        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Parts 1036 and 1037
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307; FRL-10018-51-OAR]
        Improvements for Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Test Procedures

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:

          This notice of proposed rulemaking includes corrections, clarifications, additional flexibilities, and adjustment factors to improve the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) compliance tool for heavy-duty vehicles while more closely matching the outputs produced by the original GEM version 3.0 that was used to establish the CO2 standards for Model Years 2021 and later in the 2016 Heavy-duty Phase 2 final rule. This document supplements the proposed rule published on May 12, 2020, which included a larger set of proposed revisions to modify and improve GEM. Most of the proposed revisions from that notice of proposed rulemaking are addressed in a final rulemaking published elsewhere in the Final Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register. Given the nature of this proposal, there will be neither significant environmental impacts nor significant economic impacts for any sector.

          DATES:

            Comments: Comments must be received on or before August 30, 2021.

            Public Hearing: If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing on or before July 6, 2021, we will hold an online hearing at 10 a.m. Eastern Standard Time on July 14, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:

            Comments: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307, at http://www.regulations.gov. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” section of this document.

            Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 3334, Washington, DC. Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov or email, as there is a temporary suspension of mail delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries are currently accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

            Public Hearing: Individuals are invited to notify EPA of interest in a public hearing; see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

            Public Participation: Comments: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307 for this rulemaking. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided, and cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov or email, as there is a temporary suspension of mail delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries are currently accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/.

          EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, local area health departments, and our Federal partners so we can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.

            Docket: All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. 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 through the EPA Docket Center at the location listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

            Public Hearing: If we hold a public hearing, we will announce detailed information about the hearing on our website https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/supplemental-rule-improvements-heavy-duty-engine-and. Send requests for a hearing and questions about the status of a hearing to the contact identified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Amy Kopin, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4173; email address: kopin.amy@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Table of Contents

          I. General Information
          II. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model (GEM) Background
          III. Proposed Updates to GEM
          IV. Statutory Authority and Executive Order Reviews

        I. General Information
        Does this action apply to me?
        This action relates to companies that manufacture or sell new heavy-duty engines and vehicles as defined under EPA's CAA regulations.1
           Regulated categories and entities include the following:

            1 “Heavy-duty engine” and “heavy-duty vehicle” are defined in 40 CFR 1037.801.

            NAICS codes A

            NAICS titles
            Examples of potentially regulated entities

            333618, 336111, 336112, 336120, 336211, 336999
            Other Engine Equipment Manufacturing, Automobile Manufacturing, Light Truck and Utility Vehicle Manufacturing, Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing, Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing, All Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
            Motor vehicle manufacturers and engine manufacturers.

            A North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

        This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
        What action is the Agency taking?

        This action proposes to amend the regulations that implement our air pollutant emission standards for heavy-duty engines and vehicles. The proposed amendments in this notice of proposed rulemaking include corrections, clarifications, additional flexibilities, and adjustment factors to the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) compliance tool for heavy-duty vehicles. These amendments would modify the existing test procedure for heavy-duty highway engines and vehicles and apply to the measurement of CO2 emissions. EPA published a proposed rule on May 12, 2020 (85 FR 28153) (“Technical Amendments proposed rule”). EPA is issuing a final rulemaking (“Technical Amendments final rule”) relating to most revisions proposed in the Technical Amendments proposed rule, published in the Final Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register, titled “Improvements for Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Test Procedures, and other technical amendments,” docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307; FRL-10018-52-OAR.
        This action supplements the Technical Amendments proposed rule for only certain specific aspects of revising GEM by proposing several amendments to the model, after consideration of comments solicited and received on the Technical Amendments proposed rule, including a proposed revision to address concerns raised regarding potential stringency impacts that may result from changes to GEM.
        What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?
        This action is limited in scope and does not have significant economic or environmental impacts. EPA has therefore not estimated the potential costs or benefits of this notice of proposed rulemaking.
        II. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model (GEM) Background

        GEM is a computer application that estimates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and fuel efficiency performance of specific aspects of heavy-duty vehicles. GEM uses several vehicle-specific inputs, such as engine fuel maps, aerodynamic drag coefficients, and vehicle weight ratings, to simulate vehicle and engine operation and model the amount of CO2 emitted over multiple duty cycles for tractors and vocational vehicles. The resulting CO2 values over these cycles are weighted by GEM to provide a composite GEM score. GEM version 3.0 was used to set standards in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles-Phase 2 (“Phase 2”) rulemaking (81 FR 73478). For purposes of determining compliance, composite GEM scores are compared to the applicable Phase 2 vehicle standard.
        In the Technical Amendments proposed rule, we proposed several amendments to GEM 3.0, including corrections, clarifications, and additional flexibilities in a revised version of the model, GEM 3.5 (85 FR 28145). EPA also requested comment on whether any differences in GEM output values resulting from changes to the model would impact the effective stringency of the program and, if so, whether EPA should revise the GEM model itself or address such impacts via regulations (see 85 FR 28145).
        Comments received in response to the NRPM supported most of the proposed updates to GEM and requested additional revisions to further improve the model.2
           The California Air Resources Board (CARB) provided comment on this topic, stating the importance of GEM results being consistent with the current program standards to avoid affecting program stringency. CARB recommended that EPA revise GEM in order to ensure stringency is maintained.3

            2 See “Improvements for Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Test Procedures, and other Technical Amendments Response to Comments”, Publication Number: EPA-420-R-20-026, December 2020. Chapter 2 of the Response to Comments provides additional details on the amendments, clarifications requested by commenters, and our responses to most of the comments to the NPRM.

            3 California Air Resources Board, Docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0207-0030.

        After considering the comments received, EPA applied further potential changes to GEM 3.5 and released a new development version of GEM, GEM 3.7, to the public for download and review by stakeholders to evaluate and assess the performance of this revised model. GEM 3.7 incorporated some corrections and improvements relative to the proposed version GEM 3.5, as noted in the corresponding memorandum in the rulemaking docket.4

            4 Nelson, Brian. Memorandum to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307. “Development version of GEM and adjustment factors”. October 23, 2020. Docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307-0083. Also available online: https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/gem-p2v3.7-release-memo-2020-10-23.pdf.

        While evaluating GEM 3.7, we found differences in the output values for some tractor and vocational vehicles compared to the output values from GEM 3.0 used to set the Phase 2 CO2 standards. To understand the differences between GEM 3.0 and GEM 3.7, we recreated the process used in 2016 to determine the numerical level of the Phase 2 standards. Without an adjustment to the resulting GEM output value, these differences in GEM output values when compared to the Phase 2 final rule could be considered an effective change in stringency. In light of GEM 3.7 output differences and considering CARB's comment, we identified adjustment factors in that same docketed memo that could be applied to the unrounded GEM 3.7 output to better ensure effective stringency of the standards is maintained.5

            5 Id.

        The Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) requested additional time for its members to review the potential updates to the model in GEM 3.7 and evaluate the impact of the adjustment factors made available.6

            6 Charmley, Bill. Memorandum to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307. “EPA discussions with the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association, and with the California Air Resources Board, regarding Highway Heavy-Duty Technical Amendments.” December 14, 2020. Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307-0092.

        As described in the Technical Amendments final rule, EPA released a revised version of GEM (i.e., GEM 3.5.1) that corrected three errors in GEM 3.5 and finalized provisions to specify GEM 3.5.1 without adjustment factors as the compliance tool for meeting Phase 2 standards.7
           GEM 3.5.1 includes the following updates to GEM 3.5:

            7 See the notice of final rulemaking for “Improvements for Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Test Procedures, and other Technical Amendments” published in the Final Rule's section of today's Federal Register, titled “Improvements for Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Test Procedures,” docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307; FRL-10018-52-OAR.

        • Corrected duty cycle weighting factors for vocational vehicles in the Heavy Heavy-Duty Multipurpose subcategory.
        • Corrected an idle map error when the cycle average engine fuel mapping procedure is used for all three drive cycles.

        • Corrected a functional error that unnecessarily required manufacturers to include transmission power loss data when using the option to enter a unique (instead of default) k-factor for the torque converter.

        III. Proposed Updates to GEM
        In this notice of proposed rulemaking, as detailed further in this section, we are proposing to revise GEM and to revise GEM's test procedures to include adjustment factors after consideration of comments solicited and received on the Technical Amendments proposed rule. We request comment only on these specific revisions and are not proposing changes to or seeking comment on any other amendments included in the Technical Amendments proposed or final rule.
        We are releasing GEM version 3.8 for notice and comment.8
           The proposed GEM 3.8 allows additional compliance flexibilities and improves the vehicle simulation by incorporating the following improvements relative to GEM 3.5.1:

            8 Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) Phase 2, Version 3.8, December 2020. A working version of this software is also available for download at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/greenhouse-gas-emissions-model-gem-medium-and-heavy-duty.

        • Changed limits on engine input to allow small negative torque inputs.
        • Corrected how GEM adjusts the idle fueling of the transient cycle by using the same idle duration time both for subtracting the idle fuel rate from the transient cycle average engine fuel map and for adding back in the simulated idle fuel rate.
        • Added an option for vocational vehicles to input a value for neutral coasting in GEM and amend the related test procedure in 40 CFR 1037.520(j)(1).
        • Corrected manual and automated manual transmissions to perform clutched upshifts for Heavy HDV.
        We request comment on the revisions listed above.
        As noted in a memorandum to the docket, the resulting standards generated using GEM 3.8 in place of GEM 3.0 were, on average, 0.58 percent lower for tractors and 0.20 percent higher for vocational vehicles, with the greatest difference (an increase of 1.3 percent) occuring in a few of the custom chassis standards.9

           To ensure that these changes to GEM do not change the effective stringency of the Phase 2 CO2 standards, we propose a revision to the test procedures in 40 CFR 1037.520(o) to include a table of adjustment factors to be applied to the unrounded GEM 3.8 output to correct the differences. We request comment on this proposed revision to 40 CFR 1037.520(o). EPA also requests comment on whether EPA should incorporate the adjustment factors directly into the GEM model, if EPA is able to develop a version of the GEM model which properly incorporates the adjustment factors.

            9 Sanchez, James, Memorandum to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0307. Process of Using GEM to Set Vehicle Standards. December 4, 2020.

        We are proposing to incorporate by reference into the regulations the revised version, GEM 3.8, for manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the Phase 2 standards, including obtaining a certificate of conformity and submitting end-of-year reports. For MY 2021, we are proposing to allow use of GEM 3.5.1 under § 1037.150(bb) as an interim provision, but to limit this optional use of GEM 3.5.1 for demonstrating compliance with the Phase 2 standards, including obtaining a certificate of conformity and submitting end-of-year reports, to MY 2021 vehicles only. A manufacturer who opts to use GEM 3.5.1 for MY 2021 is required to apply GEM 3.5.1 across its entire MY 2021 U.S.-directed production volume. We also propose to allow MY 2021 data based on the use of GEM 3.5.1 to be used for carryover requests for certificates of conformity for MY 2022 and future years for qualifying vehicles under § 1037.235(d); however, manufacturers would still need to use GEM 3.8 for end-of-year reporting for MY 2022 and later. Under this proposal, GEM 3.8 would need to be used for all other certificates of conformity for MY 2022 and later. Due to the model improvements and flexibilities available in GEM 3.8 relative to GEM 3.5.1, we request comment on the appropriateness of requiring that GEM 3.8 be used for MY 2021 end-of-year reports even if MY 2021 certificates of conformity were obtained using GEM 3.5.1. Finally, we are proposing that if an engine fuel map was run on an engine using a cycle generated from GEM 3.5.1 for MY 2021 and the manufacturer of that engine applies for carryover certification for MY 2022 or later, the manufacturer would not need to rerun the engine fuel map. We request comment on these requirements, allowable uses, and limitations proposed for each of these revised GEM model versions, including the use of GEM 3.5.1 for MY 2021 and carryover applications.
        IV. Statutory Authority and Executive Order Reviews

        Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

        A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
        This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
        I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This action is designed to reduce testing burdens, increase compliance flexibility, and make various corrections and adjustments to compliance provisions; as a result, we anticipate no costs associated with this rule. We have therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden for directly regulated small entities.
        C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
        This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments. Requirements for the private sector do not exceed $100 million in any one year.
        D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
        This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
        E. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
        This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule will be implemented at the Federal level and affects engine and vehicle manufacturers. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
        F. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

        This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. There are no environmental health or safety risks created by this action that could present a disproportionate risk to children.
        G. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
        This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
        H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR Part 51

        Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs agencies to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This action involves technical standards.
        Except for the reference discussed below, the standards included in the regulatory text as incorporated by reference in 40 CFR part 1037 were all previously approved for IBR and no change is proposed in this action.
        In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by reference a new version of the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM), which we use for certifying heavy-duty highway vehicles to the greenhouse gas emission standards in 40 CFR part 1037. The model calculates emission rates for heavy-duty highway vehicles based on input values defined by the manufacturer. The model is available as noted in the amended regulations at 40 CFR 1037.810.
        I. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
        The EPA believes this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Due to the small environmental impact, this regulatory action will not have a disproportionate adverse effect on minority populations, low-income populations, or indigenous peoples.

          List of Subjects
          40 CFR Part 1036
          Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Environmental protection, Greenhouse gases, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.
          40 CFR Part 1037
          Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.

          Jane Nishida,
          Acting Administrator.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, we propose to amend title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below.

          PART 1036—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY ENGINES

        1. The authority citation for part 1036 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

        2. Amend § 1036.150 by adding paragraph (r) to read as follows:

          § 1036.150
          Interim provisions.

          (r) Carryover fuel maps. You may use fuel maps from model year 2021 engines for certifying model year 2022 and later vehicles using carryover provisions in § 1036.235(d), even if the specified version of the GEM simulation tool to generate duty cycles for fuel mapping changes for those later model years.

          PART 1037—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW HEAVY-DUTY MOTOR VEHICLES

        3. The authority citation for part 1037 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

        4. Amend § 1037.150 by adding paragraph (bb) to read as follows:

          § 1037.150
          Interim provisions.

          (bb) Transition to updated GEM. Vehicle manufacturers may demonstrate compliance with Phase 2 GHG standards in model year 2021 vehicles using GEM Phase 2, Version 3.5.1 (incorporated by reference in § 1037.810). Each vehicle manufacturer must use a single version of GEM for all its model year 2021 families. Vehicle manufacturers may use GEM Phase 2, Version 3.5.1 for later model years only to certify vehicle families from model year 2021 that qualify for using carryover provisions in § 1037.235(d).

        5. Amend § 1037.520 by revising the introductory text and paragraph (j)(1) and adding paragraph (o) to read as follows:

          § 1037.520
          Modeling CO2 emissions to show compliance for vocational vehicles and tractors.

          This section describes how to use the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) (incorporated by reference in § 1037.810) to show compliance with the CO2 standards of §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106 for vocational vehicles and tractors. Use GEM version 2.0.1 to demonstrate compliance with Phase 1 standards; use GEM Phase 2, Version 3.8 to demonstrate compliance with Phase 2 standards. Use good engineering judgment when demonstrating compliance using GEM. See § 1037.515 for calculation procedures for demonstrating compliance with trailer standards.

          (j) * * *
          (1) Intelligent controls. Enter 2 for tractors with predictive cruise control. This includes any cruise control system that incorporates satellite-based global-positioning data for controlling operator demand. For tractors without predictive cruise control and for all vocational vehicles, enter 1.5 if they have neutral coasting, unless good engineering judgment indicates that a lower percentage should apply.

          (o) Adjusting results for updated GEM. Adjust composite results from GEM Phase 2, Version 3.8 using the following equation to account for modeling changes relative to GEM Phase 2, Version 3.0:

            EP29JN21.000

            Where:

              e
              CO2 = FEL CO2 Emissions from GEM.
            AF = the adjustment factor from the following table:

            Table 10 of § 1037.520—Adjustment Factors for Composite Results From GEM Phase 2, Version 3.8

              Regulatory subcategory
              Adjustment factor
              MY 2022-2023
              MY 2024-2026
              MY 2027-and-later

              Class 7 Day Cab Low Roof
              −0.0104
              −0.0090
              −0.0094

              Class 7 Day Cab Mid Roof
              −0.0106
              −0.0084
              −0.0097

              Class 7 Day Cab High Roof
              −0.0088
              −0.0084
              −0.0090

              Class 8 Day Cab Low Roof
              −0.0062
              −0.0079
              −0.0068

              Class 8 Sleeper Cab Low Roof
              −0.0014
              −0.0015
              −0.0016

              Class 8 Day Cab Mid Roof
              −0.0059
              −0.0062
              −0.0064

              Class 8 Sleeper Cab Mid Roof
              −0.0013
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Class 8 Day Cab High Roof
              −0.0058
              −0.0062
              −0.0066

              Class 8 Sleeper Cab High Roof
              −0.0013
              −0.0014
              −0.0016

              Class 8 Heavy Haul
              −0.0076
              −0.0080
              −0.0062

              Multi-Purpose Light HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0000
              −0.0029
              0.0000

              Regional Light HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Urban Light HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Multi-Purpose Medium HDV Compression-ignition
              −0.0038
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Regional Medium HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Urban Medium HDV Compression-ignition
              −0.0034
              −0.0037
              0.0000

              Multi-Purpose Heavy HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0038
              0.0041
              0.0043

              Regional Heavy HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Urban Heavy HDV Compression-ignition
              0.0065
              0.0071
              0.0037

              Multi-Purpose Light HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              −0.0027

              Regional Light HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Urban Light HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Multi-Purpose Medium HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Regional Medium HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0040

              Urban Medium HDV Spark-ignition
              0.0030
              0.0032
              0.0034

              School bus
              −0.0034
              −0.0034
              0.0000

              Motor home
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0000

              Coach bus
              0.0000
              0.0000
              0.0049

              Other bus
              0.0067
              0.0067
              0.0000

              Refuse hauler
              0.0096
              0.0096
              0.0034

              Concrete mixer
              0.0125
              0.0125
              0.0127

              Mixed-use vehicle
              0.0125
              0.0125
              0.0127

              Emergency vehicle
              0.0123
              0.0123
              0.0125

        6. Amend § 1037.810 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

          § 1037.810
          Incorporation by reference.

          (c) U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, www.epa.gov.
          (1)(i) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM), Version 2.0.1, September 2012 (“GEM version 2.0.1”), IBR approved for § 1037.520.
          (ii) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) Phase 2, Version 3.5.1, November 2020 (“GEM Phase 2, Version 3.5.1”); IBR approved for § 1037.150(bb).
          (iii) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) Phase 2, Version 3.8, November 2020 (“GEM Phase 2, Version 3.8”); IBR approved for § 1037.520.
          (iv) GEM's MATLAB/Simulink Hardware-in-Loop model, Version 3.8, December 2020 (“GEM HIL model”); IBR approved for § 1037.550(a).

          (2) The computer code for these models is available as noted in paragraph (a) of this section. A working version of the software is also available for download at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/greenhouse-gas-emissions-model-gem-medium-and-heavy-duty.

      [FR Doc. 2021-05305 Filed 6-28-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Parts 36 and 54
        [CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 00-256, FCC 01-157]
        Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service; Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan for Regulation of Interstate Services of Non-Price Cap Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers and Interexchange Carriers

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Further notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          In this document, the Commission declines, at this time, to adopt the Rural Task Force's proposal to freeze per-line support in rural carrier study areas in which a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier is providing service; however, the Commission recognizes that excessive fund growth may occur during this five-year plan. To develop the record on this issue more fully, the Commission invites interested parties to propose possible alternative measures that may be appropriate to address this issue. The Commission also invites commenters to address the likelihood that such measures may be necessary to prevent excessive fund growth during the five-year period.

          DATES:
          Comments are due on or before July 30, 2001. Reply comments are due on or before August 28, 2001. Written comments by the public on the proposed information collections discussed in this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are due on or before July 30, 2001. Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed information collections on or before August 28, 2001.

          ADDRESSES:
          Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. All filings must be sent to the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the information collection(s) contained herein should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov and to Edward C. Springer, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, or via the Internet to Edward.Springer@omb.eop.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Genaro Fullano, Paul Garnett, or Greg Guice, Attorney, Common Carrier Bureau, Accounting Policy Division, (202) 418-7400.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) in CC Docket No. 96-45 released on May 23, 2001. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. This FNPRM contains proposed information collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). It has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are invited to comment on the proposed information collections contained in this proceeding.
        Paperwork Reduction Act
        The FNPRM contains a proposed information collection. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and OMB to comment on the information collection(s) contained in this FNPRM, as required by the PRA, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments on the proposed information collections discussed in this FNPRM are due on or before July 30, 2001. Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed information collections on or before August 28, 2001.
        Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

          OMB Control Number: None.

          Title: Proposed Alternatives for the Rural Task Force's Proposal to Freeze High Cost Loop Support Upon Competitive Entry in Rural Carrier Study Areas (FNPRM).

          Form No.: None.

          Type of Review: Proposed New Collections.

          Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

            Title
            No. of respondents

            Est. time per response (hrs)

            Total annual burden

            Reporting of Working Loops at Cost-Zone Level
            9
            20
            720

          Total Annual Burden: 720.

          Cost to Respondents: $0.

          Needs and Uses: In addition to information already required by § 54.307 of the Commission's rules, competitive eligible telecommunications carriers serving loops in the service area of a rural incumbent local exchange carrier, as that term is defined by § 54.5 of the Commission's rules, would be required to separately report the number of captured and new loops in the service area disaggregated by cost zone if disaggregation zones have been established within the service area pursuant to § 54.315 of the Commission's rules. The frequency of reporting also may be impacted by conclusions reached in this proceeding. For purposes of this Paperwork Reduction Act analysis, we assume that competitive eligible telecommunications carriers would continue to be required to submit such data on a quarterly basis. Such reporting would be a modification to the current reporting requirement. The goal of this proposal is to ensure that per-line high-cost. The Commission also intends to consider alternatives that do not involve additional reporting requirements.
        Synopsis of FNPRM
        I. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
        A. Background
        1. As discussed in greater detail in the companion Order, 66 FR 30080, June 5, 2001, we decline at this time to adopt the Rural Task Force's proposal to freeze high-cost loop support on a per-line basis in rural carrier study areas where a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier initiates service. The purpose of the proposal was to prevent excessive growth in the universal service fund as a result of the entrance of competitive eligible telecommunications carriers in rural carrier study areas over the life of the five-year plan we adopt here. As discussed in the companion Order, support provided to competitive eligible telecommunications carriers is not subject to the overall cap on the high-cost loop fund. During the five-year period, excessive growth in the fund is thus possible if incumbent carriers lose many lines to competitive eligible telecommunications carriers, or if competitive eligible telecommunications carriers add a significant number of lines. The first scenario raises particular fund growth concerns because as an incumbent “loses” lines to a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier, the incumbent must recover its fixed costs from fewer lines, thus increasing its per-line costs. With higher per-line costs, the incumbent would receive greater per-line support, which would also be available to the competitive eligible telecommunications carrier for each of the lines that it serves. Thus, a substantial loss of an incumbent's lines to a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier could result in excessive fund growth.
        2. We base our decision not to adopt the Rural Task Force's proposal at this time on several concerns. First, the proposal may be of limited benefit in serving its intended purpose and may, in some instances, contribute to fund growth by freezing support at higher levels than would be warranted in the future. Second, the likelihood of a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier capturing a substantial percentage of lines from the incumbent during the five-year period is speculative. Third, the indexed cap on the high-cost loop fund will operate as a check on excessive fund growth to a certain extent. Fourth, we are concerned that the proposal may have the unintended consequence of discouraging efficient investment in rural infrastructure. Fifth, the proposal may hinder the competitive entry in rural study areas by creating an additional incentive for incumbents to oppose the designation of eligible telecommunications carriers in rural study areas. Finally, we are concerned that the proposal would require complex and administratively burdensome regulations to implement.
        B. Issues for Comment

        3. Although we decline, at this time, to adopt the Rural Task Force's proposal to freeze per-line support in rural carrier study areas in which a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier is providing service, we recognize that excessive fund growth may occur during this five-year plan. We note that the indexed cap on high-cost loop support would not check this growth fully, because support received by competitive carriers currently is not included within the cap. To develop the record on this issue more fully, we invite interested parties to propose possible alternative measures that may be appropriate to address this issue. We also invite commenters to address the likelihood that such measures may be necessary to prevent excessive fund growth during the five-year period.
        4. One possible approach suggested by commenters would be to freeze support only when a competitive carrier serves a specific percentage of the total lines within a study area. Under this approach, the Commission would adopt a threshold percentage of lines lost for triggering the freeze. As discussed, however, a simple threshold requirement would fail to target study areas where the excessive fund growth is most likely to occur, because it could not distinguish captured from new subscriber lines. With regard to any proposal to freeze support, commenters should address whether support should be frozen for the study area, the competitor's service area, or the incumbent's specific disaggregation zone. We also invite commenters to propose other alternatives. Commenters should address the administrative feasibility of any such proposals, and whether they are consistent with the principles of encouraging investment in rural infrastructure and promoting competitive entry.
        5. Although we are not convinced of the likelihood of excessive fund growth due to competitive entry in high-cost areas during the life of this five-year plan, we intend to resolve the issues raised in this FNPRM expeditiously after we have developed the record more fully. In the meantime, as discussed, we intend to closely monitor the impact of competitive entry in rural carrier study areas to ensure that excessive fund growth does not occur, consistent with our obligation in section 254 to maintain a specific, predictable, and sufficient universal service fund.
        II. Procedural Matters
        A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

        6. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in this FNPRM. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines, and should have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA. The Commission will send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
        1. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rules
        7. In the Order accompanying this FNPRM, we modify the rural high-cost mechanism. While we declined to adopt the Rural Task Force's proposal to freeze per-line support in rural carrier study areas in which a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier is providing service, we recognized that excessive fund growth may occur during the five-year duration of the interim plan. We noted that the indexed cap on high-cost loop support would not check this growth fully, because support received by competitive carriers is not included within the cap. To develop the record on this issue more fully, we issue this FNPRM and invite interested parties to propose possible alternative measures that may be appropriate to address this issue. We also invite commenters to address the likelihood that such measures may be necessary to prevent excessive fund growth during the five-year period.

        8. Although we are not convinced of the likelihood of excessive fund growth due to competitive entry in high-cost areas during the life of this five-year plan, we intend to resolve the issues raised in this FNPRM expeditiously after we have developed the record more fully.
        2. Legal Basis
        9. The legal basis as proposed for this FNPRM is contained in sections 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934 (as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996).
        3. Description and Estimate of Small Entities to Which Rules Will Apply
        10. 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 adopted herein. 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. Under the Small Business Act, a “small business concern” is one that: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) meets any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).

        11. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis. As noted, a “small business” under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and “is not dominant in its field of operation.” The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not “national” in scope. We have therefore included small incumbent carriers in this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on the Commission's analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
        12. Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition for small providers of local exchange services. The closest applicable definition under the SBA rules is for telephone communications companies other than radiotelephone (wireless) companies. According to the most recent Trends Report data, 1,335 incumbent carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of local exchange services. We do not have data specifying the number of these carriers that are either dominant in their field of operations, are not independently owned and operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of local exchange carriers that would qualify as small business concerns under the SBA's definition. Of the 1,335 incumbent carriers, 13 entities are price cap carriers that are not subject to these rules. Consequently, we estimate that fewer than 1,322 providers of local exchange service are small entities or small incumbent local exchange carriers that may be affected.
        13. Competitive Access Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to competitive access services providers (CAPs). The closest applicable definition under the SBA rules is for telephone communications companies other than radiotelephone (wireless) companies. According to the most recent Trends Report data, 349 CAPs/competitive local exchange carriers and 60 other local exchange carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of competitive local exchange services. We do not have data specifying the number of these carriers that are not independently owned and operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of CAPs that would qualify as small business concerns under the SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are less than 349 small entity CAPs and 60 other local exchange carriers that may be affected.
        14. Cellular Licensees. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition of small entities applicable to cellular licensees. Therefore, the applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the SBA rules applicable to radiotelephone (wireless) companies. This provides that a small entity is a radiotelephone company employing no more than 1,500 persons. According to the Bureau of the Census, only twelve radiotelephone firms from a total of 1,178 such firms which operated during 1992 had 1,000 or more employees. Therefore, even if all twelve of these firms were cellular telephone companies, nearly all cellular carriers were small businesses under the SBA's definition. In addition, we note that there are 1,758 cellular licenses; however, a cellular licensee may own several licenses. In addition, according to the most recent Telecommunications Industry Revenue data, 806 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of either cellular service or Personal Communications Service (PCS) services, which are placed together in the data. We do not have data specifying the number of these carriers that are not independently owned and operated or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of cellular service carriers that would qualify as small business concerns under the SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 808 small cellular service carriers that may be affected.
        15. Broadband Personal Communications Service (PCS). The broadband PCS spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held auctions for each block. The Commission defined “small entity” for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. For Block F, an additional classification for “very small business” was added and is defined as an entity that, together with their affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. These regulations defining “small entity” in the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved definition bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the Block C auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. Based on this information, we conclude that the number of small broadband PCS licensees will include the 90 winning C Block bidders and the 93 qualifying bidders in the D, E, and F blocks, for a total of 183 small entity PCS providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
        16. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not adopted a definition of small entity specific to the Rural Radiotelephone Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio Systems (BETRS). We will use the SBA's definition applicable to radiotelephone companies, i.e., an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and we estimate that almost all of them qualify as small entities under the SBA's definition.
        17. Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR). The Commission awards bidding credits in auctions for geographic area 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR licenses to firms that had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous calendar years. In the context of both the 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR, a definition of “small entity” has been approved by the SBA.
        18. These fees apply to SMR providers in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands that either hold geographic area licenses or have obtained extended implementation authorizations. We do not know how many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR service pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of no more than $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues. We assume, for purposes of this FRFA, that all of the remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by small entities, as that term is defined by the SBA.
        19. For geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band, there are 60 who qualified as small entities. For the 800 MHz SMR's, 38 are small or very small entities.
        20. Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave services include common carrier, private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio services. At present, there are approximately 22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670 private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services. The Commission has not yet defined a small business with respect to microwave services. For purposes of this IRFA, we utilize the SBA's definition applicable to radiotelephone companies—i.e., an entity with no more than 1,500 persons. We estimate, for this purpose, that all of the Fixed Microwave licensees (excluding broadcast auxiliary licensees) would qualify as small entities under the SBA definition for radiotelephone companies.
        21. 39 GHz Licensees. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition of small entities applicable to 39 GHz licensees. Therefore, the applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the SBA rules applicable to radiotelephone (wireless) companies. This provides that a small entity is a radiotelephone company employing no more than 1,500 persons. For purposes of the 39 GHz license auction, the Commission defined “small entity” as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years, and “very small entity” as an entity that has average gross revenues of not more that $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. The Commission has granted licenses to 29 service providers in the 39 GHz service. We do not have data specifying the number of these carriers that are not independently owned and operated or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of 39 GHz licensees that would qualify as small business concerns under the SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are no more than 29 39 GHz small business providers that may be affected.
        4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
        22. In the Order accompanying this FNPRM, the Commission revised the reporting frequency of line count data in study areas where competitive entry has occurred. Prior to the Order's adoption, rural carriers were required to submit line count data annually. The Commission determined that the more frequent reporting requirement was necessary to ensure that only one carrier receives support for each line served and to monitor the concerns expressed by the Rural Task Force with regard to the potential impact of competitive entry in rural carrier study areas. The line count data submitted by carriers on a quarterly basis under the Order should be sufficient for the Commission to implement any change it may adopt pursuant to this FNPRM; however, the issues of frequency of reporting and timing of submission may need to be revisited for implementation purposes.
        5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
        23. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 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 or reporting requirements under the rule for 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 small entities.

        24. Here, we have declined at this time to freeze per-line support in rural carriers' study areas in which a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier is providing service. Had we adopted the alternative of the freeze, we would, we believe, have also needed to adopt, e.g., complex and administratively burdensome implementing regulations. By seeking additional comments on this issue, including comment from small entities regarding significant alternatives, we hope to identify alternatives that would include simpler reporting or other compliance requirements. Thus, the FNPRM under consideration herein seeks to determine possible alternative measures that may be appropriate to address the issue of excessive fund growth that may result from competitive entry in rural study areas. We invite comment on how any alternatives proposed would be likely to affect small businesses.
        6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules
        25. None.
        B. Ex Parte
        26. This is a non-restricted FNPRM and comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the Commission's rules.
        C. Comment Filing Procedures
        27. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments on or before July 30, 2001, and reply comments on or before August 28, 2001. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies.
        28. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to <http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html>. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. If multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, however, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of the comments to each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of the message, “get form <your e-mail address>.” A sample form and directions will be sent in reply. Parties should also send three paper copies of their filings to Sheryl Todd, Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Room 5-B540, Washington, DC 20554. Parties who choose to file by paper should also submit their comments on diskette. These diskettes should be submitted to Sheryl Todd, Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Room 5-B540, Washington, DC 20554. In addition, commenters must send diskette copies to the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037.
        III. Ordering Clauses
        29. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45 is adopted.
        30. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-45, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

          List of Subjects
          47 CFR Part 36
          Jurisdictional separations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, Telephone.
          47 CFR Part 54
          Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, Telephone.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Magalie Roman Salas,
          Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 01-16371 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P