC’s Lifeline 

program pursuant to the procedures 

described below. As noted below, we do 

not require a total termination of 

Lifeline discounts to the consumer in 

this situation, as the consumer will be 

permitted to maintain a single Lifeline 

service with one of the ETCs. We expect 

USAC to continue to perform in-depth 

data validations targeted at uncovering 

duplicative claims for Lifeline support, 

and we direct the Bureau to send a letter 

to USAC to implement a process to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES