### 37704 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 2, 2014 / Proposed Rules

acceptance costs appropriately between the paid USPS Tracking Service and the host pieces. This entails attributingcosts related to final, en-route and nonwindow acceptance scans to the host product, not to the USPS Tracking Service, and performing the calculations in the B workpapers rather than making a D report adjustment. This means the cost model for USPS Tracking in NP26 will no longer be needed for the D report adjustment. Id. at 2. In addition, in the In-Office Cost System, the percentage of volume from the POS retail system that was paid for the extra service to attribute costs to USPSTracking will be used for windowrelated acceptance costs. Id. III. Notice and Opportunity for Comment

The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2014–6 for consideration of matters raised by the Petition. Additional information concerning the Petition may be accessed via the Commission’s Web site at http://
www.prc.gov. Interested persons may submit comments on the Petition and Proposals Three through Eight no later than July 28, 2014. Reply comments are due no later than August 12, 2014. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Tracy N. Ferguson is designated as officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding. IV. Ordering Paragraphs

It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2014–6 for consideration of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposals Three Through Eight), filed June 20, 2014.

2. Comments by interested persons in this proceeding are due no later than July 28, 2014. Reply comments are due no later than August 12, 2014.

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Tracy N. Ferguson to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this docket.

4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register

.

By the Commission. Shoshana M. Grove, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–15452 Filed 7–1–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**  **AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 13**

**[FRL–9910–13–OCFO]**

**Administrative Wage Garnishment**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend EPA’s claims collection standards to include administrative wage garnishment. This rule amends the EPA’s debt collection regulations to implement the administrative wage garnishment (AWG) provisions of the Debt Collection Act of 1982, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA). The proposed rule will allow the EPA to garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register we are approving an amendment to EPA’s regulations on claims collection standards by using administrative wage garnishment as a direct final rule without a prior proposed rule. If we receive no adverse comment, the direct final rule will go into effect and we will not take further action on this proposed rule.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received by August 1, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments by one of the following methods:

1. Email: jones.anita@epa.gov.
2. Fax: (202) 565–2585.
3. Mail: OCFO–2014–0001; FRL– 9910–13–OCFO, FPPS c/o Anita Jones, OCFO/OFM/FPPS, Mailcode 2733R, Environmental Protection Agency, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

Comments may be submitted electronically by following the detailed instructions in the **ADDRESSES** section of the direct final rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register

. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  FPPS c/o Anita Jones, OCFO/OFM/ FPPS, Mailcode 2733R, Environmental Protection Agency, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–4969; fax number: (202) 565–2585; email address: jones.anita@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Background

This proposed rule implements the administrative wage garnishment provisions in section 31001(o) of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of the 1996 (DCIA), Public Law 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321–358, codified as 31 U.S.C. 3720D. Under the administrative wage garnishment provisions of the DCIA, Federal agencies may garnish administratively up to 15 percent of the disposal pay of a debtor to satisfy a delinquent non-tax debt owed to the United States. Prior to the enactment of the DCIA, Federal agencies were required to obtain a court judgment before garnishing non-Federal wages. Section 31001(o) of the DCIA preempts State laws that prohibit wage garnishment or otherwise govern wage garnishment procedures.

As authorized by the DCIA, a Federal agency collecting a delinquent non-tax debt may garnish a delinquent debtor’s wages in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Bureau of Fiscal Services, a bureau of the Department of the Treasury (Treasury), is responsible for promulgating the regulations implementing this and other debt collection tools established by the DCIA. The Bureau of Fiscal Services published its final rule at 63 FR 25136, May 6 1998, (Treasury Final Rule) and published technical amendments at 64 FR 22906, 22908, April 28, 1999 and 66 FR 51867, 51868, October 11, 2001. The Treasury Final Rule, as amended, is published in § 285.11 of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Pursuant to 31 CFR 285.11 (f), Federal agencies must either prescribe regulations for the conduct of AWG hearings consistent with the procedural requirements set forth in the Treasury Final Rule or adopt § 285.11 without change by reference.

Basic Provisions

In accordance with the requirements of the DCIA and the implementing regulations at 31 CFR 285.11, the EPA is adopting the provisions of 31 CFR 285.11concerning administrative wage garnishment, including the hearing procedures described in 31 CFR 285.11(f).

Use of the Direct Final Rule

This document proposes to take action on amending EPA’s regulations on claims collection standards by using administrative wage garnishment. We have published a direct final rule amending EPA’s regulations on claims collection standards by using administrative wage garnishment in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of today’s Federal Register because we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this


### 37705 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 2, 2014 / Proposed Rules

action in the preamble to the direct final rule.

If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule.

We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further information, please see the information provided in the **ADDRESSES** section of this document.

Dated: June 23, 2014. Jeanne Conklin, Acting Director, Office of Financial Management.
[FR Doc. 2014–15579 Filed 7–1–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION** 

**47 CFR Parts 1, 27, and 73**

**[GN Docket No. 12–268; ET Docket No. 13– 26; DA 14–677]** 

**Incentive Auction Task Force Seeks Comment on Staff Analysis Regarding**  **Pairwise Approach To Preserving Population Served** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Communications Commission.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; request for
comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The FCC’s Incentive Auction Task Force (IATF) seeks comment on the results of a staff analysis on the potential for new aggregate interference in the repacking process and seeks comment on newly released repacking constraint data that uses actual channels.

**DATES :**  Comments must be filed on or before July 2, 2014 and reply comments must be filed on or before July 22, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by GN Docket No. 12–268 and ET Docket No. 13–26, by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Federal Communications Commission’s Web site: http:// www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the Commission continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission’s Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

• People With Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.

For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** section of this document.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Jonathan McCormack, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418– 1065, email: jonathan.mccormack@ fcc.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This is a summary of the FCC’s document, GN Docket No. 12–268, ET Docket No. 13– 26, DA 14–677 released on June 2, 2014. The full text of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be purchased from the Commission’s copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov.
Summary

On June 2, 2014, the IATF released a document that published updated constraint data based upon actual channels, rather than proxy channels, to assist interested parties in conducting their own repacking studies. The document also announced the results of a staff analysis on the potential for new aggregate interference in the repacking process using the Commission’s adopted approach to preserving population served. This approach limits allowable station assignments to those causing 0.5 percent or less new pairwise interference. The staff analysis compiled 100 repacking scenario studies and found that on average, approximately one percent of all stations received new aggregate interference above one percent, and that the vast majority received less than the 0.5 percent interference constraint.

The data and information released are based on preliminary staff assumptions necessary for completing the analysis, and are meant to be illustrative only. The FCC will adopt final decisions regarding the repacking process at a later date. The document and its appendix relate only to the repacking process, and specifically to issues commenters raised regarding the necessity of an aggregate interference cap and the use of proxy channels when preserving coverage area and population served. The results of studies in the analysis do not reflect any FCC assumptions about auction participation or station valuation.

A number of commenters supported using a 0.5 percent pairwise limit approach for limiting interference in the repacking process, but argued that the FCC should impose a cap of one percent on allowable aggregate interference for each station to mitigate the risk that an individual station in a crowded market could receive significant new interference when the permitted pairwise interference from multiple stations is added up.

In response to that argument, FCC staff conducted studies to calculate potential aggregate interference using the updated constraint files, which are based on actual channels, versus proxy channels. The staff analysis shows that approximately one percent of all stations in simulated channel reassignments received new interference above a one percent cap, and that the majority of stations received new aggregate interference well below the pairwise interference limit adopted by the FCC. The analysis is presented in detail in the appendix, available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs

_ public/ attachmatch/DA-14-677A2.pdf. The repacking scenarios relate only to the UHF band because the largest number of stations that could potentially be assigned a new channel will be in this band. The FCC staff is releasing updated constraint files based upon actual channels to assist interested parties in conducting their own repacking studies. The new constraint files are in the same format as those released in July 2013, and can be found on the FCC’s LEARN Web site under the Repacking Section
at: http://fcc.gov/learn. These files are also posted at: http://data.fcc.gov/ download/incentive-auctions/ Constraint

_Files/. To generate sufficient data from which to draw meaningful results, FCC staff performed 100 simulations using several variations of an approach developed for creating simulated sets of stations to be repacked. The output of each of these simulations was a set of stations that remain on the air in the UHF band, together with the respective channel assignments, called a channel plan. Consistent with the FCC’s adopted approach to preserving population