Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through the Equipment Authorization Program and the Competitive Bidding Program

CourtFederal Communications Commission
Citation86 FR 46641
Record Number2021-16087
Publication Date19 Aug 2021
46641
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 2
[ET Docket No. 21–232, EA Docket No. 21–
233; FCC 21–73; FR ID 39556]
Protecting Against National Security
Threats to the Communications Supply
Chain Through the Equipment
Authorization Program and the
Competitive Bidding Program
AGENCY
: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION
: Request for comments.
SUMMARY
: The Commission seeks
comment on how to leverage its
equipment authorization program to
encourage manufacturers who are
building devices that will connect to
U.S. networks to consider cybersecurity
standards and guidelines.
DATES
: Comments are due on or before
September 20, 2021; reply comments are
due on or before October 18, 2021.
ADDRESSES
: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket No. 21–232, by
any of the following methods:
Federal Communications
Commission’s Website: http://
apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: 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.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Jamie Coleman Office of Engineering
and Technology, 202–418–2705,
Jamie.Coleman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Inquiry (NOI), that is part of ET Docket
No. 21–232, EA Docket No. 21–233, FCC
21–73, that was adopted and released
June 17, 2021. The full text of this
document is available by downloading
the text from the Commission’s website
at: https://www.fcc.gov/document/
equipment-authorization-and-
competitive-bidding-supply-chain-
nprm. When the FCC Headquarters
reopens to the public, the full text of
this document will also be available for
public inspection and copying during
regular business hours in the FCC
Reference Center, 45 L Street NE,
Washington, DC 20554. Alternative
formats are available for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), by
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice),
202–418–0432 (TTY).
Comment Filing Procedures
Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. Comments may
be filed using the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121 (1998).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/
ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing.
Filings can be sent by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD
20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 45 L Street NE,
Washington, DC 20554.
Effective March 19, 2020, and until
further notice, the Commission no
longer accepts any hand or messenger
delivered filings. This is a temporary
measure taken to help protect the health
and safety of individuals, and to
mitigate the transmission of COVID–19.
See FCC Announces Closure of FCC
Headquarters Open Window and
Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public
Notice, DA 20–304 (March 19, 2020).
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-
closes-headquarters-open-window-and-
changes-hand-delivery-policy.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 Analysis
This document does not contain
proposed information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. In addition, therefore, it does not
contain any proposed information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees,
pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Ex Parte Rules—Permit-But-Disclose
The proceeding this NOI initiates
shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-but-
disclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules,
47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. Persons making ex
parte presentations must file a copy of
any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral
presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different
deadline applicable to the Sunshine
period applies). Persons making oral ex
parte presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with rule
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
rule 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
Synopsis
The Commission adopted this Notice
of Inquiry (NOI) in conjunction with a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET
Docket No. 21–232, EA Docket No. 21–
233, FCC 21–73, in which it proposes
direct action to limit the presence of
untrusted equipment and services in
U.S. networks. The Commission
believes that ensuring continued U.S.
leadership requires that the Commission
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Aug 18, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
46642
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules
also explore opportunities to spur
trustworthy innovation for more secure
equipment. In this NOI, the Commission
seeks comment on how the Commission
can leverage its equipment
authorization program to encourage
manufacturers who are building devices
that will connect to U.S. networks to
consider cybersecurity standards and
guidelines.
The development and implementation
of effective cybersecurity practices
requires the continued cooperation and
participation of all stakeholders. In this
regard, the Commission observes that
both the public and private sectors have
come together to develop measures to
protect the integrity of communications
networks and guard against malicious or
foreign intrusions that can compromise
network services, steal proprietary
information, and harm consumers. In
particular, the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) has
worked with both industry and
government to produce multiple
cybersecurity frameworks and other
forms of guidance that help protect the
integrity of communications networks.
Pursuant to Executive Order No. 13636,
NIST began working with public and
private stakeholders to develop a
voluntary cybersecurity framework
designed to reduce risks to critical
infrastructure. Exec. Order No. 13636,
78 FR 11737 (Feb. 19, 2013; see Nat’l
Inst. of Standards & Tech., Cybersecurity
Framework: New to Framework (last
updated Sept. 23, 2020), https://
www.nist.gov/cyberframework/new-
framework. This framework consists of
‘‘voluntary guidance, based on existing
standards, guidelines, and practices for
organizations to better manage and
reduce cybersecurity risk.’’ See Nat’l
Inst. of Standards & Tech., Cybersecurity
Framework: New to Framework (last
updated Sept. 23, 2020), https://
www.nist.gov/cyberframework/new-
framework. Originally issued in 2013,
the NIST cybersecurity framework was
updated in 2018 to clarify and refine
certain aspects and better explain how
entities should use the framework to
improve their cybersecurity practices.
See Nat’l Inst. of Standards & Tech.,
Framework for Improving Critical
Infrastructure Cybersecurity: Version 1.1
(Apr. 16, 2018), https://
nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/CSWP/
NIST.CSWP.04162018.pdf. In addition,
among other organizations, the Federal
Trade Commission has been active in
cybersecurity matters for years, bringing
multiple enforcement actions against
firms for having poor cybersecurity
practices and offering cybersecurity
guidance for Internet of Things (IoT)
devices as early as 2015. Fed. Trade
Comm’n, Careful Connections: Building
Security in the Internet of Things (Jan.
2015), https://www.bulkorder.ftc.gov/
system/files/publications/pdf0199-
carefulconnections-buildingsecurity
internetofthings.pdf. Further, industry
trade groups, including CTIA–The
Wireless Association, GSMA, the ioXt
Alliance, and TIA have produced
cybersecurity guidance applicable to
various sectors of the communications
industry. Non-profit standards bodies
and think tanks have also produced
cybersecurity guidance that could be
useful to the communications industry.
See, e.g., internet Soc’y, Internet of
Things (IoT) Trust Framework v2.5 (May
22, 2019), https://
www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/
2018/iot-trust-framework-v2-5/.
More recently, NIST has developed a
Cybersecurity for IoT Program, which
specifically ‘‘supports the development
and application of standards,
guidelines, and related tools to improve
the cybersecurity of connected devices
and the environments in which they are
deployed.’’ Nat’l Inst. of Standards &
Tech., NIST Cybersecurity for IoT
Program (last updated Mar. 19, 2021),
https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/
nist-cybersecurity-iot-program. Devices
that operate as part of the IoT
specifically raise concerns about
security risks. For example, NTIA has
recognized that connected devices in
the IoT can extend the scope and scale
of automated, distributed attacks.
This Cybersecurity for IoT program
has produced multiple reports, but
perhaps most notable is Internal Report
8259, released in May 2020. Nat’l Inst.
of Standards & Tech., Foundational
Cybersecurity Activities for IoT Device
Manufacturers, Internal Report 8259
(May 2020) (NIST IoT Report), https://
nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2020/
NIST.IR.8259.pdf. This NIST IoT Report
details activities that ‘‘can help
manufacturers lessen the cybersecurity-
related efforts needed by customers,
which in turn can reduce the prevalence
and severity of IoT device compromises
and the attacks performed using
compromised devices.’’ Id. The NIST
IoT Report is voluntary guidance
intended to help promote the best
available practices for mitigating risks to
IoT security. The report describes six
recommended foundational
cybersecurity activities that
manufacturers should consider
performing to improve the securability
of the new IoT devices they make. They
include identifying expected customers
and users and defining expected use
cases; researching customer
cybersecurity needs and goals;
determining how to address customer
needs and goals; planning for adequate
support of customer needs and goals;
defining approaches for communicating
to customers; and deciding what to
communicate to customers and how to
communicate it. These activities are
intended to fit within a manufacturer’s
existing development process.
The Commission seeks comment on
how it can leverage its equipment
authorization program to help address
the particular security risks that are
associated with IoT devices. Should the
Commission encourage manufacturers
of IoT devices to follow the guidance in
the NIST IoT Report? If the Commission
were to utilize the equipment
authorization process to incentivize
better cybersecurity practices, either for
all devices or specifically for IoT
devices, what form should such
provisions take and how would such a
program be structured most effectively?
Should the FCC allow IoT
manufacturers to voluntarily certify
during the equipment authorization
process that they have performed or
plan to perform the activities described
in the guidance? Are there other
technologies or cybersecurity methods
that mitigate security risks (e.g., RF
fingerprinting or some other method)?
What, if anything, should the
Commission be doing to encourage
development and adoption of such
technologies or methods? Which
standards should be considered? Are
there other incentives or considerations
that could encourage manufacturers to
build security into their products?
Commenters should discuss the
potential costs and benefits associated
with their proposals or with the
potential approaches discussed herein.
Even with broad adoption of industry
best practices and standards, some
equipment sold in the United States
may lack appropriate security
protections. What is the role of retailers
in voluntarily limiting the sale of such
equipment? How can retailers educate
consumers about the importance of
security protections for their devices?
The Commission also seeks to
understand developments in
international standards-setting bodies.
What is the status of international
standards-setting that could be relevant
to supply chain security, and what can
the FCC do to encourage action by
international standards-setting bodies
and participation by American
companies in their efforts?
The Commission observes that the
Consumer Technology Association
(CTA) published a white paper offering
guidance for how government, industry,
and consumers can all work together to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Aug 18, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
46643
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules
promote better cybersecurity practices
going forward. Consumer Tech. Ass’n,
Smart Policy to Secure our Smart
Future: How to Promote a Secure
Internet of Things for Consumers (Mar.
2021) (CTA Cybersecurity White Paper),
https://www.cta.tech/Resources/
Newsroom/Media-Releases/2021/
March/IOT-Device-Security-White-
Paper-Release. In this white paper, CTA
encourages public-private partnerships
to develop and deploy risk-based
approaches to cybersecurity, and argues
that ‘‘neither the new Administration
nor Congress should embrace rules,
product labels or certification regimes
for consumer IoT.’’ They claim that
‘‘[c]ybersecurity mandates, pre-market
‘approval,’ and government certification
or labeling of IoT devices are likely to
require an enormous bureaucracy and
have unintended consequences.’’ The
Commission seeks comment on these
views. Are there any gaps in the NIST
IoT Report or other federal efforts to
address IoT security that the
Commission could help address?
The Commission recognizes that
consideration of how to incentivize
cybersecurity best practices through the
equipment authorization process aligns
closely with the recently issued
Executive Order 14028, which directs
NIST to work with the Federal Trade
Commission and other agencies to
develop a labeling program to identify
specific IoT cybersecurity criteria and
provide that information to consumers.
Exec. Order No. 14028, Executive Order
on Improving the Nation’s
Cybersecurity, 86 FR 26633, 26640–41,
§ 4(s)–(u) (May 17, 2021). While the
Director of NIST has not yet identified
the agencies that will participate in the
forthcoming IoT cybersecurity labeling
program, the Commission seeks
comment on whether the Commission
can support these efforts, either directly
or indirectly. If so, how?
Legal Authority
Adopting rules that take security into
consideration in the equipment
authorization process would serve the
public interest by addressing significant
national security risks that have been
identified by this Commission in other
proceedings, and by Congress and other
federal agencies, and doing so would be
consistent with the Commission’s
statutory ‘‘purpose of regulating
interstate and foreign commerce in
communication by wire and radio . . .
for the purpose of the national defense
[and] for the purpose of promoting
safety of life and property through the
use of wire and radio communications.’’
47 U.S.C. 151. The Commission
tentatively concludes that doing so is
not specifically authorized by the
Secure Networks Act itself, pursuant to
which the Commission adopted the
Covered List. However, the Commission
has broad authority to adopt rules, not
inconsistent with the Communications
Act, ‘‘as may be necessary in the
execution of its functions.’’ 47 U.S.C.
154(i). The Commission believes that, in
order to ensure that the Commission’s
rules under the Secure Networks Act
effectively preclude use of equipment
on the Covered List by USF recipients
as contemplated by Congress, it is
necessary to rely on the Commission’s
established equipment authorization
procedures to restrict further equipment
authorization, and the importation and
marketing, of such devices in the first
instance. As discussed above, the
Commission also relies on the
equipment authorization process to
implement other statutory duties,
including the duty to promote efficient
use of the radio spectrum, the duties
under the National Environmental
Policy Act to regulate human RF
exposure, the Commission’s duty to
ensure that mobile handsets are
compatible with hearing aids, and the
duty to deny federal benefits to certain
individuals who have been convicted
multiple times of federal offenses
related to trafficking in or possession of
controlled substances. The Commission
believes that these processes can and
should also serve the purpose of
fulfilling other Commission
responsibilities under the Secure
Networks Act, and the Commission
seeks comment on that issue.
The Commission also believes that
other authorities in the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, provide
authority for the Commission to rely on
for potential modifications to its rules
and procedures governing equipment
authorization. Since Congress added
section 302 to the Act, the
Commission’s part 2 equipment
authorization rules and processes have
served to ensure that RF equipment
marketed, sold, imported, and used in
the United States complies with the
applicable rules governing use of such
equipment. See Equipment
Authorization of RF Devices, Docket No.
19356, Report and Order, 39 FR 5912,
5912, para. 2 (1970). That section
authorizes the Commission to,
‘‘consistent with the public interest,
convenience, and necessity, make
reasonable regulations . . . governing
the interference potential of devices
which in their operation are capable of
emitting radio frequency energy by
radiation, conduction, or other means in
sufficient degree to cause harmful
interference to radio communications.’’
47 U.S.C. 302(a)(1). Regulations that the
Commission adopts in implementing
that authority ‘‘shall be applicable to the
manufacture, import, sale, offer for sale,
or shipment of such devices and . . . to
the use of such devices.’’ 47 U.S.C.
302(a)(2). The authorization processes
are primarily for the purpose of
evaluating equipment’s compliance
with technical specifications intended
to minimize the interference potential of
devices that emit RF energy. As noted
above, however, these rules are also
designed to implement other statutory
responsibilities. The Commission seeks
comment on the scope of the authority
to rely on such rules to effectuate other
public interest responsibilities,
including the Commission’s section
303(e) authority to ‘‘[r]egulate the kind
of apparatus to be used with respect to
its external effects.’’ 47 U.S.C. 303(e).
Section 302(a) directs the Commission
to make reasonable regulations
consistent with the public interest
governing the interference potential of
devices; it would appear to be in the
public interest not to approve devices
capable of emitting RF energy in
sufficient degree to cause harmful
interference to radio communications if
such equipment has been deemed,
pursuant to law, to pose an
unacceptable risk to the national
security of the United States or the
security and safety of United States
persons. The Commission seeks
comment on this tentative conclusion.
The Commission also seeks comment
on a potential alternative basis for such
security rules. The Communications
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act
(CALEA) includes security requirements
that apply directly to equipment
intended for use by providers of
telecommunications services. 47 U.S.C.
1001–1010. Section 105 requires
telecommunications carriers to ensure
that the surveillance capabilities built
into their networks ‘‘can be activated
only in accordance with a court order or
other lawful authorization and with the
affirmative intervention of an individual
officer or employee of the carrier acting
in accordance with regulations
prescribed by the Commission,’’ (47
U.S.C. 1004) and the Commission has
concluded that its rule prohibiting the
use of equipment produced or provided
by any company posing a national
security threat implements that
provision. Supply Chain First Report
and Order, 34 FCC Rcd at 11436–37,
paras. 35–36. The Commission is
required to prescribe rules necessary to
implement CALEA’s requirements. 47
U.S.C. 229.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Aug 18, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
46644
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 158 / Thursday, August 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules
As noted above, the Commission
believes it has ancillary authority under
section 4(i) of the Act to consider
revisions to its part 2 rules as reasonably
necessary to the effective enforcement of
the Secure Networks Act. The
Commission also tentatively concludes
that such rules would be consistent with
the Commission’s specific statutorily
mandated responsibilities under the
Communications Act to make
reasonable regulations consistent with
the public interest governing the
interference potential of electronic
devices, to protect consumers through
the oversight of common carriers under
Title II of that Act, and to prescribe the
nature of services to be rendered by
radio licensees under section 303(b) of
that Act. The Commission seeks
comment on this reasoning as well. The
Commission also seeks comment on any
other sources of authority for the
Commission to propose rules as a result
of this Notice of Inquiry.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–16087 Filed 8–18–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 2
[ET Docket No. 21–232, EA Docket No. 21–
233; FCC 21–73; FR ID 39522]
Protecting Against National Security
Threats to the Communications Supply
Chain Through the Equipment
Authorization Program and the
Competitive Bidding Program
AGENCY
: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION
: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
: The Commission proposes to
revise rules related to its equipment
authorization processes to prohibit
authorization of any ‘‘covered’’
equipment on the recently established
Covered List. The Commission also
seeks comment on whether to require
additional certification relating to
national security from applicants who
wish to participate in the Commission’s
competitive bidding auctions. This
action explores steps the Commission
can take to further its goal of protecting
communications networks from
communications equipment and
services that pose a national security
risk.
DATES
: Comments are due September
20, 2021. Reply comments are due
October 18, 2021. Written comments on
the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed
information collection requirements
must be submitted by the public, Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), and
other interested parties on or before
October 18, 2021.
ADDRESSES
: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket No. 21–232, by
any of the following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/
ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing.
Filings can be sent by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD
20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 45 L Street NE,
Washington, DC 20554.
Effective March 19, 2020, and until
further notice, the Commission no
longer accepts any hand or messenger
delivered filings. This is a temporary
measure taken to help protect the health
and safety of individuals, and to
mitigate the transmission of COVID–19.
See FCC Announces Closure of FCC
Headquarters Open Window and
Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public
Notice, DA 20–304 (March 19, 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),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice),
202–418–0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Jamie Coleman, Office of Engineering
and Technology, 202–418–2705,
Jamie.Coleman@fcc.gov. For
information regarding the PRA
information collection requirements
contained in this PRA, contact Nicole
Ongele, Office of Managing Director, at
(202) 418–2991 or Nicole.Ongele@
fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), in ET
Docket No. 21–232 and EA Docket No.
21–233; FCC 21–73, adopted and
released June 17, 2021. The full text of
this document is available by
downloading the text from the
Commission’s website at: https://
www.fcc.gov/document/equipment-
authorization-and-competitive-bidding-
supply-chain-nprm. When the FCC
Headquarters reopens to the public, the
full text of this document will also be
available for public inspection and
copying during regular business hours
in the FCC Reference Center, 45 L Street
NE, Washington, DC 20554.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 Analysis
This document contains proposed
information collection requirements.
The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burdens, invites the general public and
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to comment on the information
collection requirements contained in
this document, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Public and agency
comments are due October 18, 2021.
Comments should address: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s
burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and (e) way to
further reduce the information
collection burden on small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on
how we might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
OMB Control Number: 3060–0057.
Title: Application for Equipment
Authorization, FCC Form 731.
Form No.: FCC Form 731.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-
profit.
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 11,305 respondents; 24,873
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 8.11
hours (rounded).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Aug 18, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT