        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Coast Guard
        46 CFR Part 153
        [Docket No. USCG-2013-0915]
        RIN 1625-ZA31
        Carriage of Conditionally Permitted Shale Gas Extraction Waste Water in Bulk

          AGENCY:
          Coast Guard, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability and request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Coast Guard announces the availability of a proposed policy letter concerning the carriage of shale gas extraction waste water in bulk via barge, and invites public comment. The policy letter specifies the conditions under which a barge owner may request and be granted a Certificate of Inspection endorsement or letter allowing the barge to transport shale gas extraction waste water in bulk. The policy letter also defines the information the Coast Guard may require the barge owner to provide and specifies the additional requirements the Coast Guard is considering imposing on such barges. Upon reviewing comments received on this proposed policy letter, Coast Guard will issue the final policy letter and specify its effective date.

          DATES:

          Comments and related material must either be submitted to our online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before November 29, 2013 or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2013-0915 using any one of the following methods:
          (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:  http://www.regulations.gov.

          (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
          (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
          (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

          To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          If you have questions on this notice, call or email Dr. Cynthia A. Znati, Office of Design and Engineering Standards, Hazardous Materials Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1412, email HazmatStandards@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Public Participation and Request for Comments

        We encourage you to submit comments and related material on the proposed policy letter concerning the carriage of conditionally permitted shale gas extraction waste water in bulk. In particular, we specifically request public comment regarding the disclosure of proprietary information to the Coast Guard, and regarding the applicability of testing requirements for radioactive materials to all regions where shale gas extraction waste water may be transported by barge. All comments received will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided.

          Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this notice (USCG-2013-0915) and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
        To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “submit a comment” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Document Type” drop down menu select “Notices” and insert “USCG-2013-0915” in the “Keyword” box. Click “Search” then click on the balloon shape in the “Actions” column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period.

          Viewing the comments and proposed new policy letter: To view the comments and the policy letter, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Keyword” box insert “USCG-2013-0915” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.

          Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act, system of records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

        Background and Purpose
        This notice is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a). The purpose of this notice is to announce the availability of the Coast Guard's proposed policy letter entitled “Carriage of Conditionally Permitted Shale Gas Extraction Waste Water in Bulk,” and to request public comments on the policy the letter describes. The policy letter specifies the conditions under which a barge owner may request and be granted a Certificate of Inspection endorsement or letter, under 46 CFR part 153, allowing the barge to transport shale gas extraction waste water (SGEWW) in bulk as Conditionally Permitted SGEWW. The policy letter also defines the information the Coast Guard may require the barge owner to provide and specifies the additional requirements the Coast Guard is considering imposing on such barges.
        SGEWW is a by-product of drilling for natural gas using unconventional hydraulic fracturing technology, which involves the injection of water, sand, and chemical additives. The sand remains in the well but a substantial portion of the injected fluid re-surfaces after the drilling and must be handled as SGEWW. At present, this SGEWW is either stored at the drilling site or transported by rail or truck to remote storage or reprocessing centers. There is commercial interest in transporting SGEWW from northern Appalachia via inland waterways to storage or reprocessing centers and final disposal sites in Ohio, Texas, and Louisiana.
        Pursuant to 46 CFR 153.900(a) and (c), under certain circumstances a bulk liquid hazardous material may be transported by a tank vessel if it is a “listed cargo” (listed in any of several specified tables in Coast Guard regulations). SGEWW, however, cannot be treated as a “listed cargo” because the specific chemical composition of SGEWW varies from one consignment load to another and may contain one or more hazardous materials as defined in 46 CFR 153.2, including radioactive isotopes such as radium-226 and radium-228. Variables affecting the chemical composition of SGEWW include the chemicals present in the initial drilling fluid, the specific site being drilled, and the age of the well. In addition, each load can be a mixture of SGEWW from different wells.
        Upon reviewing comments received on this proposed policy letter, Coast Guard will issue the final policy letter and specify its effective date.

          Dated: October 23, 2013.
          J.G. Lantz,
          Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, United States Coast Guard.

      [FR Doc. 2013-25628 Filed 10-29-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 98
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508; FRL-9127-5]
        RIN 2060-AQ15
        Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases: Minor Harmonizing Changes to the General Provisions

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          EPA is proposing to amend the general provisions for the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Rule. The amendments do not change the requirements of the regulation for facilities and suppliers covered by the 2009 final rule. Rather, the amendments are minor changes to the format of several sections of the general provisions to accommodate the addition of new subparts in the future in a simple and clear manner. These changes include updating the language for the schedule for submitting reports and calibrating equipment to recognize that subparts that may be added in the future would have later deadlines. These revisions do not change the requirements for subparts included in the 2009 final rule.

          DATES:

            Comments. Written comments must be received on or before April 15, 2010.

            Public Hearing. EPA does not plan to conduct a public hearing unless requested. To request a hearing, please contact the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by March 23, 2010. If requested, the public hearing will be conducted on March 31, 2010 at 1310 L St., NW., Washington, DC, 20005 starting at 9 a.m., local time. EPA will provide further information about the hearing on its Web page if a hearing is requested.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508, by mail to Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Mailcode 6102T, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies. Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier 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:

          Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC-6207J), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-9263; fax number: (202) 343-2342; e-mail address: GHGReportingRule@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        I. Why Is EPA Issuing This Proposed Rule?

        This document proposes to take action on the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (40 CFR part 98, subpart A.) We have published a direct final rule in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register because we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this 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 are not accepting comment on any other aspect of 40 CFR Part 98 other than comments on the specific changes explained in the direct final rule. We would address all relevant public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We are not requesting or entertaining comments on decisions made in the 2009 final rule. Comments received on issues resolved in the 2009 final rule will not be considered adverse comments on this direct final rule because they are outside the scope of the changes being made by this 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.
        II. Does This Action Apply to Me?

          Regulated Entities. The proposed amendments to the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule would affect owners and operators of fuel and chemicals suppliers and direct emitters of GHGs who are already subject to the rule. Regulated categories and entities would include those listed in Table 1 of this preamble:

          Table 1—Examples of Affected Entities by Category

            Category
            NAICS
            Examples of affected facilities

            General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources

            Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, incinerators, turbines, and internal combustion engines.

            211
            Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas.

            321
            Manufacturers of lumber and wood products.

            322
            Pulp and paper mills.

            325
            Chemical manufacturers.

            324
            Petroleum refineries, and manufacturers of coal products.

            316, 326, 339
            Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic products.

            331
            Steel works, blast furnaces.

            332
            Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring.

            336
            Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.

            221
            Electric, gas, and sanitary services.

            622
            Health services.

            611
            Educational services.

            Electricity Generation
            221112
            Fossil-fuel fired electric generating units, including units owned by Federal and municipal governments and units located in Indian Country.

            Adipic Acid Production
            325199
            Adipic acid manufacturing facilities.

            Aluminum Production
            331312
            Primary aluminum production facilities.

            Ammonia Manufacturing
            325311
            Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia manufacturing facilities.

            Cement Production
            327310
            Portland Cement manufacturing plants.

            Ferroalloy Production
            331112
            Ferroalloys manufacturing facilities.

            Glass Production
            327211
            Flat glass manufacturing facilities.

            327213
            Glass container manufacturing facilities.

            327212
            Other pressed and blown glass and glassware manufacturing facilities.

            HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 Destruction
            325120
            Chlorodifluoromethane manufacturing facilities.

            Hydrogen Production
            325120
            Hydrogen manufacturing facilities.

            Iron and Steel Production
            331111
            Integrated iron and steel mills, steel companies, sinter plants, blast furnaces, basic oxygen process furnace shops.

            Lead Production
            331419
            Primary lead smelting and refining facilities.

            331492
            Secondary lead smelting and refining facilities.

            Lime Production
            327410
            Calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, dolomitic hydrates manufacturing facilities.

            Nitric Acid Production
            325311
            Nitric acid manufacturing facilities.

            Petrochemical Production
            32511
            Ethylene dichloride manufacturing facilities.

            325199
            Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol manufacturing facilities.

            325110
            Ethylene manufacturing facilities.

            325182
            Carbon black manufacturing facilities.

            Petroleum Refineries
            324110
            Petroleum refineries.

            Phosphoric Acid Production
            325312
            Phosphoric acid manufacturing facilities.

            Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
            322110
            Pulp mills.

            322121
            Paper mills.

            322130
            Paperboard mills.

            Silicon Carbide Production
            327910
            Silicon carbide abrasives manufacturing facilities.

            Soda Ash Manufacturing
            325181
            Alkalies and chlorine manufacturing facilities.

            212391
            Soda ash, natural, mining and/or beneficiation.

            Titanium Dioxide Production
            325188
            Titanium dioxide manufacturing facilities.

            Zinc Production
            331419
            Primary zinc refining facilities.

            331492
            Zinc dust reclaiming facilities, recovering from scrap and/or alloying purchased metals.

            Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
            562212
            Solid waste landfills.

            Manure Management 1

            112111
            Beef cattle feedlots.

            112120
            Dairy cattle and milk production facilities.

            112210
            Hog and pig farms.

            112310
            Chicken egg production facilities.

            112330
            Turkey production.

            112320
            Broilers and other meat type chicken production.

            Suppliers of Coal Based Liquids Fuels
            211111
            Coal liquefaction at mine sites.

            Suppliers of Petroleum Products
            324110
            Petroleum refineries.

            Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGLs
            221210
            Natural gas distribution facilities.

            211112
            Natural gas liquid extraction facilities.

            Suppliers of Industrial GHGs
            325120
            Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.

            Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
            325120
            Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.

            1 EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule due to a Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this purpose.

        Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding facilities likely to be regulated by this action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the types of facilities that EPA is now aware could be potentially affected by this action. Other types of facilities not listed in the table could also be subject to reporting requirements. To determine whether your facility is affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A, and other subparts as necessary. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular facility, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
        III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

        For a complete discussion of all of the administrative requirements applicable to this action, see the direct final rule in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register.

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98
          Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Greenhouse gases, Suppliers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: March 10, 2010.
          Lisa P. Jackson,
          Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 2010-5694 Filed 3-15-10; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 54
        [WC Docket No. 10-90; FCC 17-61]
        Connect America Fund

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) seeks comment on whether the Commission should change the current rate floor methodology or eliminate the rate floor and its accompanying reporting obligation.

          DATES:
          Comments are due on or before July 10, 2017 and reply comments are due on or before July 24, 2017. 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 below as soon as possible.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No. 10-90, 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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.

            Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing.
          • Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

          ○ All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building.
           Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
           U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th St. SW., Washington, DC 20554.
          • 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Alexander Minard, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7400 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in WC Docket No. 10-90; FCC 17-61, adopted on May 18, 2017 and released on May 19, 2017. 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 St. SW., Washington, DC 20554 or at the following Internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/voice-rate-floor-nprm-and-order.

        I. Introduction
        1. In 2011, the Commission adopted a rule intended to ensure that consumers across the country are not subsidizing the cost of voice service to rural customers whose rates are below a set minimum rate. This requirement is known as the “rate floor.” If a carrier chooses to charge its customers less than the rate floor amount for voice service, the difference between the amount charged and the rate floor is deducted from the amount of support that carrier receives through the Universal Service Fund (USF). Since July 1, 2016, this minimum amount has been $18, and the Commission previously scheduled increases to $20 on July 1, 2017 and $22 on July 1, 2018. After several years of experience with it, the Commission now revisits it to ensure the Commission's policies continue to further its statutory obligation to ensure “[q]uality services . . . available at just, reasonable, and affordable rates.” The Commission accordingly seeks comment on whether it should make any changes to the current methodology or eliminate the rate floor and its accompanying reporting obligation.
        II. Discussion
        2. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should change the current methodology or eliminate the rate floor and its accompanying reporting obligation.
        3. In adopting the rate floor, the Commission determined that it is “inappropriate to provide federal high-cost support to subsidize local rates beyond what is necessary to ensure reasonable comparability.” The Commission further stated that “[d]oing so places an undue burden on the Fund and consumers that pay into it” and expressed the view that it would not be equitable “for consumers across the country to subsidize the cost of service for some consumers that pay local service rates that are significantly lower than the national urban average.”
        4. On the other hand, stakeholders ranging from the AARP to the National Tribal Telecommunications Association, from the National Consumer Law Center to small, medium, and large rural telephone companies, have raised concerns that the rate floor is inconsistent with the direction of section 254(b) of the Communications Act to advance universal service in rural, insular, and high cost areas of the country while ensuring that rates are just, reasonable, and affordable. These parties have argued that the rule makes basic voice service in rural areas less affordable, does not make voice service available at reasonably comparable rates to urban areas, and does not further the Commission's objective to “minimize the universal service contribution burden on consumers and businesses.” In that same vein, no one disputes that the rate floor has increased rates for voice service in rural areas, despite the Commission's goal to “preserve and advance universal availability of voice service.” Some parties have also asserted that price increases negatively affect rural consumers and “could lead to some customers losing affordable access to basic service entirely.” Others have noted that the increases caused by the rate floor rule could have a particularly deleterious effect on older Americans on fixed incomes and customers in Tribal areas.
        5. In addition, some parties have raised concerns about the use of a single, national rate floor. Some have argued that incomes are often lower in rural areas and the rate floor incorrectly “assumes that what's affordable in our country's largest cities must be affordable in our small towns.” Others have suggested that the Commission should consider “whether more localized survey data would better serve the goal of ensuring reasonably comparable service at reasonably comparable rates, and what flexibility the states need to serve users under the particular circumstances of each state.” The Commission observes that nothing in the statute requires adoption of a single, national rate floor.
        6. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on whether changes to the current methodology are needed to address these concerns. If so, what changes should be made? Should the Commission allow carriers to charge a rate that is one standard deviation below the average urban rate? Should the Commission replace the single, national rate floor with state or regional rate floors? Are there other ideas the Commission should consider? Alternatively, should the Commission eliminate the rate floor altogether?

        7. As part of the Commission's consideration of possible changes to the methodology or elimination of the rate floor, it seeks comment on the intersection of the rate floor with state ratemaking and state universal service funds. The Commission also notes that states have historically regulated rates for local telephone service. Indeed, the Communications Act makes clear that “nothing in this [Act] shall be construed to apply, or to give the Commission jurisdiction,” over rates for “telephone exchange service,” i.e., local service. States have historically relied on a variety of regulating methods (including the use of state universal service funds) to ensure just and reasonable rates for that service—and those methods already by law must not “rely on or burden Federal universal service support mechanisms.” The Commission seeks comment on these arguments. The Commission also seeks comment on the Tenth Circuit's suggestion that “the FCC `remains obligated to create some inducement . . . for the states to assist in implementing the goals of universal service,' i.e., in this case to ensure that rural rates are not artificially low.”
        8. More generally, the Commission seeks comment on whether the rate floor is meeting the intended purposes. One party has argued that “an increase in the local rate floor does not impact payment into the Universal Service Fund or the budget of the fund, but it does affect consumer choice, penalizes incumbent wireline providers and ultimately broadband deployment.” On the other hand, the Commission notes that the Commission last year adopted a budget control mechanism for carriers within the legacy rate-of-return system, including those receiving high-cost loop support. As such, any funding reductions from the rate floor are generally redistributed to other carriers to mitigate the impact of the budget control mechanism, not returned to ratepayers as contributions relief. The Commission notes that the rate floor both reduces total high-cost loop support (HCLS) support and reduces the budget impact on all rate-of-return carriers for HCLS and Connect America Fund—Broadband Loop Support (CAF-BLS). Specifically, based on the data used to calculate the recently published rate-of-return budget control mechanism, the Commission estimates that the rate floor effectively reduced total HCLS by 1.3 percent and effectively increased CAF-BLS by 0.9 percent. The Commission seeks comment on the impact of this redistribution on broadband deployment, both with respect to carriers receiving higher total USF support and those impacted directly by the rate floor and thus receiving lower total USF support. The Commission also seeks comment on these arguments generally.
        9. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on ways to reduce ongoing administrative and compliance costs on rural telephone companies, state commissions, the Commission, the National Exchange Carrier Association, and the Universal Service Administrative Company. Each year, federal staff must calculate a new rate floor, which rural telephone companies must then seek permission from their state commissions to implement, with oversight by several entities to ensure that rural rates are sufficiently high and universal service payments are appropriately withheld. Incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) subject to the rate floor must complete yet another form specifying each of the carrier's rates that fall below the rate floor and the number of lines for each rate specified. Stakeholders have previously detailed impediments to implementation in a number of states and have explained that carriers require time after a rate floor increase to pursue and implement rate increases. The Commission seeks comment on these arguments and whether modifying or eliminating the rate floor and the accompanying reporting obligations would reduce the complexity of the high-cost program and minimize the associated administrative and compliance costs that have stemmed from implementation of the rate floor. Alternatively, the Commission seeks comment on whether updating the rate floor on a biennial or triennial basis would accomplish similar goals while decreasing administrative burdens. More generally, the Commission seeks comment on the costs and benefits of the rate floor, and specifically on a cost-benefit analysis of the rule.
        III. Procedural Matters
        10. This document proposes modified information collection requirements subject to the PRA. It will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. As part of the Commission's continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, the Commission invites the general public and OMB to comment on the proposed information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the PRA. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act, the Commission seeks specific comment on how it might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The Commission describes impacts that might affect small businesses, which includes most businesses with fewer than 25 employees, in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) below.
        11. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on whether to modify or eliminate two rules: sections 54.313(h) and 54.318 of the Commission's rules. The Commission is seeking comment on whether it should modify or eliminate section 54.318, the rate floor rule, to better advance section 254 of the Commission's Act and the goals of the Commission's universal service reforms. Section 54.313(h) requires carriers to report on the number lines it serves with rates that fall below the rate floor. If the Commission modifies or eliminates the rate floor rule, there may be no need to for carriers report on rates that fall below the rate floor.
        12. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to this NPRM is contained in sections 201, 219, 220 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 201, 219, 220 and 254.
        13. 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 (SBA). A small-business concern” is one which: (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.
        14. This NPRM seeks comment on changes to the Commission's rules, which, if adopted, will result in reduced information collection and reporting requirements for ILECs.
        15. In this NPRM, the Commission seeks public comment on modifying or eliminating sections 54.313(h) and 54.318 of the Commission's rules. Because the Commission actions here will likely result in reduced regulatory burdens, the Commission concludes that the changes on which it seeks comment will not result in any additional recordkeeping requirements for small entities.
        16. Permit-But-Disclose. The proceeding this NPRM initiates shall be treated as 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 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.
        17. 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).
        IV. Ordering Clauses
        18. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 201, 219, 220 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 201, 219, 220, 254, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order is adopted.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Katura Jackson,
          Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 2017-11848 Filed 6-7-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D. 112399D]
        Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Petition for Rulemaking on the Prohibition of Shark Finning and Related Measures

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of receipt of petition for rulemaking; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces receipt of, and requests public comment on, a petition for rulemaking. The Western Pacific Fisheries Coalition (Petitioner), consisting of the Hawaii Fishermen's Foundation and Hawaii Audubon Society, has petitioned the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to prohibit shark finning (i.e., removal of only the fins and returning the remainder of the shark to the sea), and implement measures to require full utilization of sharks harvested in fisheries conducted under the Fishery Management Plan for the Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (FMP).

          DATES:
          Comments on the petition must be received by NMFS no later than May 12, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments should be sent to, and copies of the petition are available from, Dr. Charles Karnella, Administrator, Pacific Islands Area Office, NMFS, 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Rm 110, Honolulu, HI 96814. Please mark the outside of the envelope “Shark Petition.” Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 808-973-2941. Comments submitted via e-mail or Internet will not be accepted.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Alvin Katekaru, 808-973-2935 ext. 207, fax 808-973-2941, e-mail alvin.katekaru@noaa.gov

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The fishery affected by this petition for rulemaking is primarily the Hawaii-based longline fishery, which is managed according to the FMP developed by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council (Council). The Secretary has management authority, under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, over the shark resources in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone of the western Pacific region.
        The purpose of the petition is to facilitate maximum utilization of sharks harvested in the western Pacific, particularly in the Hawaii longline fishery. The Petitioner maintains that the continued unrestricted practice of shark finning in the fishery is wasteful and could lead to overexploitation of certain vulnerable shark species that are managed under the FMP. A prohibition on shark finning would be consistent with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization's International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks.
        The Petitioner requests the Secretary to amend the FMP and to promulgate regulations for the western Pacific region that would govern the possession at-sea and landing of sharks, as well as implement restrictions on the sale/purchase of sharks, similar to those contained in the regulations implementing the Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks (50 CFR 635.30(c); 64 FR 29090, May 28, 1999). Such regulations would be precautionary and would likely reduce the harvest of Pacific shark stocks, including the relatively abundant blue shark.
        NMFS requests comments on the petition for rulemaking. NMFS recognizes that shark fin transshipments and importation of processed shark fins into the United States are closely related to the conservation and management issues raised in this petition. In addition to comments on the petition for rulemaking, NMFS requests public comment addressing the practice of shark finning as it relates to transshipments and importation of processed fins. NMFS will consider this information in determining whether to proceed with the development of regulations requested by the Petitioner.

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 1801 et
            seq.

          Dated: April 7, 2000.
          Andrew A. Rosenberg,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-9071 Filed 4-7-00; 3:54 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-F