Commission's Ex Parte Rules and Other Procedural Rules, 24434-24436 [2011-10352]
Download as PDF
24434
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 84 / Monday, May 2, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Measures In The New
Mexico SIP,’’ found under 40 CFR
52.1620(e), by including an entry for
New Mexico’s already SIP approved Air
Pollution Episode Contingency Plan.
2. The table titled ‘‘EPA Approved
New Mexico Regulations,’’ found under
40 CFR 52.1620(c), by (i) deleting
entries for part 70 (Operating Permits)
and part 71 (Operating Permit Emission
Fees) of 20.2 NMAC and (ii) correcting
the currently listed EPA approval date
for the recodification of New Mexico’s
air quality regulations in the SIP.
3. 40 CFR 52.1640(c)(66)(i)(B), by
amending the paragraph such that it
correctly identifies the State regulations
submitted by the State and approved by
EPA into the New Mexico SIP.
4. 40 CFR 52.1634(a) and 40 CFR
52.1640(c)(39), by amending each
paragraph such that it identifies that
New Mexico has fully met all conditions
of our February 27, 1987 conditional
approval of New Mexico’s PSD program
such that our conditional approval is
converted to a full approval.
We are also proposing to convert our
February 27, 1987, conditional approval
of New Mexico’s PSD program (52 FR
5964), to a full approval based on the
November 2, 1988, approval of New
Mexico’s stack height regulations (53 FR
44191), at which point New Mexico
fully met the condition in the
conditional approval.
Lastly, EPA is proposing to approve a
severable revision to regulation 20.2.3
NMAC (Ambient Air Quality
Standards), which was submitted by
New Mexico on November 2, 2006. The
revision to 20.2.3 NMAC removes the
state ambient air quality standards from
being an applicable requirement under
the State’s Title V permitting program,
found at 20.2.70 NMAC (Operating
Permits). The revision also adds
language to ensure that sources being
issued a permit under the State’s minor
source permitting program, found at
20.2.72 NMAC (Operating Permits), are
required to continue to address the
State’s ambient air quality standards in
their application.
EPA is proposing these actions in
accordance with section 110 and part C
of the Act and EPA’s regulations and is
consistent with EPA guidance.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In
addition, this rule does not have Tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to apply in Indian country located in the
state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Apr 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: April 22, 2011.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2011–10569 Filed 4–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 0 and 1
[GC Docket No. 10–43; FCC 11–11]
Commission’s Ex Parte Rules and
Other Procedural Rules
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Further notice of proposed
rulemaking
AGENCY:
In this document the
Commission seeks comment on
amending the rules to require that
notices of ex parte discussions disclose
real parties-in-interest. The change was
proposed because the existing rules do
not enable interested parties to know
whose interests are being represented
when a contact is made. By requiring
the disclosure of this information the
proposed amendment would increase
transparency and openness in
Commission proceedings. The FNPRM
was adopted in conjunction with a
Report and Order amending the ex parte
rules, which is published elsewhere in
this Federal Register.
DATES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of
the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments on or before June 16, 2011
and reply comments on or before July
18, 2011. Written comments on the
Paperwork Reduction Act proposed
information collection requirements
must be submitted by the public, Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), and
other interested parties on or before July
1, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by GC Docket No. 10–43, by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web Site: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
In addition to filing comments with
the Office of the Secretary, a copy of any
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02MYP1.SGM
02MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 84 / Monday, May 2, 2011 / Proposed Rules
comments on the Paperwork Reduction
Act information collection requirements
contained herein should be submitted to
Leslie F. Smith, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C216, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington,
DC 20554, or send an e-mail to
PRA@fcc.gov. and to Nicholas A. Fraser,
Office of Management and Budget, via
e-mail to
Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or via
fax at (202) 395–5167.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel
Kaufman, Chief, Administrative Law
Division, Office of General Counsel,
(202) 418–1758 or
joel.kaufman@fcc.gov. For additional
information concerning the Paperwork
Reduction Act information collection
requirements contained in this
document, send an e-mail to
PRA@fcc.gov or contact Leslie F. Smith,
(202) 418–0217 or Leslie.Smith@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments
may be filed using: (1) The
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal
Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or
(3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Paper Filers: 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, filers must submit two
additional copies for each additional
docket or rulemaking number.
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 messengerdelivered 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 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries
must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Apr 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
• 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 Street, SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
418–0432 (tty).
In this FNPRM adopted February 1,
2011 and released February 2, 2011, the
Commission seeks comment on
requiring anyone making an ex parte
presentation to disclose the identity of
any real party in interest to the issues
discussed. At times a party making an
ex parte contact may be representing the
interests of another undisclosed party,
or the presenter’s interest in the
proceeding may not be entirely clear.
The Commission found that a disclosure
requirement that addresses these
problems without imposing undue
burdens on the disclosing party, or
requiring duplicative filing of generallyavailable information, would serve the
public interest. The FNPRM solicits
comment on what type of disclosure
rule would balance those two interests,
and how it should be applied. Comment
is sought on the suitability of using
existing judicial disclosure rules, such
as Supreme Court Rules 29.6 and 37.6,
or Rule 26.1 of the Rules for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.
Comment is also sought on the possible
use of the Lobbying Disclosure Act as a
model. Comment is requested on the
range of proceedings to which new
disclosure rules should apply, and
whether disclosure requirements should
apply to trade associations and nonprofit entities. Finally, the Commission
asks a number of logistical questions
regarding disclosure. Comment is
sought on whether disclosure should be
required when the information to be
disclosed can be found in existing
Commission records or on the party’s
Web site. If reliance were to be placed
on information already in the
Commission’s records, how would the
Commission ensure its information is
up-to-date and easily accessible?
Comment is requested on whether the
Commission should create a single
electronically accessible source for all
disclosure statements, and how often
filers should be required to update this
information.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24435
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Our
proposed action does not require notice
and comment, and therefore falls
outside the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), and
requires no initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under Section 604 of
that Act, 5 U.S.C. 604. We nevertheless
note that we anticipate that the
alternatives proposed in the FNPRM
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities or impose significant costs on
parties to Commission proceedings. We
will, however, send a copy of the
FNPRM to the Chief Counsel of
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 Analysis. This document contains
proposed information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general
public and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) to comment on the
information collection requirements
contained in this document, as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, Public Law 104–13. Public and
agency comments are due July 1, 2011.
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; (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; and (e) ways to
further reduce the information
collection burden on small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on
how we might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
OMB Control Number: 3060–0430.
Title: Section 1.1206, Permit-butDisclose Proceedings.
Type of Review: Revision of currently
approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or
households; Business or other forprofits; Not-for-profit institutions;
Federal Government; and State, local or
tribal governments.
E:\FR\FM\02MYP1.SGM
02MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
24436
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 84 / Monday, May 2, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 11,500 respondents; 34,500
responses.
Estimated time per Response: 45
minutes (0.75 hours).
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Response: On-occasion
reporting requirements; Third party
disclosure.
Total Annual Burden: 25,875 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No
impacts.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
The Commission is not requesting that
respondents submit confidential
information; however, consistent with
the Commission’s rules on confidential
treatment of submissions, under 47 CFR
0.459, a presenter may request
confidential treatment of ex parte
presentations. In addition, the
Commission will permit parties to
remove metadata containing
confidential or privileged information,
and the Commission will also not
require parties to file electronically ex
parte notices that contain confidential
information. The Commission will,
however, require a redacted version to
be filed electronically at the same time
the paper filing is submitted, and that
the redacted version must be machinereadable whenever technically possible.
Needs and Uses: The Commission’s
rules, under 47 CFR 1.1206, require that
a public record be made of ex parte
presentations (i.e., written presentations
not served on all parties to the
proceeding or oral presentations as to
which all parties have not been given
notice and an opportunity to be present)
to decision-making personnel in
‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceedings, such
as notice-and-comment rulemakings and
declaratory ruling proceedings. Persons
making such presentations must file two
copies of written presentations and two
copies of memoranda reflecting new
data or arguments in oral presentations
no later than the next business day after
the presentation; alternatively, in
proceedings in which electronic filing is
permitted, a copy may be filed
electronically.
On February 2, 2011, the FCC released
a Report and Order and Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, CG Docket
Number 10–43, FCC 11–11, which
amends and reforms the Commission’s
rules on ex parte presentations (47 CFR
1.1206(b)(2)) made in the course of
Commission rulemakings and other
permit-but-disclose proceedings. The
modifications to the existing rules
adopted in this Report and Order
address these problems by requiring that
parties file more descriptive summaries
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 Apr 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
of their ex parte contacts, by ensuring
that other parties and the public have an
adequate opportunity to review and
respond to information submitted ex
parte, and by improving the FCC’s
oversight and enforcement of the ex
parte rules. The modified ex parte rules
provide as follows: (1) Ex parte notices
will be required for all oral ex parte
presentations in permit-but-disclose
proceedings, not just for those
presentations that involve new
information or arguments not already in
the record; (2) If an oral ex parte
presentation is limited to material
already in the written record, the notice
must contain either a succinct summary
of the matters discussed or a citation to
the page or paragraph number in the
party’s written submission(s) where the
matters discussed can be found; (3)
Notices for all ex parte presentations
must include the name of the person(s)
who made the ex parte presentation as
well as a list of all persons attending or
otherwise participating in the meeting at
which the presentation was made; (4)
Notices of ex parte presentations made
outside the Sunshine period must be
filed within two business days of the
presentation; (5) The Sunshine period
will begin on the day (including
business days, weekends, and holidays)
after issuance of the Sunshine notice,
rather than when the Sunshine Agenda
is issued (as the current rules provide);
(6) If an ex parte presentation is made
on the day the Sunshine notice is
released, an ex parte notice must be
submitted by the next business day, and
any reply would be due by the following
business day. If a permissible ex parte
presentation is made during the
Sunshine period (under an exception to
the Sunshine period prohibition), the ex
parte notice is due by the end of the
same day on which the presentation was
made, and any reply would need to be
filed by the next business day. Any
reply must be in writing and limited to
the issues raised in the ex parte notice
to which the reply is directed; (7)
Commissioners and agency staff may
continue to request ex parte
presentations during the Sunshine
period, but these presentations should
be limited to the specific information
required by the Commission; (8) Ex
parte notices must be submitted
electronically in machine-readable
format. PDF images created by scanning
a paper document may not be
submitted, except in cases in which a
word-processing version of the
document is not available. Confidential
information may continue to be
submitted by paper filing, but a redacted
version must be filed electronically at
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
the same time the paper filing is
submitted. An exception to the
electronic filing requirement will be
made in cases in which the filing party
claims hardship. The basis for the
hardship claim must be substantiated in
the ex parte filing; (9) To facilitate
stricter enforcement of the ex parte
rules, the Enforcement Bureau is
authorized to levy forfeitures for ex
parte rule violations; (10) Copies of
electronically filed ex parte notices
must also be sent electronically to all
staff and Commissioners present at the
ex parte meeting so as to enable them
to review the notices for accuracy and
completeness. Filers may be asked to
submit corrections or further
information as necessary for compliance
with the rules. Where staff believes
there are instances of substantial or
repeated violations of the ex parte rules,
staff should report such to the General
Counsel; and (11) Minor conforming
and clarifying rule changes proposed in
the Notice are adopted. The only change
entailing increased information
collection is the requirement that parties
making permissible ex parte
presentations in restricted proceedings
must file an ex parte notice.
The information is used by parties to
permit-but-disclose proceedings,
including interested members of the
public, to respond to the arguments
made and data offered in the
presentations. The responses may then
be used by the Commission in its
decision-making. The availability of the
ex parte materials ensures that the
Commission’s decisional processes are
fair, impartial, and comport with the
concept of due process in that all
interested parties can know of and
respond to the arguments made to the
decision-making officials.
Currently, persons making ex parte
presentations have no obligation to
disclose whether the person making the
presentation represents a real party-ininterest whose identity has not been
disclosed. In this FNPRM, the
Commission proposed to require the
disclosure of the identity of real partiesin-interest, which would further the
goal of openness and transparency in
the Commission decision making
process.
Statutory Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154(i),
154(j), and 303(r).
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–10352 Filed 4–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\02MYP1.SGM
02MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24434-24436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10352]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 0 and 1
[GC Docket No. 10-43; FCC 11-11]
Commission's Ex Parte Rules and Other Procedural Rules
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Further notice of proposed rulemaking
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document the Commission seeks comment on amending the
rules to require that notices of ex parte discussions disclose real
parties-in-interest. The change was proposed because the existing rules
do not enable interested parties to know whose interests are being
represented when a contact is made. By requiring the disclosure of this
information the proposed amendment would increase transparency and
openness in Commission proceedings. The FNPRM was adopted in
conjunction with a Report and Order amending the ex parte rules, which
is published elsewhere in this Federal Register.
DATES: Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or
before June 16, 2011 and reply comments on or before July 18, 2011.
Written comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information
collection requirements must be submitted by the public, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before
July 1, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by GC Docket No. 10-43,
by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
In addition to filing comments with the Office of the Secretary, a
copy of any
[[Page 24435]]
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection
requirements contained herein should be submitted to Leslie F. Smith,
Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C216, 445 12th Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554, or send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov. and to Nicholas
A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via e-mail to Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or via fax at (202) 395-5167.
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Kaufman, Chief, Administrative
Law Division, Office of General Counsel, (202) 418-1758 or
joel.kaufman@fcc.gov. For additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained
in this document, send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Leslie F.
Smith, (202) 418-0217 or Leslie.Smith@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments may be filed using: (1) The
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal
Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121
(1998).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Paper Filers: 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,
filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
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 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes 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 Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
In this FNPRM adopted February 1, 2011 and released February 2,
2011, the Commission seeks comment on requiring anyone making an ex
parte presentation to disclose the identity of any real party in
interest to the issues discussed. At times a party making an ex parte
contact may be representing the interests of another undisclosed party,
or the presenter's interest in the proceeding may not be entirely
clear. The Commission found that a disclosure requirement that
addresses these problems without imposing undue burdens on the
disclosing party, or requiring duplicative filing of generally-
available information, would serve the public interest. The FNPRM
solicits comment on what type of disclosure rule would balance those
two interests, and how it should be applied. Comment is sought on the
suitability of using existing judicial disclosure rules, such as
Supreme Court Rules 29.6 and 37.6, or Rule 26.1 of the Rules for the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Comment is also sought on the
possible use of the Lobbying Disclosure Act as a model. Comment is
requested on the range of proceedings to which new disclosure rules
should apply, and whether disclosure requirements should apply to trade
associations and non-profit entities. Finally, the Commission asks a
number of logistical questions regarding disclosure. Comment is sought
on whether disclosure should be required when the information to be
disclosed can be found in existing Commission records or on the party's
Web site. If reliance were to be placed on information already in the
Commission's records, how would the Commission ensure its information
is up-to-date and easily accessible? Comment is requested on whether
the Commission should create a single electronically accessible source
for all disclosure statements, and how often filers should be required
to update this information.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Our proposed action does not require
notice and comment, and therefore falls outside the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), and requires no
initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis under Section 604 of
that Act, 5 U.S.C. 604. We nevertheless note that we anticipate that
the alternatives proposed in the FNPRM will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities or impose
significant costs on parties to Commission proceedings. We will,
however, send a copy of the FNPRM to the Chief Counsel of Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis. This document
contains proposed information collection requirements. The Commission,
as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites
the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
comment on the information collection requirements contained in this
document, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due July 1, 2011.
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; (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; and (e)
ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. In addition, pursuant
to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198,
see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on how we might
further reduce the information collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0430.
Title: Section 1.1206, Permit-but-Disclose Proceedings.
Type of Review: Revision of currently approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or households; Business or other for-
profits; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government; and State,
local or tribal governments.
[[Page 24436]]
Number of Respondents and Responses: 11,500 respondents; 34,500
responses.
Estimated time per Response: 45 minutes (0.75 hours).
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Response: On-occasion reporting requirements; Third
party disclosure.
Total Annual Burden: 25,875 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impacts.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not
requesting that respondents submit confidential information; however,
consistent with the Commission's rules on confidential treatment of
submissions, under 47 CFR 0.459, a presenter may request confidential
treatment of ex parte presentations. In addition, the Commission will
permit parties to remove metadata containing confidential or privileged
information, and the Commission will also not require parties to file
electronically ex parte notices that contain confidential information.
The Commission will, however, require a redacted version to be filed
electronically at the same time the paper filing is submitted, and that
the redacted version must be machine-readable whenever technically
possible.
Needs and Uses: The Commission's rules, under 47 CFR 1.1206,
require that a public record be made of ex parte presentations (i.e.,
written presentations not served on all parties to the proceeding or
oral presentations as to which all parties have not been given notice
and an opportunity to be present) to decision-making personnel in
``permit-but-disclose'' proceedings, such as notice-and-comment
rulemakings and declaratory ruling proceedings. Persons making such
presentations must file two copies of written presentations and two
copies of memoranda reflecting new data or arguments in oral
presentations no later than the next business day after the
presentation; alternatively, in proceedings in which electronic filing
is permitted, a copy may be filed electronically.
On February 2, 2011, the FCC released a Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CG Docket Number 10-43, FCC 11-
11, which amends and reforms the Commission's rules on ex parte
presentations (47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2)) made in the course of Commission
rulemakings and other permit-but-disclose proceedings. The
modifications to the existing rules adopted in this Report and Order
address these problems by requiring that parties file more descriptive
summaries of their ex parte contacts, by ensuring that other parties
and the public have an adequate opportunity to review and respond to
information submitted ex parte, and by improving the FCC's oversight
and enforcement of the ex parte rules. The modified ex parte rules
provide as follows: (1) Ex parte notices will be required for all oral
ex parte presentations in permit-but-disclose proceedings, not just for
those presentations that involve new information or arguments not
already in the record; (2) If an oral ex parte presentation is limited
to material already in the written record, the notice must contain
either a succinct summary of the matters discussed or a citation to the
page or paragraph number in the party's written submission(s) where the
matters discussed can be found; (3) Notices for all ex parte
presentations must include the name of the person(s) who made the ex
parte presentation as well as a list of all persons attending or
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the presentation was
made; (4) Notices of ex parte presentations made outside the Sunshine
period must be filed within two business days of the presentation; (5)
The Sunshine period will begin on the day (including business days,
weekends, and holidays) after issuance of the Sunshine notice, rather
than when the Sunshine Agenda is issued (as the current rules provide);
(6) If an ex parte presentation is made on the day the Sunshine notice
is released, an ex parte notice must be submitted by the next business
day, and any reply would be due by the following business day. If a
permissible ex parte presentation is made during the Sunshine period
(under an exception to the Sunshine period prohibition), the ex parte
notice is due by the end of the same day on which the presentation was
made, and any reply would need to be filed by the next business day.
Any reply must be in writing and limited to the issues raised in the ex
parte notice to which the reply is directed; (7) Commissioners and
agency staff may continue to request ex parte presentations during the
Sunshine period, but these presentations should be limited to the
specific information required by the Commission; (8) Ex parte notices
must be submitted electronically in machine-readable format. PDF images
created by scanning a paper document may not be submitted, except in
cases in which a word-processing version of the document is not
available. Confidential information may continue to be submitted by
paper filing, but a redacted version must be filed electronically at
the same time the paper filing is submitted. An exception to the
electronic filing requirement will be made in cases in which the filing
party claims hardship. The basis for the hardship claim must be
substantiated in the ex parte filing; (9) To facilitate stricter
enforcement of the ex parte rules, the Enforcement Bureau is authorized
to levy forfeitures for ex parte rule violations; (10) Copies of
electronically filed ex parte notices must also be sent electronically
to all staff and Commissioners present at the ex parte meeting so as to
enable them to review the notices for accuracy and completeness. Filers
may be asked to submit corrections or further information as necessary
for compliance with the rules. Where staff believes there are instances
of substantial or repeated violations of the ex parte rules, staff
should report such to the General Counsel; and (11) Minor conforming
and clarifying rule changes proposed in the Notice are adopted. The
only change entailing increased information collection is the
requirement that parties making permissible ex parte presentations in
restricted proceedings must file an ex parte notice.
The information is used by parties to permit-but-disclose
proceedings, including interested members of the public, to respond to
the arguments made and data offered in the presentations. The responses
may then be used by the Commission in its decision-making. The
availability of the ex parte materials ensures that the Commission's
decisional processes are fair, impartial, and comport with the concept
of due process in that all interested parties can know of and respond
to the arguments made to the decision-making officials.
Currently, persons making ex parte presentations have no obligation
to disclose whether the person making the presentation represents a
real party-in-interest whose identity has not been disclosed. In this
FNPRM, the Commission proposed to require the disclosure of the
identity of real parties-in-interest, which would further the goal of
openness and transparency in the Commission decision making process.
Statutory Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), and 303(r).
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-10352 Filed 4-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P