Supporting Survivors of Domestic and Sexual Violence, 30303-30311 [2024-08642]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
30303
TABLE 110.214(c)
Anchorage
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
N
P
Q
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
...........................................................................................
............................................................................................
............................................................................................
...........................................................................................
General location
Purpose
Los Angeles Harbor ..............
Long Beach Harbor ...............
......do ....................................
......do ....................................
......do ....................................
Outside Breakwater ..............
......do ....................................
Los Angeles Harbor ..............
Long Beach Harbor ...............
......do ....................................
Commercial ...........................
......do ....................................
......do ....................................
Commercial & Naval .............
Commercial ...........................
......do ....................................
......do ....................................
Small Craft ............................
......do ....................................
......do ....................................
Specific regulations
Note a.
......Do.
Notes a, g.
Notes a, b, g.
Note c.
Notes c, d, g.
Notes c, d.
Note e.
Note f.
Notes c, g.
Notes:
a. Bunkering and lightering are permitted.
b. West of 118°–09′–48″ W priority for use of the anchorage will be given to commercial vessels over 244 meters (approximately 800 feet).
East of 118°–09′–48″ W priority for use of the anchorage will be given to Naval and Public vessels, vessels under Department of Defense charter, and vessels requiring use of the explosives anchorage.
c. Bunkering and lightering are prohibited.
d. This anchorage is within a Regulated Navigation Area and additional requirements apply as set forth in 33 CFR 165.1109(E).
e. This anchorage is controlled by the Los Angeles Port Police. Anchoring, mooring and recreational boating activities conforming to applicable
City of Los Angeles ordinances and regulations are allowed in this anchorage.
f. This anchorage is controlled by the Long Beach Harbor Master. Anchoring, mooring and recreational boating activities conforming to applicable City of Long Beach ordinances and regulations are allowed in this anchorage.
g. When the explosives anchorage is activated portions of this anchorage lie within the explosives anchorage and the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section apply.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 16, 2024.
Andrew M. Sugimoto,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2024–08636 Filed 4–22–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[WC Docket No. 22–238; FCC 24–38; FR
ID 214900]
Supporting Survivors of Domestic and
Sexual Violence
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) seeks comment on
additional action it can take to help
survivors of domestic violence access
safe and affordable connectivity,
particularly in the context of connected
car services which may be used to stalk,
harass, and revictimize survivors of
domestic violence.
DATES: Interested parties may file
comments on or before May 23, 2024,
and reply comments on or before June
24, 2024. Written comments on the
Paperwork Reduction Act proposed
information collection requirements
must be submitted by the public, the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and other interested parties on
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
or before June 24, 2024. Written
comments on the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in this
document must have a separate and
distinct heading designating them as
responses to the IRFA and must be
submitted by the public on or before
May 23, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by WC Docket No. 22–238, by
any of the following methods:
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the 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 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.
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Headquarters Open Window and
Change in Hand-Delivery Filing, Public
Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 2788 (2020), https://
www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closesheadquarters-open-window-andchanges-hand-delivery-policy
People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
please send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov
or call the Consumer & Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information on this proceeding,
contact Thomas Hastings,
Thomas.Hastings@fcc.gov, of the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau,
Competition & Infrastructure Policy
Division, (202) 418–1343. For additional
information concerning the Paperwork
Reduction Act proposed information
requirements contained in this
document, send an email to PRA@
fcc.gov or contact Cathy Williams at
(202) 418–2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM), in WC Docket No. 22–238;
FCC 24–38, adopted April 3, 2024, and
released on April 8, 2024. The full text
of the document is available for
download at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/
attachments/FCC-24-38A1.pdf.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: The
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), requires that an agency
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis
for notice-and-comment rulemakings,
unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule
will not, if promulgated, have a
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
30304
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.’’
Accordingly, the Commission has
prepared an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning
the possible impact of the rule and
policy changes contained in this Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking. Written public
comments are requested on the IRFA.
Comments must be by the deadlines for
comments on this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking indicated in the DATES
section of this document and must have
a separate and distinct heading
designating them as responses to the
IRFA and must be filed in WC Docket
No. 22–238.
Paperwork Reduction Act: This
document contains proposed modified
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. If the Commission
adopts any new or revised information
collection requirements, the
Commission will publish a notice in the
Federal Register inviting the general
public and the Office of Management
and Budget to comment on the
information collection requirements. In
addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks
specific comment on how it might
further reduce the information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
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 presenter’s
written comments, memoranda, or other
filings in the proceeding, then the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 47 CFR 1.1206(b). In
proceedings governed by 47 CFR 1.49(f),
or for which the Commission has made
available a method of electronic filing,
written ex parte presentations and
memoranda summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding and must
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act: The Providing
Accountability Through Transparency
Act, Public Law 118–9, requires each
agency, in providing notice of a
rulemaking, to post online a brief plainlanguage summary of the proposed rule.
The required summary of this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is available at
https://www.fcc.gov/proposedrulemakings.
Synopsis
I. Introduction
1. In this FNPRM, the Commission
seeks comment on additional action we
can take to help survivors of domestic
violence access safe and affordable
connectivity, particularly in the context
of connected car services. Modern
vehicles are frequently equipped with a
suite of connectivity tools and features,
such as hands-free communication, realtime location, and other connectivity
services. While these services provide
benefits to drivers and passengers when
used as intended, news reports suggest
that these services have also been used
to stalk, harass, and revictimize
survivors of domestic violence.
2. We seek comment on solutions to
help ensure that domestic violence
survivors need not choose between
access to personal transportation or
exposing themselves to threatening,
stalking, or other harmful behavior by
those who can access the car’s data and
connectivity. We seek comment on the
types, as well as the frequency of use,
of connected car services in the
marketplace today. In addition, we ask
whether changes to the Commission’s
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
rules implementing the Safe
Connections Act (SCA) are needed to
address the impact of connected car
services on domestic violence survivors.
Safe Connections Act of 2022, Public
Law 117–223, 116 Stat. 2280 (Safe
Connections Act or SCA). In November
2023, the Commission adopted a Report
and Order implementing the Safe
Connections Act. Supporting Survivors
of Domestic and Sexual Violence et al.,
WC Docket No. 22–238, Report and
Order, FCC 23–96 (Nov. 16, 2023) (SCA
Report and Order). We also ask more
broadly what steps connected car
service providers can proactively take to
protect survivors from being stalked,
harassed, intimidated, or otherwise
revictimized through the misuse of
connected car services.
II. Background
3. Domestic violence and abusive
relationships are a significant safety and
public health issue that result in
individual harm and societal costs that
extend beyond the survivor. Domestic
violence affects more than 12 million
people every year, and an average of 24
people per minute are subject to
physical violence or stalking by an
intimate partner. Almost half of all
women and men in the United States
have experienced psychological
aggression by an intimate partner in
their lifetime (48.4% and 48.8%,
respectively). The effects of domestic
violence disproportionately impact
women. In addition, domestic violence
disproportionately impacts people of
color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other
individuals who identify with
historically marginalized demographics.
Estimates of economic costs due to
domestic violence are vast and
encompass disruptions to education and
work, among other aspects.
4. Safe Connections Act. In
recognition of the harmful and lasting
impact that domestic violence and
related crimes have on survivors,
Congress passed the SCA in November
of 2022. In particular, Congress
recognized the reality that survivors
seeking to escape their abusers are often
tethered to their abusers by
technology—such as shared mobile
service—and that these lingering
connections present unique challenges
for survivors seeking to maintain
essential connectivity while distancing
themselves from their abusers. In the
SCA, Congress found that ‘‘perpetrators
of violence and abuse . . . increasingly
use technological and communications
tools to exercise control over, monitor,
and abuse their victims,’’ and that
‘‘[c]ommunications law can play a
public interest role in the promotion of
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
safety, life, and property’’ with respect
to these types of violence and abuse.
The SCA further found that
‘‘[s]afeguards within communications
services can serve a role in preventing
abuse and narrowing the digital divide
experienced by survivors of abuse.’’
Congress, through the SCA, sought to
ensure that survivors can separate from
abusers without losing independent
access to their mobile service plans. To
further that objective, Congress directed
the Commission to adopt rules to
implement the protections established
in the SCA for survivors of domestic
violence.
5. SCA Report and Order. In
November 2023, the Commission
adopted the SCA Report and Order
implementing the Commission’s
obligations under the SCA to help
survivors of domestic violence and
related crimes to separate service lines
from accounts shared with their abusers,
protect the privacy of calls made by
survivors to domestic-violence hotlines,
and support survivors suffering from
financial hardship. The Commission
defined key terms in the SCA, such as
what constitutes a ‘‘covered provider’’
subject to the Commission’s new rules.
As noted in the SCA Report and Order,
multi-line shared mobile service
contracts present challenges for
survivors of domestic violence who seek
to maintain essential connectivity while
also distancing themselves from their
abuser, because the abuser may be an
account holder and thus able to monitor
the survivor’s calls, text messages, and
device location. In adopting rules
implementing the SCA, the Commission
recognized that it can be difficult for the
survivor to separate their mobile service
line from their abuser when the plan is
shared with and controlled by the
abuser.
6. Concerns of Misuse of Connected
Car Applications by Abusers. Connected
cars bring a myriad of benefits that can
improve conditions for drivers,
pedestrians, and motorists in general.
These benefits include helping to locate
a vehicle in a parking lot and
connecting promptly with first
responders in an emergency without a
phone. These features typically require
the car to have wireless connectivity
and to create and share location data.
However, when these data and
connectivity are in the wrong hands,
they may be used to harm a survivor
in—or attempting to leave—an abusive
relationship. Indeed, recent reports
suggest that connected cars can be
‘‘weaponized’’ against survivors,
especially when survivors co-own or
share a car with an abuser. For instance,
connected cars co-owned or leased by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
both the abuser and survivor may allow
the abuser to track the survivor using
the car’s location-based services. One
news report suggests that survivors may
have only limited ability to remove an
abuser from their vehicle’s data services
and that connected car manufacturers
may hesitate to act or abstain from
acting altogether when the abuser has an
ownership interest in the connected car
with the survivor.
7. FCC Letters and Responses. In
response to this public policy concern
and Congress’ directive in the SCA, in
January 2024, Chairwoman Rosenworcel
sent a series of letters to wireless service
providers and to auto manufacturers to
seek information and ask for their help
in protecting domestic violence
survivors. The letters to the wireless
providers asked about existing
connected car services, treatment of
geolocation data from these services,
current compliance with the SCA, and
whether (and if so, how) the companies
provide connected car services to
consumers who are not subscribers to
the company’s wireless services. The
letters to the auto manufacturers asked
the companies for details about the
connected car services they offer, any
existing plans to support survivors’
efforts to disconnect from abusers, and
how the manufacturers handle
consumers’ geolocation data.
8. In their responses, as discussed
further below, the wireless service
providers noted their shared concerns
about safeguarding survivors of
domestic violence and affirmed that
they are taking steps to implement the
SCA. The auto manufacturers provided
an overview of the functions and
privacy features of their connected car
services.
III. Discussion
9. We seek comment generally on the
ways that connected car services are
used and steps the Commission can take
to help protect survivors of domestic
violence from misuse of such services.
First, based on the responses to the
information requests sent by the
Chairwoman, we describe and seek
comment on our understanding of
wireless service providers’ and auto
manufacturers’ connected car service
offerings. We also seek additional
information on any other connected car
services that are available. Next, we seek
comment on whether changes to the
Commission’s rules implementing the
SCA are necessary to address the impact
of connected car services on domestic
violence survivors. Finally, we seek
comment on other actions we can take
to help protect survivors using
connected car services. In that regard,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30305
we seek comment on other potential
sources of authority for Commission
action and on how to encourage
connected car service providers to take
proactive steps to protect survivors
against misuse of these services.
10. The Connected Car Services
Available Today. The responses to
Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s information
requests show that wireless service
providers and auto manufacturers
currently provide a range of connected
car services in the marketplace. We seek
additional information about how these
services are offered to consumers.
11. One method for offering
connected car services is through a
wireless service provider. The wireless
service providers’ responses to the
Chairwoman’s information requests
suggest that their offerings generally
consist either of (1) services offered
directly to consumers or (2) wholesale
connectivity services offered to auto
manufacturers or to the manufacturer’s
contracted third-party telematics service
provider. For services offered directly to
consumers, wireless service providers
may enter into an agreement with a
subscriber to add a line with an
associated phone number to their
wireless service contract for the
connected car service. Subscribers
typically access these services using an
app and, in some cases, a separate
device that plugs into their vehicle’s
control panel. The direct-to-subscriber
services offer a range of features such as
roadside assistance, navigation, and
notification of required vehicle
maintenance. Wireless service provider
responses to the information requests
suggest that some of these services also
include the ability to track the vehicle’s
location remotely. Some wireless
service providers also offer in-vehicle
Wi-Fi services to consumers. When
wireless service providers offer
wholesale connectivity services, the
providers may not have a direct
contractual relationship with individual
vehicle owners or lessees. Rather, they
may contract directly with auto
manufacturers via wholesale agreements
or with other third parties to provide
connectivity for a fleet of vehicles. We
seek comment on our understanding of
the connected car services offered by
wireless service providers, and we seek
additional information on any other
features and capabilities not covered in
this paragraph.
12. With respect to auto
manufacturers’ connected car services,
the responses suggest that, when
purchasing service from an auto
manufacturer, the owner or lessee of a
car typically enters into a service
agreement with the auto manufacturer
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
30306
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
for connected car services. A car owner
typically accesses connected services on
their mobile device through a
manufacturer-provided app. Many auto
manufacturers obtain the network
connectivity to power these services by
entering into contracts to access the
wireless networks of wireless service
providers or other third parties. The
connected car services provided by auto
manufacturers include a range of
features such as the ability to start the
vehicle or control the vehicle’s climate
control system remotely. Some services
also include the ability to track the
vehicle’s location remotely. We seek
comment on our understanding of the
connected car services offered by auto
manufacturers, and we seek additional
information on any other features and
capabilities not covered in this
paragraph.
13. It appears that consumers—
including domestic violence survivors—
have varying levels of control of the data
that connected car services generate,
including remote vehicle location data.
Responses to the information requests
suggest that while some of the wireless
service providers and auto
manufacturers enable a survivor to turn
off remote location tracking if the
survivor becomes aware of being tracked
by an abuser, not all companies
currently provide that ability. For some
connected car services, it appears that
only a vehicle owner or lessee may
disable tracking features on the
connected car app absent a court order
or other legal process. Some of the
responses to the information requests
indicate that the provider’s connected
car service gives notice to a driver that
the car’s location is being tracked. Other
responses do not indicate whether the
service offers this function. The
responses to the information requests
further indicate that information
collected through connected car services
may be shared with third parties in
accordance with connected car service
agreements. We seek further information
on whether and how users, including
both owners or lessees and nonowners
or lessees, control access to their data
for connected car services that are
available today and on what information
users receive about the tracking features
of these services. To what extent do auto
manufacturers and wireless service
providers enable—or plan to enable—
access controls for data associated with
connected car services for owners and
lessees and other vehicle users?
14. Application of the SCA and the
FCC’s Implementing Rules to Connected
Car Services. We seek comment on
what, if any, changes to our rules
implementing the SCA could help to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
address the impact of connected car
services on domestic violence survivors.
A ‘‘shared mobile service contract’’ is
defined under the SCA rules to mean ‘‘a
mobile service contract for an account
that includes not less than two lines of
service and does not include enterprise
services offered by a covered provider.
‘‘Lines of service,’’ under the SCA rules,
are those ‘‘associated with a telephone
number’’ and include ‘‘all of the mobile
services associated with that line under
the shared mobile service contract,
regardless of classification, including
voice, text, and data services.’’ The SCA
Report and Order makes clear that a
‘‘line’’ can apply to devices, ‘‘such as
tablets with no mobile capability, which
only nominally have a line associated
with a customer account,’’ noting, for
example, that ‘‘a survivor may want to
separate a line for a device in order to
protect his or her location information
from an abuser with access to the shared
mobile account information.’’
15. Line separation requirements
apply, under the SCA rules, to ‘‘covered
providers.’’ ‘‘Covered providers’’ are
defined as providers of ‘‘a private
mobile service or commercial mobile
service, as those terms are defined in 47
U.S.C. 332(d).’’ ‘‘Covered provider’’
includes providers of mobile
broadband-only or mobile text service
that do not also offer mobile voice
service, if such provider assigns a
telephone number to a device. ‘‘Covered
provider’’ also includes facilities-based
mobile network operators and resellers/
mobile virtual network operators
(MVNOs).
16. Where the defined elements in the
Commission’s SCA rules are present, the
obligations associated with line
separations apply. The FCC’s rules
implementing the SCA thus could apply
to connected car services that involve a
‘‘shared mobile service contract’’ offered
by a ‘‘covered provider’’ as defined
under the rules and would require a
provider to respond to a valid request
for a line separation. We seek comment
on this position and the extent to which
the FCC’s existing SCA rules do not
fully address concerns regarding the
impact of connected car services on
domestic violence survivors and
whether changes to these rules would
enable the Commission to better address
these concerns.
17. As stated above, the definition of
‘‘covered provider’’ under the SCA rules
includes providers both of commercial
mobile service and private mobile
service and also includes facilitiesbased mobile network operators and
resellers/MVNOs. In the context of
connected cars, wireless providers offer
services directly to consumers and may
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
enter into an agreement with a
subscriber to add a line to their mobile
service contract for the connected car
service. Wireless providers also provide
wholesale service to auto
manufacturers, which in turn provide
connectivity for consumers as a valueadded service. Auto manufacturers enter
into service agreements with owners
and lessees of vehicles to provide them
connected car services using, in many
cases, the connectivity from the
networks of wireless service providers.
We view the broad scope of the
‘‘covered provider’’ definition as
potentially including the connected car
services that wireless service providers
offer directly to consumers, and we
highlight this view to assist efforts to
implement the Commission’s recently
adopted rules under the SCA. Does the
definition also include the service that
auto manufacturers purchase wholesale
and in turn offer to consumers? Does the
definition of ‘‘covered provider’’ in the
SCA rules need to be modified to
account for additional use cases in order
to better protect survivors, and if so,
what revisions do commenters
recommend? Would doing so be
consistent with the policy objectives
and authority of the SCA?
18. To what extent are auto
manufacturers reselling mobile
connectivity when providing connected
car services? In clarifying that the SCA
rules extend to MVNOs, the
Commission noted in the SCA Report
and Order that, for some MVNOs, ‘‘the
underlying facilities-based provider may
have control over some parts of, or all
of, the systems and infrastructure
necessary to effectuate line
separations.’’ The Commission clarified
that, in those cases, ‘‘the MVNO should
fulfill its obligations under the SCA and
our rules through its contractual
relationship with the underlying
facilities-based provider, and may
satisfy its obligations by utilizing the
same procedures and processes the
facilities-based provider makes available
to its own customers.’’ To the extent an
MVNO controls any facilities or
systems, such as customer care or
billing, the Commission found that ‘‘the
obligations imposed by the SCA fall
entirely upon the MVNO and not the
underlying facilities-based provider.’’
We seek comment on how these
findings may apply in the context of
connected car services offered by auto
manufacturers. Do auto manufacturers
have control over any systems or
infrastructure necessary to effectuate a
line separation under the SCA rules?
Are these systems entirely controlled by
the wireless service providers who
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
provide the connectivity for the
services? Are they controlled or
operated jointly?
19. Under the SCA, ‘‘shared mobile
service contract’’ is defined to mean ‘‘a
mobile service contract for an account
that includes not less than 2
consumers.’’ The rules implementing
the SCA provide that a ‘‘shared mobile
service contract’’ means ‘‘a mobile
service contract for an account that
includes not less than two lines of
service’’ and define ‘‘lines of service’’ to
mean those lines associated with a
telephone number. Connected car
services generally involve a ‘‘shared
mobile service contract’’ when the
service is offered by a wireless service
provider as an add-on to an existing
wireless service agreement. Do
connected car services offered by auto
manufacturers also involve multiple
lines of service? For example, if
someone owns multiple cars from the
same manufacturer and each of those
cars has connected car service, would
there be a ‘‘shared mobile service
contract’’ for those services? Do
connected car services use ‘‘lines of
service’’ as contemplated under the SCA
framework? The responses to the
information requests suggest that some
connected car services associate phone
numbers with specific vehicles. Is that
association typical for the majority of
connected car services? If there are some
connected car services that do not
involve ‘‘shared mobile service
contracts’’ and ‘‘lines of service’’ as
currently defined by the Commission,
are there ways that the Commission can
revise these definitions, consistent with
our authority under the SCA, to expand
their scope and apply to connected car
services? Would doing so be consistent
with the policy objectives of and
authority granted by the SCA? For
example, to the extent connected car
services are not currently encompassed
in the Commission’s definition of
‘‘shared mobile service contract’’ under
our rules, does the language in the SCA
definition that refers to ‘‘an account that
includes not less than 2 consumers’’
suggest that we could extend the
definition to a shared account (e.g., coowners or co-lessees of a vehicle) for
connected car services?
20. To the extent that connected car
services are—or could be—covered by
the SCA, how would line separation
requirements apply? Are there
operational or technical issues that
would affect implementation, including
any unique challenges for small
entities? For example, how would
vehicle ownership affect
implementation? Are vehicles typically
owned on a shared basis by both
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
members of a couple? We expect that, if
a vehicle is under the sole ownership of
an abuser, but is used by a survivor, the
SCA rules would require separation of
the connected car service line that is
associated with that vehicle through the
abuser’s account. In these cases, what
evidence and standards of proof would
be needed from a survivor to separate
the connected car service line?
Currently, under the Commission’s SCA
rules, survivors seeking a line
separation are required to submit
documentation that verifies that an
individual who uses a line under the
shared mobile service contract has
committed or allegedly committed a
covered act against the survivor or an
individual in the survivor’s care. Would
there be any reason to modify these
evidentiary requirements for connected
car services?
21. Other Actions to Protect Survivors
Using Connected Car Services. Outside
of the SCA, we seek comment on other
authority the Commission could use and
other steps the Commission could take
to help prevent the misuse of connected
car services. To the extent that
connected car services are not covered
by the SCA and Commission rules, are
there other sources of authority the
Commission could use to help address
the misuse of these services? For
example, could the Commission use its
authority under other Title III
provisions to adopt requirements that
apply to the connected car services
offered by wireless service providers
and/or auto manufacturers?
22. Outside of formal Commission
action, what steps can providers of
connected car services take to prevent
the misuse of connected car services in
domestic violence situations? How can
the Commission encourage providers to
take such steps? What changes to the
design and functionality of these
services are needed to help protect
survivors of domestic violence? In
particular, we seek comment on what
steps providers of connected car
services could take to make it easier for
survivors to turn off remote location
tracking and other services that might
enable abusers to track, control, or
revictimize survivors. For example, for
some connected car services it appears
that only a vehicle owner or lessee may
disable tracking features on the
connected car app absent a court order.
Should manufacturers permit their apps
to allow multiple account holders so
that survivors using a co-owned vehicle
may access the app to turn off tracking
features? How could companies change
their policies to better respond to
domestic violence situations? What
other users or sets of users should be
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30307
permitted to disable such features? Are
there any risks that would arise if
companies were to allow users other
than the owner or lessee to disable any
connected car services?
23. What are companies’ policies, and
how can they best ensure that survivors
are protected in instances when
survivors request, and companies make,
changes to location tracking or other
connected services? Where companies
do permit survivors who are not the
primary account holder to request
changes (such as turning off location
data for a connected car service), do
companies automatically send notices to
primary account holders? If so, do
companies need to notify a primary
account holder (who may be an abuser)
about such changes? Should companies
set a uniform waiting period between
when the company receives a request
from a survivor and when the company
notifies a primary account holder?
Could companies delay notice to
primary account holders until the
company has approved and processed
such requests, or do the companies need
to communicate with primary account
holders prior to making changes?
24. Are there other ways to allow
vehicle tracking for legitimate safety
reasons (e.g., driver safety or vehicle
theft recovery) without making the
tracking features accessible by abusers?
Are there changes that automakers
could make to alert unsuspecting
survivors about tracking services that
may be active in their vehicles? What
other steps should auto manufacturers
and wireless service providers consider
to prevent the misuse of connected car
services? Should they provide
consumers with more information about
the connectivity features, privacy
controls, and other settings available in
connected car services and apps?
Should they develop more specific
policies to address the misuse of
connected car services in domestic
violence situations? How can the
Commission encourage auto
manufacturers and wireless service
providers to collaborate proactively
with stakeholders to protect against
misuse of connected car services?
25. Promoting Digital Equity and
Inclusion. As noted earlier, the effects of
domestic violence disproportionately
impact women as well as people of
color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other
individuals who identify with
historically marginalized demographics.
The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to advance digital
equity for all, including people of color,
persons with disabilities, persons who
live in rural or Tribal areas, women,
LGBTQ+ persons, and others who are or
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
30308
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
have been historically underserved,
marginalized, or adversely affected by
persistent poverty or inequality, invites
comment on any equity-related
considerations and benefits (if any) that
may be associated with the proposals
and issues discussed herein.
Specifically, we seek comment on how
our proposals may promote or inhibit
advances in diversity, equity, inclusion,
and accessibility, as well the scope of
the Commission’s relevant legal
authority.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
IV. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis
26. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended,
(RFA), the Federal Communications
Commission (Commission) has prepared
this Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) of the possible
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities by
the policies and rules proposed in the
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM). The Commission requests
written public comments on this IRFA.
Comments must be identified as
responses to the IRFA and must be filed
by the deadlines for comments provided
on the first page of the FNPRM. The
Commission will send a copy of the
Notice, including this IRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA). In
addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or
summaries thereof) will be published in
the Federal Register.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
27. Connectivity services in modern
vehicles such as hands-free
communication or find-your-car are
intended to function as convenient tools
for passengers and drivers. However, in
the hands of an abuser, those same
services can be used to stalk, harass, and
intimidate survivors of domestic
violence. In the FNPRM, the
Commission seeks comment generally
from small and other entities on the
ways that connected car services are
used and what further action the
Commission can take to help protect
domestic violence survivors from
misuse of these services. First, based on
the responses the Commission received
to the information requests sent by the
Chairwoman, the FNPRM describes and
seeks comment on the Commission’s
understanding of wireless-service
providers’ and auto manufacturers’
connected car service offerings. The
FNPRM also seeks additional
information on any other connected car
services that are available in today’s
marketplace. Next, the FNPRM seeks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
comment on whether changes to the
Commission’s rules implementing the
Safe Connections Act (SCA) are
necessary to address the impact of
connected car services on domestic
violence survivors. Finally, the FNPRM
seeks comment on other actions the
Commission can take to help protect
survivors using connected car services,
other potential sources of authority for
Commission action, and how best to
encourage connected car service
providers to take proactive steps to
protect survivors against abuse of these
services.
B. Legal Basis
28. The proposed action is authorized
pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 254,
345, and 403 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.
§§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 254, 345, and 403;
section 5(b) of the Safe Connections Act
of 2022, Public Law 117–223, 136 Stat
2280; and section 904 of Division N,
Title IX of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law
116–260, 134 Stat. 1182, as amended by
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act, Public Law 117–58, 135 Stat. 429.
C. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Would Apply
29. The RFA directs agencies to
provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities that may be affected by
the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA
generally defines the term ‘‘small
entity’’ as having the same meaning as
the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small
organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental
jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term
‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning
as the term ‘‘small business concern’’
under the Small Business Act. A ‘‘small
business concern’’ is one which: (1) is
independently owned and operated; (2)
is not dominant in its field of operation;
and (3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the SBA.
30. Small Businesses, Small
Organizations, Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time,
may affect small entities that are not
easily categorized at present. We
therefore describe, at the outset, three
broad groups of small entities that could
be directly affected herein. First, while
there are industry specific size
standards for small businesses that are
used in the regulatory flexibility
analysis, according to data from the
Small Business Administration’s (SBA)
Office of Advocacy, in general a small
business is an independent business
having fewer than 500 employees. These
types of small businesses represent
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
99.9% of all businesses in the United
States, which translates to 33.2 million
businesses.
31. Next, the type of small entity
described as a ‘‘small organization’’ is
generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise
which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its
field.’’ The Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of
$50,000 or less to delineate its annual
electronic filing requirements for small
exempt organizations. Nationwide, for
tax year 2020, there were approximately
447,689 small exempt organizations in
the U.S. reporting revenues of $50,000
or less according to the registration and
tax data for exempt organizations
available from the IRS.
32. Finally, the small entity described
as a ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction’’
is defined generally as ‘‘governments of
cities, counties, towns, townships,
villages, school districts, or special
districts, with a population of less than
fifty thousand.’’ U.S. Census Bureau
data from the 2017 Census of
Governments indicate there were 90,075
local governmental jurisdictions
consisting of general purpose
governments and special purpose
governments in the United States. Of
this number, there were 36,931 general
purpose governments (county,
municipal, and town or township) with
populations of less than 50,000 and
12,040 special purpose governments—
independent school districts with
enrollment populations of less than
50,000. Accordingly, based on the 2017
U.S. Census of Governments data, we
estimate that at least 48,971 entities fall
into the category of ‘‘small
governmental jurisdictions.’’
33. Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite). This industry
comprises establishments engaged in
operating and maintaining switching
and transmission facilities to provide
communications via the airwaves.
Establishments in this industry have
spectrum licenses and provide services
using that spectrum, such as cellular
services, paging services, wireless
internet access, and wireless video
services. The SBA size standard for this
industry classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
there were 2,893 firms in this industry
that operated for the entire year. Of that
number, 2,837 firms employed fewer
than 250 employees. Additionally,
based on Commission data in the 2022
Universal Service Monitoring Report, as
of December 31, 2021, there were 594
providers that reported they were
engaged in the provision of wireless
services. Of these providers, the
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Commission estimates that 511
providers have 1,500 or fewer
employees. Consequently, using the
SBA’s small business size standard,
most of these providers can be
considered small entities.
34. Satellite Telecommunications.
This industry comprises firms
‘‘primarily engaged in providing
telecommunications services to other
establishments in the
telecommunications and broadcasting
industries by forwarding and receiving
communications signals via a system of
satellites or reselling satellite
telecommunications.’’ Satellite
telecommunications service providers
include satellite and earth station
operators. The SBA small business size
standard for this industry classifies a
business with $38.5 million or less in
annual receipts as small. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that 275
firms in this industry operated for the
entire year. Of this number, 242 firms
had revenue of less than $25 million.
Additionally, based on Commission
data in the 2022 Universal Service
Monitoring Report, as of December 31,
2021, there were 65 providers that
reported they were engaged in the
provision of satellite
telecommunications services. Of these
providers, the Commission estimates
that approximately 42 providers have
1,500 or fewer employees.
Consequently, using the SBA’s small
business size standard, a little more
than half of these providers can be
considered small entities.
35. Wireless Broadband Internet
Access Service Providers (Wireless ISPs
or WISPs). Providers of wireless
broadband internet access service
include fixed and mobile wireless
providers. The Commission defines a
WISP as ‘‘[a] company that provides
end-users with wireless access to the
internet[.]’’ Wireless service that
terminates at an end user location or
mobile device and enables the end user
to receive information from and/or send
information to the internet at
information transfer rates exceeding 200
kilobits per second (kbps) in at least one
direction is classified as a broadband
connection under the Commission’s
rules. Neither the SBA nor the
Commission have developed a size
standard specifically applicable to
Wireless Broadband Internet Access
Service Providers. The closest
applicable industry with an SBA small
business size standard is Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite). The SBA size standard for this
industry classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
there were 2,893 firms in this industry
that operated for the entire year. Of that
number, 2,837 firms employed fewer
than 250 employees.
36. Additionally, according to
Commission data on internet access
services as of June 30, 2019, nationwide
there were approximately 1,237 fixed
wireless and 70 mobile wireless
providers of connections over 200 kbps
in at least one direction. The
Commission does not collect data on the
number of employees for providers of
these services, therefore, at this time we
are not able to estimate the number of
providers that would qualify as small
under the SBA’s small business size
standard. However, based on data in the
Commission’s 2022 Communications
Marketplace Report on the small
number of large mobile wireless
nationwide and regional facilities-based
providers, the dozens of small regional
facilities-based providers and the
number of wireless mobile virtual
network providers in general, as well as
on terrestrial fixed wireless broadband
providers in general, we believe that the
majority of wireless internet access
service providers can be considered
small entities.
37. Local Resellers. Neither the
Commission nor the SBA have
developed a small business size
standard specifically for Local Resellers.
Telecommunications Resellers is the
closest industry with a SBA small
business size standard. The
Telecommunications Resellers industry
comprises establishments engaged in
purchasing access and network capacity
from owners and operators of
telecommunications networks and
reselling wired and wireless
telecommunications services (except
satellite) to businesses and households.
Establishments in this industry resell
telecommunications; they do not
operate transmission facilities and
infrastructure. Mobile virtual network
operators (MVNOs) are included in this
industry. The SBA small business size
standard for Telecommunications
Resellers classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
1,386 firms in this industry provided
resale services for the entire year. Of
that number, 1,375 firms operated with
fewer than 250 employees.
Additionally, based on Commission
data in the 2022 Universal Service
Monitoring Report, as of December 31,
2021, there were 207 providers that
reported they were engaged in the
provision of local resale services. Of
these providers, the Commission
estimates that 202 providers have 1,500
or fewer employees. Consequently,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30309
using the SBA’s small business size
standard, most of these providers can be
considered small entities.
38. Toll Resellers. Neither the
Commission nor the SBA have
developed a small business size
standard specifically for Toll Resellers.
Telecommunications Resellers is the
closest industry with a SBA small
business size standard. The
Telecommunications Resellers industry
comprises establishments engaged in
purchasing access and network capacity
from owners and operators of
telecommunications networks and
reselling wired and wireless
telecommunications services (except
satellite) to businesses and households.
Establishments in this industry resell
telecommunications; they do not
operate transmission facilities and
infrastructure. Mobile virtual network
operators (MVNOs) are included in this
industry. The SBA small business size
standard for Telecommunications
Resellers classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
1,386 firms in this industry provided
resale services for the entire year. Of
that number, 1,375 firms operated with
fewer than 250 employees.
Additionally, based on Commission
data in the 2022 Universal Service
Monitoring Report, as of December 31,
2021, there were 457 providers that
reported they were engaged in the
provision of toll services. Of these
providers, the Commission estimates
that 438 providers have 1,500 or fewer
employees. Consequently, using the
SBA’s small business size standard,
most of these providers can be
considered small entities.
39. All Other Telecommunications.
This industry is comprised of
establishments primarily engaged in
providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as
satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation.
This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in
providing satellite terminal stations and
associated facilities connected with one
or more terrestrial systems and capable
of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from,
satellite systems. Providers of internet
services (e.g., dial-up ISPs) or Voice
over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services,
via client-supplied telecommunications
connections are also included in this
industry. The SBA small business size
standard for this industry classifies
firms with annual receipts of $35
million or less as small. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there
were 1,079 firms in this industry that
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
30310
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
operated for the entire year. Of those
firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than
$25 million. Based on this data, the
Commission estimates that the majority
of ‘‘All Other Telecommunications’’
firms can be considered small.
40. Automobile Manufacturing. This
U.S. industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in (1) manufacturing
complete automobiles (i.e., body and
chassis or unibody) or (2) manufacturing
automobile chassis only. The SBA small
business size standard for this industry
classifies firms having 1,500 employees
or less as small. 2017 U.S. Census
Bureau data indicate that 157 firms
operated in this industry for the entire
year. Of this number, 145 firms
employed fewer than 100 employees.
Therefore, the Commission estimates
that the majority of manufacturers in
this industry are small entities.
D. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
41. The FNPRM seeks comment on
the ways that connected car services are
used and steps the Commission can take
to help protect survivors of domestic
violence from misuse of these services.
The Commission states that the FCC’s
rules implementing the SCA apply to
connected car services that involve a
‘‘shared mobile service contract’’ offered
by a ‘‘covered provider’’ as defined
under the rules and would require a
provider to respond to a valid request
for a line separation. The FNPRM seeks
comment on the extent to which the
FCC’s existing SCA rules do not fully
address concerns regarding the impact
of connected car services on domestic
violence survivors and whether changes
to these rules would enable the
Commission to better address these
concerns. Outside of the SCA, the
FNPRM seeks comment on other sources
of authority the Commission can use to
help address the misuse of connected
car services.
42. While the FNPRM does not
specifically propose new rules, the
Commission does discuss application of
the existing SCA rules in a new context
and to potentially additional entities.
The Commission seeks comment from
small and other entities on whether any
changes to the SCA rules are necessary.
If the Commission ultimately decides to
make any changes to the SCA rules in
the connected car context, this could
potentially result in additional costs,
new or modified recordkeeping,
reporting, or other compliance
requirements for small and other
providers. For example, the existing
SCA rules require covered providers,
within two business days of receiving a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
completed request from a survivor, to
(1) separate the line of the survivor, and
the line of any individual in the care of
the survivor, from a shared mobile
service contract, or (2) separate the line
of the abuser from a shared mobile
service contract. We seek comment on
the impact to compliance for small and
other entities as a result of rules
reflecting a broader application of the
SCA.
43. At present, the record does not
include a detailed cost/benefit analysis
that would allow us to quantify the
costs of compliance for small entities,
including whether it will be necessary
for small entities to hire professionals to
comply with any rules that may be
adopted. Small and other entities are
encouraged to quantify the costs and
benefits of any reporting, recordkeeping,
or compliance requirement that may be
established in this proceeding. The
Commission expects the comments it
receives on its proposals, and the
matters discussed in the FNPRM to
include information addressing costs,
benefits, and other matters of concern
for small entities, which should help the
Commission identify and better evaluate
compliance costs and relevant issues for
small entities before adopting final
rules.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives
Considered
44. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant, specifically
small business, 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 and reporting requirements
under the rules for such 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 such small entities.
45. The FNPRM considers alternative
approaches for addressing the misuse of
connected car services. It discusses
application of the existing SCA rules in
the connected car services context and
seeks comment on whether any changes
to the SCA rules are necessary to
address these services. To the extent
that connected car services are or could
be covered by the SCA, the FNPRM
seeks comment on how line separation
requirements would apply. The FNPRM
also asks whether there are operational
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
or technical issues that would affect
implementation, including for small
entity providers. The FNPRM also seeks
comment on an alternative, nonregulatory approach that would
minimize potential burden and provide
additional flexibility for connected car
providers, including any small entity
providers. The FNPRM seeks comment
on how the Commission can encourage
connected car service providers to
voluntarily take steps to prevent the
misuse of connected car services in
domestic violence situations. In
particular, the FNPRM seeks comment
on what steps providers of connected
car services could take to make it easier
for survivors to turn off remote location
tracking and other services that might
enable abusers to track, control, or
revictimize domestic violence survivors.
46. Additionally, to assist with the
Commission’s evaluation of the
economic impact on small entities that
may result from the actions and
alternatives that have been proposed in
this proceeding, the FNPRM seeks
alternative proposals and requests
information on the potential costs of
such alternatives. The Commission
expects to consider more fully the
economic impact on small entities
following its review of comments filed
in response to the FNPRM, including
costs and benefits information.
Alternative proposals and approaches
from commenters could help the
Commission further minimize the
economic impact on small entities. The
Commission’s evaluation of the
comments filed in this proceeding will
shape the final conclusions it reaches,
the final alternatives it considers, and
the actions it ultimately takes in this
proceeding to minimize any significant
economic impact that may occur on
small entities from the final rules that
are ultimately adopted.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
47. None.
V. Ordering Clauses
48. Accordingly, it is ordered,
pursuant to the authority contained in
sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 254, 345, and 403
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended; 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i),
154(j), 254, 345, and 403; section 5(b) of
the Safe Connections Act of 2022,
Public Law 117–223, 136 Stat 2280; and
section 904 of Division N, Title IX of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021,
Public Law 116–260, 134 Stat. 1182, as
amended by the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules
117–58, 135 Stat. 429; that this FNPRM
of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
49. It is further ordered that, pursuant
to applicable procedures set forth in
sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments on the FNPRM of Proposed
Rulemaking on or before 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register, and
reply comments on or before 60 days
after publication in the Federal
Register.
50. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Office of the Secretary
shall send a copy of this FNPRM of
Proposed Rulemaking, including the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Background
[FR Doc. 2024–08642 Filed 4–22–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2024–0022;
FXES11110900000–245–FF09E21000]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12-Month Finding for Lake
Sturgeon
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notification of petition finding.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list
the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens)
as an endangered or threatened species
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). After a
thorough review of the best available
scientific and commercial information,
we find that listing the lake sturgeon as
an endangered or threatened species is
not warranted at this time. However, we
ask the public to submit to us at any
time any new information relevant to
the status of the lake sturgeon or its
habitat.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
The finding in this document
was made April 23, 2024.
ADDRESSES: A detailed description of
the basis for this finding is available on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R3–ES–2024–0022. Supporting
information used to prepare this finding
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Apr 22, 2024
Jkt 262001
is available by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Please submit any new
information, materials, comments, or
questions concerning this finding to the
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Hosler, Regional Listing
Coordinator, Midwest Regional Office,
517–351–6326, barbara_hosler@fws.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we are required to
make a finding on whether or not a
petitioned action is warranted within 12
months after receiving any petition that
we have determined contains
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted
(‘‘12-month finding’’). We must make a
finding that the petitioned action is: (1)
Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3)
warranted, but precluded by other
listing activity. We must publish a
notification of the 12-month finding in
the Federal Register.
Summary of Information Pertaining to
the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and the implementing regulations at
part 424 of title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424)
set forth procedures for adding species
to, removing species from, or
reclassifying species on the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants (Lists). The Act defines
‘‘species’’ as including any subspecies
of fish or wildlife or plants, and any
distinct population segment of any
species of vertebrate fish or wildlife
which interbreeds when mature. The
Act defines ‘‘endangered species’’ as
any species that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)),
and ‘‘threatened species’’ as any species
that is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may
be determined to be an endangered
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30311
species or a threatened species because
of any of the following five factors:
(A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
These factors represent broad
categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an
effect on a species’ continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and
conditions, we look for those that may
have a negative effect on individuals of
the species, as well as other actions or
conditions that may ameliorate any
negative effects or may have positive
effects.
We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in
general to actions or conditions that are
known to or are reasonably likely to
negatively affect individuals of a
species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes
actions or conditions that have a direct
impact on individuals (direct impacts),
as well as those that affect individuals
through alteration of their habitat or
required resources (stressors). The term
‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either
together or separately—the source of the
action or condition or the action or
condition itself. However, the mere
identification of any threat(s) does not
necessarily mean that the species meets
the statutory definition of an
‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘threatened
species.’’ In determining whether a
species meets either definition, we must
evaluate all identified threats by
considering the expected response by
the species, and the effects of the
threats—in light of those actions and
conditions that will ameliorate the
threats—on an individual, population,
and species level. We evaluate each
threat and its expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative
effect of all of the threats on the species
as a whole. We also consider the
cumulative effect of the threats in light
of those actions and conditions that will
have positive effects on the species,
such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The
Secretary of the Interior determines
whether the species meets the Act’s
definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or
a ‘‘threatened species’’ only after
conducting this cumulative analysis and
describing the expected effect on the
species now and in the foreseeable
future.
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 23, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30303-30311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08642]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[WC Docket No. 22-238; FCC 24-38; FR ID 214900]
Supporting Survivors of Domestic and Sexual Violence
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(``Commission'') seeks comment on additional action it can take to help
survivors of domestic violence access safe and affordable connectivity,
particularly in the context of connected car services which may be used
to stalk, harass, and revictimize survivors of domestic violence.
DATES: Interested parties may file comments on or before May 23, 2024,
and reply comments on or before June 24, 2024. Written comments on the
Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection requirements
must be submitted by the public, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and other interested parties on or before June 24, 2024. Written
comments on the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in this
document must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as
responses to the IRFA and must be submitted by the public on or before
May 23, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No. 22-238,
by any of the following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the 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 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.
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 Filing, Public Notice, 35 FCC Rcd 2788 (2020), https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), please send an email to [email protected] or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
proceeding, contact Thomas Hastings, [email protected], of the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Competition & Infrastructure Policy
Division, (202) 418-1343. For additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information requirements contained in
this document, send an email to [email protected] or contact Cathy Williams
at (202) 418-2918.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), in WC Docket No. 22-238;
FCC 24-38, adopted April 3, 2024, and released on April 8, 2024. The
full text of the document is available for download at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-38A1.pdf.
Regulatory Flexibility Act: The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980,
as amended (RFA), requires that an agency prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for notice-and-comment rulemakings, unless the
agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a
[[Page 30304]]
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.'' Accordingly, the Commission has prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning the possible impact
of the rule and policy changes contained in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. Written public comments are requested on the IRFA. Comments
must be by the deadlines for comments on this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking indicated in the DATES section of this document and must
have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to
the IRFA and must be filed in WC Docket No. 22-238.
Paperwork Reduction Act: This document contains proposed modified
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. If
the Commission adopts any new or revised information collection
requirements, the Commission will publish a notice in the Federal
Register inviting the general public and the Office of Management and
Budget to comment on the information collection requirements. In
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks
specific comment on how it might further reduce the information
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
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
presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other filings in the
proceeding, then 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 47 CFR 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
47 CFR 1.49(f), or for which the Commission has made available a method
of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto,
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available
for that proceeding and must be filed in their native format (e.g.,
.doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding
should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act: The Providing
Accountability Through Transparency Act, Public Law 118-9, requires
each agency, in providing notice of a rulemaking, to post online a
brief plain-language summary of the proposed rule. The required summary
of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is available at https://www.fcc.gov/proposed-rulemakings.
Synopsis
I. Introduction
1. In this FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on additional action
we can take to help survivors of domestic violence access safe and
affordable connectivity, particularly in the context of connected car
services. Modern vehicles are frequently equipped with a suite of
connectivity tools and features, such as hands-free communication,
real-time location, and other connectivity services. While these
services provide benefits to drivers and passengers when used as
intended, news reports suggest that these services have also been used
to stalk, harass, and revictimize survivors of domestic violence.
2. We seek comment on solutions to help ensure that domestic
violence survivors need not choose between access to personal
transportation or exposing themselves to threatening, stalking, or
other harmful behavior by those who can access the car's data and
connectivity. We seek comment on the types, as well as the frequency of
use, of connected car services in the marketplace today. In addition,
we ask whether changes to the Commission's rules implementing the Safe
Connections Act (SCA) are needed to address the impact of connected car
services on domestic violence survivors. Safe Connections Act of 2022,
Public Law 117-223, 116 Stat. 2280 (Safe Connections Act or SCA). In
November 2023, the Commission adopted a Report and Order implementing
the Safe Connections Act. Supporting Survivors of Domestic and Sexual
Violence et al., WC Docket No. 22-238, Report and Order, FCC 23-96
(Nov. 16, 2023) (SCA Report and Order). We also ask more broadly what
steps connected car service providers can proactively take to protect
survivors from being stalked, harassed, intimidated, or otherwise
revictimized through the misuse of connected car services.
II. Background
3. Domestic violence and abusive relationships are a significant
safety and public health issue that result in individual harm and
societal costs that extend beyond the survivor. Domestic violence
affects more than 12 million people every year, and an average of 24
people per minute are subject to physical violence or stalking by an
intimate partner. Almost half of all women and men in the United States
have experienced psychological aggression by an intimate partner in
their lifetime (48.4% and 48.8%, respectively). The effects of domestic
violence disproportionately impact women. In addition, domestic
violence disproportionately impacts people of color, LGBTQ+
individuals, and other individuals who identify with historically
marginalized demographics. Estimates of economic costs due to domestic
violence are vast and encompass disruptions to education and work,
among other aspects.
4. Safe Connections Act. In recognition of the harmful and lasting
impact that domestic violence and related crimes have on survivors,
Congress passed the SCA in November of 2022. In particular, Congress
recognized the reality that survivors seeking to escape their abusers
are often tethered to their abusers by technology--such as shared
mobile service--and that these lingering connections present unique
challenges for survivors seeking to maintain essential connectivity
while distancing themselves from their abusers. In the SCA, Congress
found that ``perpetrators of violence and abuse . . . increasingly use
technological and communications tools to exercise control over,
monitor, and abuse their victims,'' and that ``[c]ommunications law can
play a public interest role in the promotion of
[[Page 30305]]
safety, life, and property'' with respect to these types of violence
and abuse. The SCA further found that ``[s]afeguards within
communications services can serve a role in preventing abuse and
narrowing the digital divide experienced by survivors of abuse.''
Congress, through the SCA, sought to ensure that survivors can separate
from abusers without losing independent access to their mobile service
plans. To further that objective, Congress directed the Commission to
adopt rules to implement the protections established in the SCA for
survivors of domestic violence.
5. SCA Report and Order. In November 2023, the Commission adopted
the SCA Report and Order implementing the Commission's obligations
under the SCA to help survivors of domestic violence and related crimes
to separate service lines from accounts shared with their abusers,
protect the privacy of calls made by survivors to domestic-violence
hotlines, and support survivors suffering from financial hardship. The
Commission defined key terms in the SCA, such as what constitutes a
``covered provider'' subject to the Commission's new rules. As noted in
the SCA Report and Order, multi-line shared mobile service contracts
present challenges for survivors of domestic violence who seek to
maintain essential connectivity while also distancing themselves from
their abuser, because the abuser may be an account holder and thus able
to monitor the survivor's calls, text messages, and device location. In
adopting rules implementing the SCA, the Commission recognized that it
can be difficult for the survivor to separate their mobile service line
from their abuser when the plan is shared with and controlled by the
abuser.
6. Concerns of Misuse of Connected Car Applications by Abusers.
Connected cars bring a myriad of benefits that can improve conditions
for drivers, pedestrians, and motorists in general. These benefits
include helping to locate a vehicle in a parking lot and connecting
promptly with first responders in an emergency without a phone. These
features typically require the car to have wireless connectivity and to
create and share location data. However, when these data and
connectivity are in the wrong hands, they may be used to harm a
survivor in--or attempting to leave--an abusive relationship. Indeed,
recent reports suggest that connected cars can be ``weaponized''
against survivors, especially when survivors co-own or share a car with
an abuser. For instance, connected cars co-owned or leased by both the
abuser and survivor may allow the abuser to track the survivor using
the car's location-based services. One news report suggests that
survivors may have only limited ability to remove an abuser from their
vehicle's data services and that connected car manufacturers may
hesitate to act or abstain from acting altogether when the abuser has
an ownership interest in the connected car with the survivor.
7. FCC Letters and Responses. In response to this public policy
concern and Congress' directive in the SCA, in January 2024, Chairwoman
Rosenworcel sent a series of letters to wireless service providers and
to auto manufacturers to seek information and ask for their help in
protecting domestic violence survivors. The letters to the wireless
providers asked about existing connected car services, treatment of
geolocation data from these services, current compliance with the SCA,
and whether (and if so, how) the companies provide connected car
services to consumers who are not subscribers to the company's wireless
services. The letters to the auto manufacturers asked the companies for
details about the connected car services they offer, any existing plans
to support survivors' efforts to disconnect from abusers, and how the
manufacturers handle consumers' geolocation data.
8. In their responses, as discussed further below, the wireless
service providers noted their shared concerns about safeguarding
survivors of domestic violence and affirmed that they are taking steps
to implement the SCA. The auto manufacturers provided an overview of
the functions and privacy features of their connected car services.
III. Discussion
9. We seek comment generally on the ways that connected car
services are used and steps the Commission can take to help protect
survivors of domestic violence from misuse of such services. First,
based on the responses to the information requests sent by the
Chairwoman, we describe and seek comment on our understanding of
wireless service providers' and auto manufacturers' connected car
service offerings. We also seek additional information on any other
connected car services that are available. Next, we seek comment on
whether changes to the Commission's rules implementing the SCA are
necessary to address the impact of connected car services on domestic
violence survivors. Finally, we seek comment on other actions we can
take to help protect survivors using connected car services. In that
regard, we seek comment on other potential sources of authority for
Commission action and on how to encourage connected car service
providers to take proactive steps to protect survivors against misuse
of these services.
10. The Connected Car Services Available Today. The responses to
Chairwoman Rosenworcel's information requests show that wireless
service providers and auto manufacturers currently provide a range of
connected car services in the marketplace. We seek additional
information about how these services are offered to consumers.
11. One method for offering connected car services is through a
wireless service provider. The wireless service providers' responses to
the Chairwoman's information requests suggest that their offerings
generally consist either of (1) services offered directly to consumers
or (2) wholesale connectivity services offered to auto manufacturers or
to the manufacturer's contracted third-party telematics service
provider. For services offered directly to consumers, wireless service
providers may enter into an agreement with a subscriber to add a line
with an associated phone number to their wireless service contract for
the connected car service. Subscribers typically access these services
using an app and, in some cases, a separate device that plugs into
their vehicle's control panel. The direct-to-subscriber services offer
a range of features such as roadside assistance, navigation, and
notification of required vehicle maintenance. Wireless service provider
responses to the information requests suggest that some of these
services also include the ability to track the vehicle's location
remotely. Some wireless service providers also offer in-vehicle Wi-Fi
services to consumers. When wireless service providers offer wholesale
connectivity services, the providers may not have a direct contractual
relationship with individual vehicle owners or lessees. Rather, they
may contract directly with auto manufacturers via wholesale agreements
or with other third parties to provide connectivity for a fleet of
vehicles. We seek comment on our understanding of the connected car
services offered by wireless service providers, and we seek additional
information on any other features and capabilities not covered in this
paragraph.
12. With respect to auto manufacturers' connected car services, the
responses suggest that, when purchasing service from an auto
manufacturer, the owner or lessee of a car typically enters into a
service agreement with the auto manufacturer
[[Page 30306]]
for connected car services. A car owner typically accesses connected
services on their mobile device through a manufacturer-provided app.
Many auto manufacturers obtain the network connectivity to power these
services by entering into contracts to access the wireless networks of
wireless service providers or other third parties. The connected car
services provided by auto manufacturers include a range of features
such as the ability to start the vehicle or control the vehicle's
climate control system remotely. Some services also include the ability
to track the vehicle's location remotely. We seek comment on our
understanding of the connected car services offered by auto
manufacturers, and we seek additional information on any other features
and capabilities not covered in this paragraph.
13. It appears that consumers--including domestic violence
survivors--have varying levels of control of the data that connected
car services generate, including remote vehicle location data.
Responses to the information requests suggest that while some of the
wireless service providers and auto manufacturers enable a survivor to
turn off remote location tracking if the survivor becomes aware of
being tracked by an abuser, not all companies currently provide that
ability. For some connected car services, it appears that only a
vehicle owner or lessee may disable tracking features on the connected
car app absent a court order or other legal process. Some of the
responses to the information requests indicate that the provider's
connected car service gives notice to a driver that the car's location
is being tracked. Other responses do not indicate whether the service
offers this function. The responses to the information requests further
indicate that information collected through connected car services may
be shared with third parties in accordance with connected car service
agreements. We seek further information on whether and how users,
including both owners or lessees and nonowners or lessees, control
access to their data for connected car services that are available
today and on what information users receive about the tracking features
of these services. To what extent do auto manufacturers and wireless
service providers enable--or plan to enable--access controls for data
associated with connected car services for owners and lessees and other
vehicle users?
14. Application of the SCA and the FCC's Implementing Rules to
Connected Car Services. We seek comment on what, if any, changes to our
rules implementing the SCA could help to address the impact of
connected car services on domestic violence survivors. A ``shared
mobile service contract'' is defined under the SCA rules to mean ``a
mobile service contract for an account that includes not less than two
lines of service and does not include enterprise services offered by a
covered provider. ``Lines of service,'' under the SCA rules, are those
``associated with a telephone number'' and include ``all of the mobile
services associated with that line under the shared mobile service
contract, regardless of classification, including voice, text, and data
services.'' The SCA Report and Order makes clear that a ``line'' can
apply to devices, ``such as tablets with no mobile capability, which
only nominally have a line associated with a customer account,''
noting, for example, that ``a survivor may want to separate a line for
a device in order to protect his or her location information from an
abuser with access to the shared mobile account information.''
15. Line separation requirements apply, under the SCA rules, to
``covered providers.'' ``Covered providers'' are defined as providers
of ``a private mobile service or commercial mobile service, as those
terms are defined in 47 U.S.C. 332(d).'' ``Covered provider'' includes
providers of mobile broadband-only or mobile text service that do not
also offer mobile voice service, if such provider assigns a telephone
number to a device. ``Covered provider'' also includes facilities-based
mobile network operators and resellers/mobile virtual network operators
(MVNOs).
16. Where the defined elements in the Commission's SCA rules are
present, the obligations associated with line separations apply. The
FCC's rules implementing the SCA thus could apply to connected car
services that involve a ``shared mobile service contract'' offered by a
``covered provider'' as defined under the rules and would require a
provider to respond to a valid request for a line separation. We seek
comment on this position and the extent to which the FCC's existing SCA
rules do not fully address concerns regarding the impact of connected
car services on domestic violence survivors and whether changes to
these rules would enable the Commission to better address these
concerns.
17. As stated above, the definition of ``covered provider'' under
the SCA rules includes providers both of commercial mobile service and
private mobile service and also includes facilities-based mobile
network operators and resellers/MVNOs. In the context of connected
cars, wireless providers offer services directly to consumers and may
enter into an agreement with a subscriber to add a line to their mobile
service contract for the connected car service. Wireless providers also
provide wholesale service to auto manufacturers, which in turn provide
connectivity for consumers as a value-added service. Auto manufacturers
enter into service agreements with owners and lessees of vehicles to
provide them connected car services using, in many cases, the
connectivity from the networks of wireless service providers. We view
the broad scope of the ``covered provider'' definition as potentially
including the connected car services that wireless service providers
offer directly to consumers, and we highlight this view to assist
efforts to implement the Commission's recently adopted rules under the
SCA. Does the definition also include the service that auto
manufacturers purchase wholesale and in turn offer to consumers? Does
the definition of ``covered provider'' in the SCA rules need to be
modified to account for additional use cases in order to better protect
survivors, and if so, what revisions do commenters recommend? Would
doing so be consistent with the policy objectives and authority of the
SCA?
18. To what extent are auto manufacturers reselling mobile
connectivity when providing connected car services? In clarifying that
the SCA rules extend to MVNOs, the Commission noted in the SCA Report
and Order that, for some MVNOs, ``the underlying facilities-based
provider may have control over some parts of, or all of, the systems
and infrastructure necessary to effectuate line separations.'' The
Commission clarified that, in those cases, ``the MVNO should fulfill
its obligations under the SCA and our rules through its contractual
relationship with the underlying facilities-based provider, and may
satisfy its obligations by utilizing the same procedures and processes
the facilities-based provider makes available to its own customers.''
To the extent an MVNO controls any facilities or systems, such as
customer care or billing, the Commission found that ``the obligations
imposed by the SCA fall entirely upon the MVNO and not the underlying
facilities-based provider.'' We seek comment on how these findings may
apply in the context of connected car services offered by auto
manufacturers. Do auto manufacturers have control over any systems or
infrastructure necessary to effectuate a line separation under the SCA
rules? Are these systems entirely controlled by the wireless service
providers who
[[Page 30307]]
provide the connectivity for the services? Are they controlled or
operated jointly?
19. Under the SCA, ``shared mobile service contract'' is defined to
mean ``a mobile service contract for an account that includes not less
than 2 consumers.'' The rules implementing the SCA provide that a
``shared mobile service contract'' means ``a mobile service contract
for an account that includes not less than two lines of service'' and
define ``lines of service'' to mean those lines associated with a
telephone number. Connected car services generally involve a ``shared
mobile service contract'' when the service is offered by a wireless
service provider as an add-on to an existing wireless service
agreement. Do connected car services offered by auto manufacturers also
involve multiple lines of service? For example, if someone owns
multiple cars from the same manufacturer and each of those cars has
connected car service, would there be a ``shared mobile service
contract'' for those services? Do connected car services use ``lines of
service'' as contemplated under the SCA framework? The responses to the
information requests suggest that some connected car services associate
phone numbers with specific vehicles. Is that association typical for
the majority of connected car services? If there are some connected car
services that do not involve ``shared mobile service contracts'' and
``lines of service'' as currently defined by the Commission, are there
ways that the Commission can revise these definitions, consistent with
our authority under the SCA, to expand their scope and apply to
connected car services? Would doing so be consistent with the policy
objectives of and authority granted by the SCA? For example, to the
extent connected car services are not currently encompassed in the
Commission's definition of ``shared mobile service contract'' under our
rules, does the language in the SCA definition that refers to ``an
account that includes not less than 2 consumers'' suggest that we could
extend the definition to a shared account (e.g., co-owners or co-
lessees of a vehicle) for connected car services?
20. To the extent that connected car services are--or could be--
covered by the SCA, how would line separation requirements apply? Are
there operational or technical issues that would affect implementation,
including any unique challenges for small entities? For example, how
would vehicle ownership affect implementation? Are vehicles typically
owned on a shared basis by both members of a couple? We expect that, if
a vehicle is under the sole ownership of an abuser, but is used by a
survivor, the SCA rules would require separation of the connected car
service line that is associated with that vehicle through the abuser's
account. In these cases, what evidence and standards of proof would be
needed from a survivor to separate the connected car service line?
Currently, under the Commission's SCA rules, survivors seeking a line
separation are required to submit documentation that verifies that an
individual who uses a line under the shared mobile service contract has
committed or allegedly committed a covered act against the survivor or
an individual in the survivor's care. Would there be any reason to
modify these evidentiary requirements for connected car services?
21. Other Actions to Protect Survivors Using Connected Car
Services. Outside of the SCA, we seek comment on other authority the
Commission could use and other steps the Commission could take to help
prevent the misuse of connected car services. To the extent that
connected car services are not covered by the SCA and Commission rules,
are there other sources of authority the Commission could use to help
address the misuse of these services? For example, could the Commission
use its authority under other Title III provisions to adopt
requirements that apply to the connected car services offered by
wireless service providers and/or auto manufacturers?
22. Outside of formal Commission action, what steps can providers
of connected car services take to prevent the misuse of connected car
services in domestic violence situations? How can the Commission
encourage providers to take such steps? What changes to the design and
functionality of these services are needed to help protect survivors of
domestic violence? In particular, we seek comment on what steps
providers of connected car services could take to make it easier for
survivors to turn off remote location tracking and other services that
might enable abusers to track, control, or revictimize survivors. For
example, for some connected car services it appears that only a vehicle
owner or lessee may disable tracking features on the connected car app
absent a court order. Should manufacturers permit their apps to allow
multiple account holders so that survivors using a co-owned vehicle may
access the app to turn off tracking features? How could companies
change their policies to better respond to domestic violence
situations? What other users or sets of users should be permitted to
disable such features? Are there any risks that would arise if
companies were to allow users other than the owner or lessee to disable
any connected car services?
23. What are companies' policies, and how can they best ensure that
survivors are protected in instances when survivors request, and
companies make, changes to location tracking or other connected
services? Where companies do permit survivors who are not the primary
account holder to request changes (such as turning off location data
for a connected car service), do companies automatically send notices
to primary account holders? If so, do companies need to notify a
primary account holder (who may be an abuser) about such changes?
Should companies set a uniform waiting period between when the company
receives a request from a survivor and when the company notifies a
primary account holder? Could companies delay notice to primary account
holders until the company has approved and processed such requests, or
do the companies need to communicate with primary account holders prior
to making changes?
24. Are there other ways to allow vehicle tracking for legitimate
safety reasons (e.g., driver safety or vehicle theft recovery) without
making the tracking features accessible by abusers? Are there changes
that automakers could make to alert unsuspecting survivors about
tracking services that may be active in their vehicles? What other
steps should auto manufacturers and wireless service providers consider
to prevent the misuse of connected car services? Should they provide
consumers with more information about the connectivity features,
privacy controls, and other settings available in connected car
services and apps? Should they develop more specific policies to
address the misuse of connected car services in domestic violence
situations? How can the Commission encourage auto manufacturers and
wireless service providers to collaborate proactively with stakeholders
to protect against misuse of connected car services?
25. Promoting Digital Equity and Inclusion. As noted earlier, the
effects of domestic violence disproportionately impact women as well as
people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other individuals who identify
with historically marginalized demographics. The Commission, as part of
its continuing effort to advance digital equity for all, including
people of color, persons with disabilities, persons who live in rural
or Tribal areas, women, LGBTQ+ persons, and others who are or
[[Page 30308]]
have been historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected
by persistent poverty or inequality, invites comment on any equity-
related considerations and benefits (if any) that may be associated
with the proposals and issues discussed herein. Specifically, we seek
comment on how our proposals may promote or inhibit advances in
diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as well the scope of
the Commission's relevant legal authority.
IV. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
26. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended, (RFA), the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) has
prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the
possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities by the policies and rules proposed in the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM). The Commission requests written public
comments on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the
IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the
first page of the FNPRM. The Commission will send a copy of the Notice,
including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or
summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
27. Connectivity services in modern vehicles such as hands-free
communication or find-your-car are intended to function as convenient
tools for passengers and drivers. However, in the hands of an abuser,
those same services can be used to stalk, harass, and intimidate
survivors of domestic violence. In the FNPRM, the Commission seeks
comment generally from small and other entities on the ways that
connected car services are used and what further action the Commission
can take to help protect domestic violence survivors from misuse of
these services. First, based on the responses the Commission received
to the information requests sent by the Chairwoman, the FNPRM describes
and seeks comment on the Commission's understanding of wireless-service
providers' and auto manufacturers' connected car service offerings. The
FNPRM also seeks additional information on any other connected car
services that are available in today's marketplace. Next, the FNPRM
seeks comment on whether changes to the Commission's rules implementing
the Safe Connections Act (SCA) are necessary to address the impact of
connected car services on domestic violence survivors. Finally, the
FNPRM seeks comment on other actions the Commission can take to help
protect survivors using connected car services, other potential sources
of authority for Commission action, and how best to encourage connected
car service providers to take proactive steps to protect survivors
against abuse of these services.
B. Legal Basis
28. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 4(i),
4(j), 254, 345, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
47 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 254, 345, and 403; section
5(b) of the Safe Connections Act of 2022, Public Law 117-223, 136 Stat
2280; and section 904 of Division N, Title IX of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182, as
amended by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-
58, 135 Stat. 429.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Would Apply
29. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) is independently
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
30. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory
flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small business
is an independent business having fewer than 500 employees. These types
of small businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United
States, which translates to 33.2 million businesses.
31. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2020, there were
approximately 447,689 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
32. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments indicate there were
90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general purpose
governments and special purpose governments in the United States. Of
this number, there were 36,931 general purpose governments (county,
municipal, and town or township) with populations of less than 50,000
and 12,040 special purpose governments--independent school districts
with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on
the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least
48,971 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental
jurisdictions.''
33. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 594
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of wireless
services. Of these providers, the
[[Page 30309]]
Commission estimates that 511 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees.
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of
these providers can be considered small entities.
34. Satellite Telecommunications. This industry comprises firms
``primarily engaged in providing telecommunications services to other
establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by
forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of
satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.'' Satellite
telecommunications service providers include satellite and earth
station operators. The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies a business with $38.5 million or less in annual
receipts as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 275 firms
in this industry operated for the entire year. Of this number, 242
firms had revenue of less than $25 million. Additionally, based on
Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of
December 31, 2021, there were 65 providers that reported they were
engaged in the provision of satellite telecommunications services. Of
these providers, the Commission estimates that approximately 42
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's
small business size standard, a little more than half of these
providers can be considered small entities.
35. Wireless Broadband Internet Access Service Providers (Wireless
ISPs or WISPs). Providers of wireless broadband internet access service
include fixed and mobile wireless providers. The Commission defines a
WISP as ``[a] company that provides end-users with wireless access to
the internet[.]'' Wireless service that terminates at an end user
location or mobile device and enables the end user to receive
information from and/or send information to the internet at information
transfer rates exceeding 200 kilobits per second (kbps) in at least one
direction is classified as a broadband connection under the
Commission's rules. Neither the SBA nor the Commission have developed a
size standard specifically applicable to Wireless Broadband Internet
Access Service Providers. The closest applicable industry with an SBA
small business size standard is Wireless Telecommunications Carriers
(except Satellite). The SBA size standard for this industry classifies
a business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms in this industry
that operated for the entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed
fewer than 250 employees.
36. Additionally, according to Commission data on internet access
services as of June 30, 2019, nationwide there were approximately 1,237
fixed wireless and 70 mobile wireless providers of connections over 200
kbps in at least one direction. The Commission does not collect data on
the number of employees for providers of these services, therefore, at
this time we are not able to estimate the number of providers that
would qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
However, based on data in the Commission's 2022 Communications
Marketplace Report on the small number of large mobile wireless
nationwide and regional facilities-based providers, the dozens of small
regional facilities-based providers and the number of wireless mobile
virtual network providers in general, as well as on terrestrial fixed
wireless broadband providers in general, we believe that the majority
of wireless internet access service providers can be considered small
entities.
37. Local Resellers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA have
developed a small business size standard specifically for Local
Resellers. Telecommunications Resellers is the closest industry with a
SBA small business size standard. The Telecommunications Resellers
industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and
network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications
networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services
(except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this
industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs)
are included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard for
Telecommunications Resellers classifies a business as small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
1,386 firms in this industry provided resale services for the entire
year. Of that number, 1,375 firms operated with fewer than 250
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 207
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of local
resale services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 202
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered
small entities.
38. Toll Resellers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA have
developed a small business size standard specifically for Toll
Resellers. Telecommunications Resellers is the closest industry with a
SBA small business size standard. The Telecommunications Resellers
industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and
network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications
networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services
(except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this
industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs)
are included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard for
Telecommunications Resellers classifies a business as small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
1,386 firms in this industry provided resale services for the entire
year. Of that number, 1,375 firms operated with fewer than 250
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 457
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of toll
services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 438
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered
small entities.
39. All Other Telecommunications. This industry is comprised of
establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Providers of
internet services (e.g., dial-up ISPs) or Voice over Internet Protocol
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $35 million
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were
1,079 firms in this industry that
[[Page 30310]]
operated for the entire year. Of those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less
than $25 million. Based on this data, the Commission estimates that the
majority of ``All Other Telecommunications'' firms can be considered
small.
40. Automobile Manufacturing. This U.S. industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in (1) manufacturing complete
automobiles (i.e., body and chassis or unibody) or (2) manufacturing
automobile chassis only. The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies firms having 1,500 employees or less as small. 2017
U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that 157 firms operated in this
industry for the entire year. Of this number, 145 firms employed fewer
than 100 employees. Therefore, the Commission estimates that the
majority of manufacturers in this industry are small entities.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
41. The FNPRM seeks comment on the ways that connected car services
are used and steps the Commission can take to help protect survivors of
domestic violence from misuse of these services. The Commission states
that the FCC's rules implementing the SCA apply to connected car
services that involve a ``shared mobile service contract'' offered by a
``covered provider'' as defined under the rules and would require a
provider to respond to a valid request for a line separation. The FNPRM
seeks comment on the extent to which the FCC's existing SCA rules do
not fully address concerns regarding the impact of connected car
services on domestic violence survivors and whether changes to these
rules would enable the Commission to better address these concerns.
Outside of the SCA, the FNPRM seeks comment on other sources of
authority the Commission can use to help address the misuse of
connected car services.
42. While the FNPRM does not specifically propose new rules, the
Commission does discuss application of the existing SCA rules in a new
context and to potentially additional entities. The Commission seeks
comment from small and other entities on whether any changes to the SCA
rules are necessary. If the Commission ultimately decides to make any
changes to the SCA rules in the connected car context, this could
potentially result in additional costs, new or modified recordkeeping,
reporting, or other compliance requirements for small and other
providers. For example, the existing SCA rules require covered
providers, within two business days of receiving a completed request
from a survivor, to (1) separate the line of the survivor, and the line
of any individual in the care of the survivor, from a shared mobile
service contract, or (2) separate the line of the abuser from a shared
mobile service contract. We seek comment on the impact to compliance
for small and other entities as a result of rules reflecting a broader
application of the SCA.
43. At present, the record does not include a detailed cost/benefit
analysis that would allow us to quantify the costs of compliance for
small entities, including whether it will be necessary for small
entities to hire professionals to comply with any rules that may be
adopted. Small and other entities are encouraged to quantify the costs
and benefits of any reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance requirement
that may be established in this proceeding. The Commission expects the
comments it receives on its proposals, and the matters discussed in the
FNPRM to include information addressing costs, benefits, and other
matters of concern for small entities, which should help the Commission
identify and better evaluate compliance costs and relevant issues for
small entities before adopting final rules.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
44. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business, 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 and
reporting requirements under the rules for such 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 such small
entities.
45. The FNPRM considers alternative approaches for addressing the
misuse of connected car services. It discusses application of the
existing SCA rules in the connected car services context and seeks
comment on whether any changes to the SCA rules are necessary to
address these services. To the extent that connected car services are
or could be covered by the SCA, the FNPRM seeks comment on how line
separation requirements would apply. The FNPRM also asks whether there
are operational or technical issues that would affect implementation,
including for small entity providers. The FNPRM also seeks comment on
an alternative, non-regulatory approach that would minimize potential
burden and provide additional flexibility for connected car providers,
including any small entity providers. The FNPRM seeks comment on how
the Commission can encourage connected car service providers to
voluntarily take steps to prevent the misuse of connected car services
in domestic violence situations. In particular, the FNPRM seeks comment
on what steps providers of connected car services could take to make it
easier for survivors to turn off remote location tracking and other
services that might enable abusers to track, control, or revictimize
domestic violence survivors.
46. Additionally, to assist with the Commission's evaluation of the
economic impact on small entities that may result from the actions and
alternatives that have been proposed in this proceeding, the FNPRM
seeks alternative proposals and requests information on the potential
costs of such alternatives. The Commission expects to consider more
fully the economic impact on small entities following its review of
comments filed in response to the FNPRM, including costs and benefits
information. Alternative proposals and approaches from commenters could
help the Commission further minimize the economic impact on small
entities. The Commission's evaluation of the comments filed in this
proceeding will shape the final conclusions it reaches, the final
alternatives it considers, and the actions it ultimately takes in this
proceeding to minimize any significant economic impact that may occur
on small entities from the final rules that are ultimately adopted.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
47. None.
V. Ordering Clauses
48. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained
in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 254, 345, and 403 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended; 47 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 254,
345, and 403; section 5(b) of the Safe Connections Act of 2022, Public
Law 117-223, 136 Stat 2280; and section 904 of Division N, Title IX of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, 134
Stat. 1182, as amended by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
Public Law
[[Page 30311]]
117-58, 135 Stat. 429; that this FNPRM of Proposed Rulemaking is
adopted.
49. It is further ordered that, pursuant to applicable procedures
set forth in sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on the FNPRM of
Proposed Rulemaking on or before 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register, and reply comments on or before 60 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
50. It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the
Secretary shall send a copy of this FNPRM of Proposed Rulemaking,
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-08642 Filed 4-22-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P