Call Authentication Trust Anchor, 27848-27850 [2021-10879]

Download as PDF 27848 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 98 / Monday, May 24, 2021 / Notices khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES December 17, 2020, that PPI–FG + 0.78 is the appropriate oil pricing index factor for pipelines to use for the fiveyear period commencing July 1, 2021. The regulations provide that the Commission will publish annually an index figure reflecting the final change in the PPI–FG after the Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes the final PPI–FG in May of each calendar year. The annual average PPI–FG index figures were 205.7 for 2019 and 202.9 for 2020.2 Thus, the percent change (expressed as a decimal) in the annual average PPI–FG from 2019 to 2020, plus 0.78 percent, is negative 0.005812.3 Oil pipelines must multiply their July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021, index ceiling levels by positive 0.994188 4 to compute their index ceiling levels for July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022, in accordance with 18 CFR 342.3(d). For guidance in calculating the ceiling levels for each 12-month period beginning January 1, l995,5 see Explorer Pipeline Company, 71 FERC ¶ 61,416, at n.6 (1995). In addition to publishing the full text of this Notice in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print this Notice via the internet through FERC’s Home Page (https:// www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field and follow other directions on the search page. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission’s Public Reference Room due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID–19) issued by the President on March 13, 2020. User assistance is available for eLibrary and other aspects of FERC’s website during normal business hours. For assistance, please contact the Commission’s Online Support at 1–866– 2 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes the final figure in mid-May of each year. This figure is publicly available from the Division of Industrial Prices and Price Indexes of the BLS, at 202–691– 7705, and in print in August in Table 1 of the annual data supplement to the BLS publication Producer Price Indexes via the internet at https:// www.bls.gov/ppi/home.htm. To obtain the BLS data, scroll down to ‘‘PPI Databases’’ and click on ‘‘Top Picks’’ of the Commodity Data including ‘‘headline’’ FD–ID indexes (Producer Price Index— PPI). At the next screen, under the heading ‘‘PPI Commodity Data,’’ select the box, ‘‘Finished goods—WPUFD49207,’’ then scroll to the bottom of this screen and click on Retrieve data. 3 [202.9–205.7]/205.7= (¥0.013612) + 0.0078= (¥0.005812) 4 1¥0.005812 = 0.994188. 5 For a listing of all prior multipliers issued by the Commission, see the Commission’s website, https:// www.ferc.gov/industries-data/oil/generalinformation/oil-pipeline-index. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 May 21, 2021 Jkt 253001 208–3676 (toll free) or 202–502–6652 (email at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov), or the Public Reference Room at 202– 502–8371, TTY 202–502–8659. Email the Public Reference Room at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. Dated: May 14, 2021. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2021–10860 Filed 5–21–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–R9–2021–05; FRL–10023–76–Region 9] Industrial Waste Processing Site, Fresno, California; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice; request for comment. AGENCY: In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement with Pacific Tent & Awning (Pacific Tent), for payment of costs of investigation and remediation at the Industrial Waste Processing (IWP) Site located at 7140 North Harrison Street, Fresno, California. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enters the settlement pursuant to Section 122(h)(1) of CERCLA. The settlement provides for Pacific Tent’s payment of $21,000, plus interest, towards costs incurred by EPA and the United States in investigating and remediating contamination resulting from reclamation of solvents from printing operations, glycols from fluids used in natural gas dehydration, and lead solder and zinc from waste solder flux generated by the metal can manufacturing industry during IWP’s operations at the Site in 1967–1981. The settlement includes a covenant not to sue pursuant to Sections 106 or 107(a) of CERCLA. For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this Notice in the Federal Register, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the settlement. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations that indicate the proposed settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. The Agency’s response to any comments received will be available for public SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 inspection at 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 23, 2021. ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. A copy of the proposed settlement may be obtained from David H. Kim, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, ORC–3, San Francisco, CA 94105, telephone number 415–972–3882. Comments should reference the IWP Site, Fresno, California and should be addressed to Mr. Kim at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David H. Kim, Assistant Regional Counsel (ORC–3), Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972–3882; fax: (417) 947–3570; email: kim.david@epa.gov. Enrique Manzanilla, Director, Superfund Division, U.S. EPA, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2021–10892 Filed 5–21–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [WC Docket No. 17–97; DA 21–546; FRS 27843] Call Authentication Trust Anchor Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. AGENCY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) provides information and seeks comment on adopting a Protective Order similar to that used by the Bureau in other proceedings, with modifications appropriate in the context of the Robocall Mitigation Database. It does so pursuant to direction from the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) to establish a publicly accessible database in which robocall mitigation certifications can be listed, and to issue a protective order regarding the treatment of any confidential and highly confidential information included in said certifications. DATES: Comments are due on or before June 3, 2021; reply Comments are due on or before June 8, 2021. ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments may be filed using the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM 24MYN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 98 / Monday, May 24, 2021 / Notices Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). Interested parties may file comments or reply comments, identified by WC Docket No. 17–97 by any of the following methods: • Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the internet by accessing ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/ ecfs/. • Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. • Filings can be sent 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. • Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. • U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. • Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID–19. See FCC Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 2788 (Mar. 19, 2020), https://www.fcc.gov/document/ fcc-closes-headquarters-open-windowand-changes-hand-delivery-policy. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, please contact Michael Nemcik, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at Michael.Nemcik@fcc.gov or at (202) 418–2343. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Bureau’s Public Notice seeking comment on a Protective Order for the Robocall Mitigation Database collection in WC Docket No. 17–97, DA 21–546, released on May 10, 2021. The full document is available for public inspection at the following internet address: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/ attachments/DA-21-546A1.pdf. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format, etc.) send an email to fcc504@ fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice) or (202) 418–0432 (TTY). Introduction. On September 29, 2020, in its continuing effort to combat illegal VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 May 21, 2021 Jkt 253001 robocalls, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) adopted a Second Report and Order which, among other things, required all voice service providers to file certifications with the Commission regarding their efforts to stem the origination of illegal robocalls on their networks. The Commission further directed the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) to establish a publicly accessible database in which such certifications would be listed, and to issue a protective order regarding the treatment of any confidential and highly confidential information included in said certifications. Consistent with this direction, the Bureau now provides information and seeks comment on adopting a Protective Order similar to that used by the Bureau in other proceedings, with modifications appropriate in the context of the Robocall Mitigation Database. The Commission’s rules require voice service providers to certify that their traffic is either signed with STIR/ SHAKEN caller ID authentication technology or subject to a robocall mitigation program. Voice service providers that certify that some or all of their traffic is subject to a robocall mitigation program are also required to detail in their certifications the reasonable steps they have taken to avoid originating illegal robocall traffic. In establishing this public database, the Commission stated its goals were to promote transparency and to allow and encourage industry to self-police by making robocall mitigation plans visible to other voice service providers and the public at large. A party could, for example, review a robocall mitigation plan to determine whether it wishes to do business with the voice service provider or to report insufficient robocall mitigation efforts to the Commission. At the same time, recognizing the potential sensitivity of this information, the Commission directed the Bureau to adopt a Protective Order governing submission of and access to confidential and highly confidential information included with the certifications. We seek comment below on the procedures for submitting and accessing confidential and highly confidential information submitted in conjunction with this proceeding. Submission of Information. We propose to adopt in the Protective Order a process for submitting confidential information described in the Public Notice announcing the Robocall Mitigation Database. In that Public Notice, we explained that filers are ‘‘able to request that any materials or information submitted to the PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 27849 Commission in their certifications be withheld from public inspection.’’ We further explained that, to submit a confidential filing, a voice service provider ‘‘must first submit a confidentiality request in WC Docket No 17–97 through the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS)’’ and ‘‘will then be able to submit redacted (i.e., public) and unredacted (i.e., non-public) copies of its robocall mitigation program description via the Commission’s portal.’’ Having considered the issue further, we propose formalizing this approach in the Protective Order. Rather than ask for redacted copies of confidential and highly confidential documents to be filed through the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), our proposed Protective Order would direct voice service providers to file a request for confidentiality in ECFS and then submit any redacted copies of documents directly through the portal accompanying the database. This proposed Protective Order would also direct providers to file unredacted copies of confidential and highly confidential documents through the database’s portal, which differs from the typical Protective Order process of submitting these documents to the Secretary’s Office and designated Bureau staff. We seek comment on these proposals and whether we should modify the process described in the earlier Public Notice. Access to Information. We seek comment on which parties should and should not ultimately be granted access to the confidential and highly confidential information included by voice service providers in their certifications. We propose only allowing access to limited categories of entities and individuals and only after such entities or individuals complete an appropriate process. We propose that entities or individuals that may seek to obtain access include: Federal, state, local, and Tribal governmental entities involved in robocall enforcement; the registered industry traceback consortium; the STIR/SHAKEN Governance Authority; and intermediate providers and voice service providers who accept call traffic directly from a voice service provider listed in the database and request to review what actions that provider is taking to combat the origination of illegal robocalls. For this final group, we propose limiting access to the requesting party’s outside counsel and consultants, as well as the employees and support personnel of these outside firms. We propose limiting E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM 24MYN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 27850 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 98 / Monday, May 24, 2021 / Notices access to these groups to balance the Commission’s goals of promoting transparency in robocall mitigation efforts and protecting providers’ sensitive information from competitors and bad actors attempting to circumvent these mitigation efforts. We seek comment on this proposed scope of eligible reviewing parties, and whether a broader or narrower group would better balance the goals of promoting transparency and protecting sensitive information. We also propose adopting the standard process for obtaining access to confidential and highly confidential information used by the Bureau in other proceedings. This process would require any person other than support personnel seeking access to confidential or highly confidential information pursuant to the Protective Order to sign and date an Acknowledgement of Confidentiality agreeing to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Protective Order, and to file the Acknowledgment with the Commission and deliver a copy to the filing provider. Other Protective Order Provisions. Beyond the changes proposed above, we propose adopting the standard provisions found in other Commission Protective Orders. For example, we propose adopting standard provisions governing the designation of information as confidential or highly confidential, challenges to designations, the procedure for objecting to the disclosure of confidential or highly confidential information, and the review of confidential and highly confidential documents. Additionally, we propose adopting similar appendices, including one which contains an Acknowledgement of Confidentiality, and another which details what information and documents can be designated as highly confidential. We seek comment on whether and how we should modify these provisions or appendices in the context of the Robocall Mitigation Database. Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance with the Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must: (1) List all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made; and (2) VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:32 May 21, 2021 Jkt 253001 summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenters written comments, memoranda, or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with section 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules. In proceedings governed by section 1.49(f) of the rules or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml., .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules. Federal Communications Commission. Pamela Arluk, Chief, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau. [FR Doc. 2021–10879 Filed 5–21–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060–0931; FRS 28019] Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to Office of Management and Budget Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. AGENCY: As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the FCC seeks specific comment on how it can SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. DATES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted on or before June 23, 2021. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or by using the search function. Your comment must be submitted into www.reginfo.gov per the above instructions for it to be considered. In addition to submitting in www.reginfo.gov also send a copy of your comment on the proposed information collection to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email to PRA@ fcc.gov and to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. Include in the comments the OMB control number as shown in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418–2918. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the web page https://www.reginfo.gov/ public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the web page called ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box below the ‘‘Currently Under Review’’ heading, (4) select ‘‘Federal Communications Commission’’ from the list of agencies presented in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, (5) click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to the right of the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, (6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for the Title of this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC submission to OMB will be displayed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: (a) Whether the proposed collection of E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM 24MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 98 (Monday, May 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27848-27850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10879]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[WC Docket No. 17-97; DA 21-546; FRS 27843]


Call Authentication Trust Anchor

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) 
provides information and seeks comment on adopting a Protective Order 
similar to that used by the Bureau in other proceedings, with 
modifications appropriate in the context of the Robocall Mitigation 
Database. It does so pursuant to direction from the Federal 
Communications Commission (Commission) to establish a publicly 
accessible database in which robocall mitigation certifications can be 
listed, and to issue a protective order regarding the treatment of any 
confidential and highly confidential information included in said 
certifications.

DATES: Comments are due on or before June 3, 2021; reply Comments are 
due on or before June 8, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments may be filed using the 
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic 
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking

[[Page 27849]]

Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). Interested parties may file comments 
or reply comments, identified by WC Docket No. 17-97 by any of the 
following methods:
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the internet by accessing ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy of each filing.
     Filings can be sent 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.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, 
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
     Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the 
Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. 
This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety 
of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See FCC 
Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and Change in Hand-
Delivery Policy, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 2788 (Mar. 19, 2020), 
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, please 
contact Michael Nemcik, Competition Policy Division, Wireline 
Competition Bureau, at [email protected] or at (202) 418-2343.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Bureau's Public 
Notice seeking comment on a Protective Order for the Robocall 
Mitigation Database collection in WC Docket No. 17-97, DA 21-546, 
released on May 10, 2021. The full document is available for public 
inspection at the following internet address: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-21-546A1.pdf. To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format, etc.) send an email to [email protected] or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice) or 
(202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    Introduction. On September 29, 2020, in its continuing effort to 
combat illegal robocalls, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopted a Second Report and Order which, among other 
things, required all voice service providers to file certifications 
with the Commission regarding their efforts to stem the origination of 
illegal robocalls on their networks. The Commission further directed 
the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) to establish a publicly 
accessible database in which such certifications would be listed, and 
to issue a protective order regarding the treatment of any confidential 
and highly confidential information included in said certifications. 
Consistent with this direction, the Bureau now provides information and 
seeks comment on adopting a Protective Order similar to that used by 
the Bureau in other proceedings, with modifications appropriate in the 
context of the Robocall Mitigation Database.
    The Commission's rules require voice service providers to certify 
that their traffic is either signed with STIR/SHAKEN caller ID 
authentication technology or subject to a robocall mitigation program. 
Voice service providers that certify that some or all of their traffic 
is subject to a robocall mitigation program are also required to detail 
in their certifications the reasonable steps they have taken to avoid 
originating illegal robocall traffic. In establishing this public 
database, the Commission stated its goals were to promote transparency 
and to allow and encourage industry to self-police by making robocall 
mitigation plans visible to other voice service providers and the 
public at large. A party could, for example, review a robocall 
mitigation plan to determine whether it wishes to do business with the 
voice service provider or to report insufficient robocall mitigation 
efforts to the Commission. At the same time, recognizing the potential 
sensitivity of this information, the Commission directed the Bureau to 
adopt a Protective Order governing submission of and access to 
confidential and highly confidential information included with the 
certifications. We seek comment below on the procedures for submitting 
and accessing confidential and highly confidential information 
submitted in conjunction with this proceeding.
    Submission of Information. We propose to adopt in the Protective 
Order a process for submitting confidential information described in 
the Public Notice announcing the Robocall Mitigation Database. In that 
Public Notice, we explained that filers are ``able to request that any 
materials or information submitted to the Commission in their 
certifications be withheld from public inspection.'' We further 
explained that, to submit a confidential filing, a voice service 
provider ``must first submit a confidentiality request in WC Docket No 
17-97 through the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System 
(ECFS)'' and ``will then be able to submit redacted (i.e., public) and 
unredacted (i.e., non-public) copies of its robocall mitigation program 
description via the Commission's portal.'' Having considered the issue 
further, we propose formalizing this approach in the Protective Order. 
Rather than ask for redacted copies of confidential and highly 
confidential documents to be filed through the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS), our proposed Protective Order would 
direct voice service providers to file a request for confidentiality in 
ECFS and then submit any redacted copies of documents directly through 
the portal accompanying the database. This proposed Protective Order 
would also direct providers to file unredacted copies of confidential 
and highly confidential documents through the database's portal, which 
differs from the typical Protective Order process of submitting these 
documents to the Secretary's Office and designated Bureau staff. We 
seek comment on these proposals and whether we should modify the 
process described in the earlier Public Notice.
    Access to Information. We seek comment on which parties should and 
should not ultimately be granted access to the confidential and highly 
confidential information included by voice service providers in their 
certifications. We propose only allowing access to limited categories 
of entities and individuals and only after such entities or individuals 
complete an appropriate process. We propose that entities or 
individuals that may seek to obtain access include: Federal, state, 
local, and Tribal governmental entities involved in robocall 
enforcement; the registered industry traceback consortium; the STIR/
SHAKEN Governance Authority; and intermediate providers and voice 
service providers who accept call traffic directly from a voice service 
provider listed in the database and request to review what actions that 
provider is taking to combat the origination of illegal robocalls. For 
this final group, we propose limiting access to the requesting party's 
outside counsel and consultants, as well as the employees and support 
personnel of these outside firms. We propose limiting

[[Page 27850]]

access to these groups to balance the Commission's goals of promoting 
transparency in robocall mitigation efforts and protecting providers' 
sensitive information from competitors and bad actors attempting to 
circumvent these mitigation efforts. We seek comment on this proposed 
scope of eligible reviewing parties, and whether a broader or narrower 
group would better balance the goals of promoting transparency and 
protecting sensitive information. We also propose adopting the standard 
process for obtaining access to confidential and highly confidential 
information used by the Bureau in other proceedings. This process would 
require any person other than support personnel seeking access to 
confidential or highly confidential information pursuant to the 
Protective Order to sign and date an Acknowledgement of Confidentiality 
agreeing to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Protective 
Order, and to file the Acknowledgment with the Commission and deliver a 
copy to the filing provider.
    Other Protective Order Provisions. Beyond the changes proposed 
above, we propose adopting the standard provisions found in other 
Commission Protective Orders. For example, we propose adopting standard 
provisions governing the designation of information as confidential or 
highly confidential, challenges to designations, the procedure for 
objecting to the disclosure of confidential or highly confidential 
information, and the review of confidential and highly confidential 
documents. Additionally, we propose adopting similar appendices, 
including one which contains an Acknowledgement of Confidentiality, and 
another which details what information and documents can be designated 
as highly confidential. We seek comment on whether and how we should 
modify these provisions or appendices in the context of the Robocall 
Mitigation Database.
    Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-
disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte 
rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any 
written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation 
within two business days after the presentation (unless a different 
deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making 
oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the 
presentation must: (1) List all persons attending or otherwise 
participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was 
made; and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during 
the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of 
the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the 
presenters written comments, memoranda, or other filings in the 
proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or 
arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings 
(specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data 
or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the 
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex 
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must 
be filed consistent with section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. 
In proceedings governed by section 1.49(f) of the rules or for which 
the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, 
written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte 
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the 
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and 
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml., .ppt, 
searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize 
themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.

Federal Communications Commission.
Pamela Arluk,
Chief, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2021-10879 Filed 5-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.