Federal Register Vol. 80, No.128,

Title: Food Program and Reporting System.

OMB Number: 0584-0594.

Form Number and Name: FNS-366B—Program and Budget Summary Statement Part B—Program Activity Statement.

Expiration Date: 06/30/2016.

Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: Section 16(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) authorizes 50 percent Federal reimbursement for State agency costs to administer the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). SNAP regulations at 7 CFR 272.2(a) require that State agencies plan and budget program operations and establish objectives for the next year. The basic components of the State Plan of Operation are the Federal/State Agreement, the Budget Projection Statement and the Program Activity Statement (§ 272.2(a)(2)). Under § 272.2(c), the State agency shall submit to FNS for approval a Budget Projection Statement (which projects total Federal administrative costs for the upcoming fiscal year) and a Program Activity Statement (which provides program activity data for the preceding fiscal year). Currently, regulations at § 272.2(e) require SA submit the Program Activity Statement, or form FNS-366B, to FNS no later than 45 days after the end of the State agency's fiscal year, which is typically August 15 for most States. Form FNS-366B is required to substantiate the costs the State agency expects to incur during the next fiscal year. It currently provides data on the number of SNAP applications the State agency processed, the number of fair hearings the State agency conducted, and the fraud control activities the State agency engaged. FNS uses the data to monitor State agency activity levels and performance.

FNS National and Regional Office staff developed national standardized Management Evaluation (ME) protocols for both Recipient Integrity and Program Access. The ME process provides a comprehensive assessment of how effectively States are managing SNAP activities related to the topic area and an opportunity for communication between FNS and State agencies on those management areas. MEs provided FNS the proper channel to discuss with State and local officials ideas for improving form FNS-366B, particularly Section C. In August 2014, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a study of FNS' oversight of State recipient fraud responsibilities (GAO-14-641, SNAP: Enhanced Detection Tools Could Improve Efforts to Combat Recipient Fraud). GAO concluded FNS' ability to monitor State anti-fraud activities and develop more effective anti-fraud strategies was hindered by the lack of consistency and reliability of State reported data on form FNS-366B. FNS published a Request for Information (RFI) in the Federal Register on October 16, 2014, (79 FR 62096) seeking State agency feedback on the usefulness of the data collected and the level of difficulty completing sections E and F of the form. FNS received responses from 17 State agencies and 1 National organization and the feedback was generally consistent.

Based on the GAO report, RFI responses, and results of MEs completed to date, it is apparent that State reporting lacks consistency and form FNS-366B data elements and instructions are not clearly defined. Due to the lack of clarity in these instructions, responses are left open to varying interpretation, among States, leading to unreliable reported data. Form FNS-366B lacks certain data elements that would increase its usefulness by providing more accurate information from State agencies on SNAP application timeliness, and on the types and impacts of fraud prevention activities in use. The revision of this form will improve reliability and accuracy of State reporting by adding, removing, and revising data elements related to application processing, fraud investigations, administrative disqualification hearings and prosecutions. By collecting more accurate and useful data SNAP can target technical assistance to those State agencies that need the most significant improvements to their application and recipient integrity processes. The changes to each section of form FNS-366B are specified below. Revisions were made to the form instructions for all revised sections to reflect the new and revised data elements. The revised form is available for review with this docket on www.Regulations.gov, in Supporting Documents.

Section C.—Certifications: The current form collects information on the approval and denial of initial applications, recertifications, and expedited service. Recent reviews indicate the data reported by States in section C of form FNS-366B are inaccurate and therefore, unreliable. In 2014, FNS introduced a new warning process for States with poor application processing timeliness. FNS has identified inconsistencies between State data received under the warning process and data reported on form FNS-366B. In addition, FNS has identified that State backlogs of initial and recertification applications are an indicator that poor program compliance is adversely affecting program access. Updating form FNS-366B instructions to clarify requested data elements and to include data on overdue applications will assist FNS in monitoring State application timeliness performance. To improve reporting accuracy and usefulness, revisions to form FNS-366B in Section C include:

(1) Addition of the words “Approved and Denied” in header row (C) Total in section C, Certifications.

(2) Addition of new column D with subset columns D(1)—D(4), under the header “Approved Overdue Applications” in section C, Certifications.

a. New column D will collect the counts of overdue applications for “Initial Applications” (line 1), “Recertifications” (line 2), and “Total” (line 3) broken out by “1-30 days” (Column D(1)), “31-60 days” (Column D(2)), “61-90 days” (Column D(3)), and “Over 91 days” (Column D(4)).

Section D—Fair Hearings: There are no changes to this section. Section D collects data on the number of fair hearings requested and held, as well as the outcomes of those fair hearings.

Sections E-G—Fraud Activity: Information currently collected on this form includes the total number of fraud referrals, investigations, prosecutions, disqualification consent agreements (DCA), administrative disqualification hearings (ADH), and ADH waivers for the reporting fiscal year. This form further collects data on program dollars associated with pre-certification and post-certification fraud investigations, as well as program dollars that may be recovered when a disqualification is established. Form FNS-366B lacks certain data elements that would increase its usefulness and provide more accurate information on the types and impacts of State fraud prevention activities. In the revised form FNS has replaced insufficient data elements with new reporting elements that better measure the effectiveness and impact of fraud prevention activities, such as those focusing on SNAP recipient benefit trafficking investigations and disqualifications, allowing FNS to better focus fraud prevention and detection strategies where needed. FNS has also added operational efficiency and cost avoidance measures to quantify a return on investment from fraud control activities. To improve reporting accuracy and usefulness, revisions to form FNS-366B in Sections E-G include:

Section E.—Fraud Investigations:

(1) Removed requirement to separate investigations by “Pre-certification” (line 1) and “Post-certification” (line 2) and replaced with requirement to separate investigations by “Eligibility Fraud” (line 1) and “Trafficking” (line 2)

(2) Removed “Referred for Invest.” (column a)

(3) Changed “Invest Completed—Negative” (column b) to “Completed, Individual Not Referred for ADH or Prosecution”

a. To collect data on whether investigations not resulting in a fraud Intentional Program Violation (IPV) did result in an overissuance claim due to an Inadvertent Household Error (IHE), sub-columns were added in this section for: “(1) No IHE established”, “(2) IHE Established”, and “(3) $ IHE Established”

(4) Changed “Invest Completed—Positive” (column c) to “Completed, Individual Referred for ADH or Prosecution” (shifted to column a)

(5) Removed “Program Dollars” (column d) and “Invest Cancelled” (column f)

(6) Changed “Invest Pending” (column e) to “Open Investigations, Individuals” (shifted to column c)

(7) To collect data on operational efficiency, added “Average # of Days per Investigation” (column d), “Investigation Costs” (column e), and “Investigation FTE” (column f)

Section F.—Administrative Disqualification Hearings:

(1) Split Section F on current form into sections F and G on revised form. Section F now collects data on Administrative Disqualification Hearings (ADH) only.

(2) Removed “Cases (Persons) Referred” (column a)

(3) Changed “Upheld Convictions” (column d) to “ADH Completed, Individual Disqualified” (shifted to column a)

(4) Changed “Waivers” (column c) to “Waiver Signed, Individual Disqualified” (shifted to column b)

(5) Changed “Actually Acquitted” (column e) to “ADH Completed, Individual Not Disqualified” (shifted to column c)

(6) To collect data on operational efficiency, added “Average # of Days from Referral to Disqualification” (column d)

(7) Changed “Program Dollars” (shifted to column e) to include “Amount Subject to Claim” (e1) and “Cost Savings” (e2)

(8) Removed “Pending Decisions” (column g)

(9) To capture cases referred for ADH, but awaiting action by the State agency, added “Referred Individuals Awaiting Scheduling” (column f)

a. To collect data on the number of days cases await ADH scheduling, sub-columns were added in this section for: “(1) 0-180 Days”, “(2) 181-365 Days”, and “(3) 366+ Days”.

(10) Shifted “Decisions Overdue” to column g

Section G.—Prosecutions:

(1) Split Section F on current form into sections F and G on revised form. Section G proposes to collect data on Prosecutions only.

(2) Removed “Cases (Persons) Referred” (column a)

(3) Changed “Upheld Convictions” (column d) to “Prosecution Completed, Individual Disqualified” (shifted to column a)

(4) Changed “Waivers” (column c) to “DCA Signed, Individual Disqualified” (shifted to column b)

(5) Changed “Actually Acquitted” (column e) to “Prosecution Completed, Individual Not Disqualified” (shifted to column c)

(6) To collect data on operational efficiency, added “Average # Days from Referral to Disqualification” (column d)

(7) Changed “Program Dollars” (shifted to column e) to include “Amount Subject to Claim” (e1) and “Cost Savings” (e2)

(8) Removed “Pending Decisions” (column g)

(9) To capture cases referred to the prosecuting agency, but awaiting action, added “Referred Individuals, No Action by Prosecutor” (column f)

a. To collect data on the status of cases awaiting action, sub-columns were added in this section for: “(1) 366+ Days” and “(2) Reclaimed for ADH”.

Section H.—Remarks:

(1) Added remarks section (Section H) to allow space for State agencies to provide any additional information necessary to support data reported on the FNS-366B.

The current burden for FNS 366 B is 950.29 hours. As a result of these revisions, there is an anticipated burden of 1,855, an increase of 904.71 hours for form FNS-366B. As this is a revision to form FNS-366B within the FPRS system, the total FPRS burden is summarized below.

Form FNS-366B. Fifty-three (53) SA submit 1 response annually for a total of 53 annual responses. The annual reporting burden for form FNS-366B report is 35 hours per respondent to complete the form. The reporting burden for form FNS-366B alone is 1,855 hours (53SA × 1 annual report = 53 total annual responses × 35 hours per response = 1,855). There are recordkeeping burdens which are maintained in a separated OMB Control No.: 0584-0083, Expiration Date: 4/30/2017. As this is a revision to the reporting burden estimates for form FNS-366B within the FPRS system, the total FPRS burden is summarized below.

Affected Public: State, Local and Tribal Government Agencies.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,266.

Number of Responses per Respondent: 7.3.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 23,789.

Hours per Response: 3.7.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 87,716.

The purpose of the meeting is:

1. To update members on past RAC projects, and

2. Propose new RAC projects.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by July 10, 2015, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time for oral comments must be sent to Diane L. Olson, RAC Coordinator, Ketchikan Misty Fiords Ranger District, 3031 Tongass Avenue, Ketchikan, Alaska 99901; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 907-225-8738. Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

Title: Application for Authorization to Use the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem.

OMB Number: 0524-0034.

Expiration Date of Current Approval: January 31, 2016.

Type of Request: Intent to seek approval for the extension of a currently approved information collection for three years.

Abstract: Use of the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem is authorized by an Act of Congress (18 U.S.C. 707). Use of the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem by anyone other than 4-H Clubs and those duly authorized by them, representatives of the United States Department of Agriculture, the land grant colleges and universities, and persons authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture is prohibited by the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 707. The Secretary of Agriculture has delegated authority to the Administrator of NIFA to authorize others to use the 4-H Club Name and Emblem. The Administrator has promulgated regulations at 7 CFR part 8 that govern such use. The regulatory requirements for use of the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem reflect the high standards of 4-H and its educational goals and objectives. Pursuant to provisions of 7 CFR part 8 anyone requesting authorization from the Administrator to use the 4-H Club Name and Emblem is asked to describe the proposed use in a formal application. The collection of this information is used to determine whether the applicant's proposed use will meet the regulatory requirements in 7 CFR part 8 and whether an authorization for use should be granted.

Need and Use of the Information: NIFA will collect information on the name of the individual, partnership, corporation, or association; the organizational address; the name of an authorized representative; the telephone number, fax number, and email address; the proposed use of the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem; and the plan for sale or distribution of the product bearing the 4-H Club Name and/or Emblem. The information collected by NIFA will be used to determine if those applying to use the 4-H Name and/or Emblem meet the regulatory requirements. If the information is not collected, it would not be possible to ensure that the products, services, and materials meet the regulatory requirements as well as 4-H educational goals and objectives.

Estimate of Burden: No changes have been proposed to this collection and the public reporting burden remains at the estimated average of 0.5 hours per response for 75 respondents.

Respondents: Individuals, households, business or other for-profit or not-for-profit institutions.

Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request to OMB for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program.

OMB Number: 0524-0044.

Expiration Date of Current Approval: January 31, 2016.

Type of Request: Intent to seek approval for the revision and extension of a currently approved information collection for three years.

Abstract: NIFA's Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) is a unique program that began in 1969 and is designed to reach limited resource audiences, especially youth and families with young children. EFNEP is authorized under section 1425 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3175) and funded under section 3(d) of the Smith-Lever Act (7 U.S.C. 343(d)). Extension professionals train and supervise paraprofessionals and volunteers who teach food and nutrition information and skills to limited resource families and youth. EFNEP operates through the 1862 and 1890 Land Grant Universities (LGU) in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and in American Samoa, Guam, Micronesia, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

The objectives of EFNEP are to assist limited resource families and youth in acquiring the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and changed behaviors necessary for nutritionally sound diets, and to contribute to their personal development and the improvement of the total family diet and nutritional well-being.

NIFA sponsors an integrated data collection process that is used at the county, State, and Federal level. The current data collection system, the Web-based Nutrition Education Evaluation and Reporting System (WebNEERS), captures EFNEP impacts. Its purpose is to gauge if the Federal assistance provided has had an impact on the target audience. It also enables EFNEP staff to make programmatic improvements in delivering nutrition education. Further, the data collected provide information for program management decisions and diagnostic assessments of participant needs. In order to capture all of EFNEP's reporting requirements in one place, EFNEP program plans and budgetary data are now submitted, reviewed, and approved through WebNEERS. These EFNEP specific reporting requirements are tied to release of Federal EFNEP funds.

Specifications for this system were developed by a committee of representatives from across the United States and are in compliance with Federal standards for maintaining, collecting, and presenting data on race and ethnicity and protecting personally identifiable information.

WebNEERS stores information on: (1) Adult program participants, their family structure, and dietary practices; (2) youth group participants; (3) staff; (4) annual budgets; and (5) annual program plans. WebNEERS is one web-based system which operates on three levels: The Region level (County), Institution level (university), and the Federal level. Data are entered at the regional level. They are available in aggregated form at the Institution level in real time. University staff generates State-level reports for State-level stakeholders and to guide program management decisions (State also refers to the District of Columbia and the insular areas; in States that have both 1862 and 1890 LGUs, it refers to the individual universities). Data are not available to the Federal level until the university staff submits them. This process allows for State and National assessments of the program's impact. The National data are used to create National reports which are made available to the public.

There are revisions to the currently approved collection. WebNEERS is an update to the currently approved NEERS5 system. WebNEERS is a secure online system designed, hosted, and maintained by Clemson University. WebNEERS is accessed through the Internet via Internet Explorer, Firefox, Google Chrome, and Safari web browsers. It can also be accessed through mobile devices and tablets. It incorporates local, university, and Federal components from the NEERS5 system as well as new elements such as the EFNEP 5-Year Plan/Annual Update (program plan), the EFNEP budget and budget justification, and the social ecological framework of the Community Nutrition Education (CNE) logic model. Only approved users can access WebNEERS and each user can only access data based on his/her defined permissions. The updated system also has the capability to export raw data for external analysis. Data exported from WebNEERS do not include personally identifiable information. Several stakeholder groups provided input on the updated system to ensure that EFNEP continues to collect only those data which it needs for evaluation and reporting. These groups also gave feedback to improve user interfaces and to improve functionality and capabilities of the system.

The evaluation processes of EFNEP remain consistent with the requirements of Congressional legislation and OMB. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-62), the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-352), the Federal Agriculture Improvement Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-127), and the Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform Act (AREERA) of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-185), together with OMB requirements, support the reporting requirements requested in this information collection. Section 804 of the FAIR act requires the development and implementation of a system to monitor and evaluate agricultural research and extension activities in order to measure the impact and effectiveness of research, extension, and education programs. AREERA requires a performance evaluation to be conducted to determine whether Federally funded agricultural research, extension, and education programs result in public goods that have national or multistate significance.

Estimate of Burden: The total annual estimated burden for WebNEERS is 86,826 hours for this data collection process—for participant education and data entry, aggregation, and reporting; and for preparation, review, and submission of EFNEP program plans and budgetary information. The burden for respondents was estimated through feedback from a survey sent by Clemson University to nine EFNEP Coordinators and their data managers. Seven surveys were returned. The estimate was 1,158 hours per response and annually there are 75 total responses. Burden estimates are seven percent lower than they were for NEERS5 even with the inclusion of the new reporting elements (EFNEP program plans and budgets). This indicates that even though additional reporting requirements were included in the updated system, the overall burden to the users was reduced.

Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collection requirements associated with the Program, as covered in this Notice, have been submitted to the Office of Management Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 0570-0065, for OMB approval.

Federal Agency Name: Rural Business-Cooperative Service (an Agency of USDA in the Rural Development mission area).

Solicitation Opportunity Title: Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product Manufacturing Assistance Program.

Announcement Type: Notice of Solicitation of Applications.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: The CFDA number for this Notice is 10.865.

Dates: To receive Program funds for the first application cycle, applications must be received in the USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division no later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on October 1, 2015, to compete for program funds. To receive Program funds for the second application cycle, applications must be received in the USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division no later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on April 1, 2016. Any application received after 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on April 1, 2016, will be considered for the subsequent application cycle for the Program.

Availability of Notice and Rule: This Notice and the interim rule for the Program are available on the USDA Rural Development Web site at http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/biorefinery-assistance-program and at http://www.rd.usda.gov/newsroom.

A. Purpose of the Program. The purpose of the Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product Manufacturing Program is to assist in the development of new and emerging technologies for the development of Advanced Biofuels, Renewable Chemicals, and Biobased Product Manufacturing. This is achieved through guarantees for loans made to fund the development, construction, and Retrofitting of Commercial Scale biorefineries using Eligible Technology and of Biobased Product Manufacturing facilities that use Technologically New Commercial Scale processing and manufacturing equipment and required facilities to convert Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries into end-user products on a Commercial Scale.

B. Statutory Authority. This Program is authorized under 7 U.S.C. 8103. Regulations are contained in 7 CFR part 4279, subpart C and in 7 CFR part 4287, subpart D.

C. Definition of Terms. The definitions applicable to this Notice are published at 7 CFR 4279.202 and 7 CFR 4287.302.

D. Application Awards. The Agency will review, evaluate, score, and award applications received in response to this Notice based on the provisions found in 7 CFR part 4279, subpart C and as indicated in this Notice.

A. Available Funds. This Notice is a solicitation for applications that will be funded using budget authority provided by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) and available under current law. Of the funds available, the 2014 Farm Bill provided for up to 15 percent of the mandatory funds for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 to promote Biobased Product Manufacturing.

B. Type of Award. Guaranteed loan.

D. Guarantee Loan Funding. The provisions of 7 CFR 4279.232 apply to this Notice. The Borrower needs to provide the remaining funds from other non-Federal sources to complete the Project.

E. Guarantee and Annual Renewal Fees. The guarantee and Annual Renewal Fees specified in 7 CFR 4279.231 are applicable to this Notice.

F. Anticipated Award Date. The award date will vary based on timing of completion of each Project's individual application process.

A. Eligible Lenders. To be eligible for this Program, Lenders must meet the eligibility requirements in 7 CFR 4279.208.

B. Eligible Borrowers. To be eligible for this Program, Borrowers must meet the eligibility requirements in 7 CFR 4279.209.

C. Eligible Projects. To be eligible for this Program, Projects must meet the eligibility requirements in 7 CFR 4279.210.

D. Application Completeness. Incomplete Phase 1 applications will be rejected and the Project will be given no further consideration. Lenders will be informed of the elements that made the application incomplete. If the Lender makes the required edits and resubmits the application to the USDA's Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division by 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, on the closing date, the Agency will reconsider the application.

A. Letter of Intent. For each guarantee request, the Lender or the Borrower must submit to the Agency a non-binding letter of intent to apply for a loan guarantee not less than 30 calendar days prior to the application deadline. The letter must conform to 7 CFR 4279.260. The purpose of the letter of intent is to notify the Agency approximately how many applications will need to be reviewed, so that Agency resources can be organized to adequately and expeditiously review all applications. The Agency reserves the right to request additional information from potential applicants. Applications that do not submit a letter of intent within 30 days of the application deadline will not be accepted by the Agency in that particular application cycle.

B. Applications. For each guarantee request, the Lender must submit to the Agency an application in conformance with 7 CFR 4279.261. Phase 1 applications will provide information to determine Lender, Borrower, and Project eligibility; preliminary economic and technical feasibility; and the priority score of the application. Based on the priority score ranking, the Agency will invite applicants whose Phase 1 applications receive higher priority scores to submit Phase 2 applications. Phase 2 application materials will be submitted as the Project planning and engineering is finalized and will include information such as: An environmental report, technical report, financial model, and the Lender's credit evaluation. The information required in both phases of the application process is detailed in the Agency's Application Guide.

C. Content and Form of Submission. All applicants must submit one paper copy of the application materials and an electronic copy containing the same information that is included in the paper copy. Detailed instructions regarding application submission are explained in the Application Guide that the Agency has developed. The Application Guide is available online at http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/biorefinery-assistance-program or by contacting Todd Hubbell, Telephone: 202-690-2516. Email: [email protected].

D. Application Submittal. Application materials must be submitted to USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division, Attention: Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product Manufacturing Assistance Program, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 3225, Washington, DC 20250-3225.

This Notice also announces the solicitation of applications for funds available under the Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product Manufacturing Assistance Program to specifically fund Biobased Product Manufacturing. The 2014 Farm Bill added Biobased Product Manufacturing to the Program and provided for up to 15 percent of the mandatory funds for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 to be used to support facilities producing Biobased Products for end use. The 2014 Farm Bill provides the definition of “Biobased Product Manufacturing,” which the Agency has incorporated into the subsequent interim rule (see 7 CFR 4279.202). This definition requires that the Biobased Product Manufacturing facility use Renewable Chemicals and/or other biobased outputs of biorefineries as inputs and also requires that the Borrower use Technologically New Commercial Scale processing and manufacturing equipment and required facilities. The facility must produce end-user products.

A. Biobased Product Manufacturing Eligibility Information. The eligibility requirements for prospective Lenders and Borrowers are the same as those listed in Sections III.A and III.B of this Notice. For Biobased Product Manufacturing Projects, the Eligible Project requirement is modified to reflect that eligible Projects must use Technologically New Commercial Scale processing and manufacturing equipment and must convert Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries into end-user products on a Commercial Scale.

B. Biobased Product Manufacturing Application Processing Procedures. The application processing procedures for Biobased Product Manufacturing Projects as the same as identified in Section III.D and Section IV in this Notice.

C. Biobased Product Manufacturing Scoring. In lieu of the criteria listed in 7 CFR 4279.266, Biobased Product Manufacturing Projects will be scored using the criteria listed below:

(a) Whether the Borrower has established a market for the manufactured Biobased Product, as applicable. A maximum of 16 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) Degree of commitment of contracted sales agreements. A maximum of 6 points will be awarded.

(i) If the Borrower has signed contracts for purchase for greater than 50 percent of the dollar value of manufactured Biobased Product, 6 points will be awarded.

(ii) If the Borrower has signed letters of intent to enter into contracted sales agreements, or comparable documentation, for the purchase for greater than 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product, or combination of signed contracts or agreements and letters of intent or comparable documentation, 4 points will be awarded.

(iii) If the Borrower has signed letters of interest to enter into contracted sales agreements, or comparable documentation, for the purchase for greater than 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product, or combination of signed contracts, letters of intent or comparable documentation, 2 points will be awarded.

(2) Duration of contracted sales agreements. A maximum of 6 points will be awarded.

(i) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of manufactured Biobased Product for the period not less than the loan term, 6 points will be awarded.

(ii) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product for the period not less than 5 years but less than the term of the loan, 4 points will be awarded.

(iii) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product for the period not less than 1 year but less than 5 years, 2 points will be awarded.

(3) Financial strength of the contracted sales agreement counterparty. A maximum of 4 points will be awarded.

(i) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product with a counterparty with a corporate credit rating not less than AA, Aa2, or equivalent, 4 points will be awarded.

(ii) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product with a counterparty with a corporate credit rating less than AA, Aa2, or equivalent, but not less thanA−, or A3, or equivalent, 2 points will be awarded.

(iii) If the Borrower commits to enter into contracted sales agreements prior to loan closing for purchase for greater than or equal to 50 percent of the dollar value of the manufactured Biobased Product with a counterparty with a corporate credit rating less than A−, or A3, or equivalent, but not less than BBB−, or Baa3, or equivalent, 1 point will be awarded.

(b) Whether the area in which the Borrower proposes to place the Project, defined as the area that will supply the Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries to the proposed Project, has any other similar facilities. A maximum of 5 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the area that will supply the Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries to the proposed Project does not have any other similar facilities, 5 points will be awarded.

(2) If there are other similar facilities located within the area that will supply the Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries to the proposed Project, 0 points will be awarded.

(c) Whether the Borrower is proposing to use Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries not previously used in the Biobased Product Manufacturing. A maximum of 10 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the Borrower proposes to use Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries previously used in the manufacture of a Biobased Product in a commercial facility, 0 points will be awarded.

(2) If the Borrower proposes to use Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries not previously used in the manufacture of a Biobased Product in a commercial facility, 10 points will be awarded.

(d) Whether the Borrower is proposing to work with producer associations or cooperatives. A maximum of 5 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If at least 50 percent of the dollar value of Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries to be used by the proposed Project will be supplied by producer associations and cooperatives or biorefineries supplied by producer associations and cooperatives, 5 points will be awarded.

(2) If at least 30 percent of the dollar value of Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries to be used by the proposed Project will be supplied by producer associations and cooperatives or biorefineries supplied by producer associations and cooperatives, 3 points will be awarded.

(e) The level of financial participation by the Borrower, including support from non-Federal Government sources and private sources. A maximum of 20 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the sum of the loan amount requested and other direct Federal funding is less than or equal to 50 percent of total Eligible Project Costs, 20 points will be awarded.

(2) If the sum of the loan amount requested and other direct Federal funding is greater than 50 percent but less than or equal to 55 percent of total Eligible Project Costs, 16 points will be awarded.

(3) If the sum of the loan amount requested and other direct Federal funding is greater than 55 percent but less than or equal to 60 percent of total Eligible Project Costs, 12 points will be awarded.

(4) If the sum of the loan amount and other direct Federal funding is greater than 60 percent but less than or equal to 65 percent of total Eligible Project Costs, 8 points will be awarded.

(5) If the sum of the loan amount and other direct Federal funding is greater than 65 percent but less than or equal to 70 percent of total Eligible Project Costs, 4 points will be awarded.

(f) Whether the Borrower has established that the adoption of the manufacturing process proposed in the application will have a positive effect on three impact areas: Resource conservation (e.g., water, soil, forest), public health (e.g., potable water, air quality), and the environment (e.g., compliance with an applicable renewable fuel standard, greenhouse gases, emissions, particulate matter). A maximum of 10 points can be awarded. Based on what the Borrower has provided in either the application or the Feasibility Study, points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If process adoption will have a positive impact on any one of the three impact areas (resource conservation, public health, or the environment), 3 points will be awarded.

(2) If process adoption will have a positive impact on two of the three impact areas, 6 points will be awarded.

(3) If process adoption will have a positive impact on all three impact areas, 10 points will be awarded.

(g) Whether the Borrower can establish that, if adopted, the technology proposed in the application will not have any economically significant negative impacts on existing manufacturing plants or other facilities that use Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries. A maximum of 5 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the Borrower has failed to establish, through an independent third-party Feasibility Study, that the production technology proposed in the application, if adopted, will not have any economically significant negative impacts on existing manufacturing plants or other facilities that use similar Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries, 0 points will be awarded.

(2) If the Borrower has established, through an independent third-party Feasibility Study, that the production technology proposed in the application, if adopted, will not have any economically significant negative impacts on existing manufacturing plants or other facilities that use Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries, 5 points will be awarded.

(h) The potential for Rural economic development. A maximum of 10 points will be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the Project is located in a Rural Area, 5 points will be awarded.

(2) If the Project creates jobs through direct employment with an average wage that exceeds the county median household wages where the Project will be located, 5 points will be awarded.

(i) The level of local ownership of the facility proposed in the application. For the purposes of this Notice, a Local Owner is defined as “An individual who owns any portion of an eligible Advanced Biofuel Biorefinery and whose primary residence is located within 50 miles of the Biorefinery.” A maximum of 5 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If Local Owners have an ownership interest in the facility of more than 20 percent but less than or equal to 50 percent, 3 points will be awarded.

(2) If Local Owners have an ownership interest in the facility of more than 50 percent, 5 points will be awarded.

(j) Whether the Project can be replicated. A maximum of 10 points can be awarded. Points to be awarded will be determined as follows:

(1) If the Project can be commercially replicated regionally (e.g., Northeast, Southwest, etc.), 5 points will be awarded.

(2) If the Project can be commercially replicated nationally, 10 points will be awarded.

(k) If the Project uses a particular technology, system, or process that is not currently operating at Commercial Scale as of October 1 of the fiscal year for which the funding is available (October 1, 2014 for the first application cycle which deadline is October 5, 2015, and as of October 1, 2015 for the applications submitted for cycles ending October 1, 2015 and April 1, 2016, 5 points will be awarded.

(l) The Administrator can award up to a maximum of 10 bonus points:

(1) To ensure, to the extent practical, there is diversity in the types of Projects approved for loan guarantees to ensure a wide a range as possible technologies, products, and approaches are assisted in the program portfolio; and

(2) To applications that promote partnerships and other activities that assist in the development of new and emerging technologies for the development of Renewable Chemicals and other biobased outputs of biorefineries, so as to, as applicable, promote resource conservation, public health, and the environment; diversify markets for agricultural and forestry products and agriculture waste material; and create jobs and enhance the economic development of the Rural economy. No additional information regarding partnerships is detailed in this Notice.

A. Loan Origination. Lenders seeking a loan guarantee under this Notice must comply with the all of the provisions found in 7 CFR 4279, subpart C.

B. Loan Processing. The Agency will process loans guaranteed under this Notice in accordance with the provisions specified in 7 CFR 4279.260 through 4279.290.

C. Evaluation of Applications and Awards. Awards under this Notice will be made on a competitive basis; submission of an application neither reserves funding nor ensures funding. The Agency will evaluate each application received in the USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division, select Phase 1 applications in accordance with 7 CFR 4279.267 to invite submittal of Phase 2 applications, and will make awards using the provisions specified in 7 CFR 4279.278.

D. Guaranteed Loan Servicing. The Agency will service loans guaranteed under this Notice in accordance with the provisions specified in 7 CFR 4287.301 through 4287.399.

A. Notifications. The Agency will notify, in writing, Lenders whose Phase 1 applications have scored highest and will invite them to submit Phase 2 applications. If the Agency determines it is unable to guarantee any particular loan, the Lender will be informed in writing. Such notification will include the reasons for denial of the guarantee.

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements.

1. Review or Appeal Rights. A person may seek a review of an Agency decision or appeal to the National Appeals Division in accordance with 7 CFR 4279.204.

2. Exception Authority. The provisions specified in 7 CFR 4279.203 and 7 CFR 4287.303 apply to this Notice.

C. Environmental Review. The Agency has reviewed the types of applicant proposals that may qualify for assistance under this section and has determined, in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G, that all proposals shall be reviewed as a Class II Environmental Assessment. Furthermore, if after Agency review of proposals the Agency has determined that the proposal could result in significant environmental impacts on the quality of the human environment, an Environmental Impact Statement may be required pursuant to 7 CFR 1940.313. Environmental Assessments for Projects that score high enough will be submitted during the Phase 2 application process and must be conducted in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G. Guidelines for preparing the Environmental Assessment are available by reviewing 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G and by reviewing the Application Guide, available on the Agency's Web site. http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/biorefinery-assistance-program. Applicants are reminded that this program is governed by 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G or successor regulation.

For general questions about this Notice, please contact Todd Hubbell, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Energy Division, Biorefinery Assistance Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Mail Stop 3225, Washington, DC 20250-3225. Telephone: 202-690-2516. Email: [email protected].

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)

If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, by fax (202) 690-7442 or email at [email protected].

Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and you wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish).

Persons with disabilities, who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001-21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. An Export Trade Certificate of Review protects the holder and the members identified in the Certificate from State and Federal government antitrust actions and from private treble damage antitrust actions for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out in compliance with its terms and conditions. The regulations implementing Title III are found at 15 CFR part 325 (2015). Section 302(b)(1) of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 and 15 CFR 325.6(a) require the Secretary to publish a notice in the Federal Register summarizing the application. Under 15 CFR 325.6(a), interested parties may, within twenty days after the date of this notice, submit written comments to the Secretary on the application.

Interested parties may submit written comments relevant to the determination whether an amended Certificate should be issued. If the comments include any privileged or confidential business information, it must be clearly marked and a nonconfidential version of the comments (identified as such) should be included. Any information not marked as privileged or confidential business information will be deemed to be nonconfidential.

An original and five (5) copies, plus two (2) copies of the nonconfidential version, should be submitted no later than 20 days after the date of this notice to: Export Trading Company Affairs, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 21028, Washington, DC 20230.

Information submitted by any person is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). However, nonconfidential versions of the comments will be made available to the applicant if necessary for determining whether or not to issue the amended Certificate. Comments should refer to this application as “Export Trade Certificate of Review, application number 14-1A004.”

Applicant: DFA of California, 710 Striker Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95834.

Contact: Matthew Krehe, Senior Manager with Gilbert Associates, Inc., (916) 646-6464.

Application No.: 14-1A004.

Date Deemed Submitted: June 19, 2015.

Proposed Amendment: DFA of California (“DFA”) seeks to amend its Certificate to add the following six companies as Members of DFA's Certificate:

DFA's proposed amendment of its Export Trade Certificate of Review would result in the following companies as Members under the Certificate:

Scope of the Order

The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is brass sheet and strip, other than leaded brass and tin brass sheet and strip, from Italy, which is currently classified under subheading 7409.21.00.50, 7409.21.00.75, 7409.21.00.90, 7409.29.00.50, 7409.29.00.75, and 7409.29.00.90 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.2 The written description is dispositive.

As a result of our review, we determine that the following dumping margin on BSS from Italy exists for the period March 1, 2013, through February 28, 2014:

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the Department determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise, in accordance with the final results of this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of BSS from Italy entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for KME Italy SpA will be equal to the dumping margin established in the final results of this review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer has its own rate, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 5.44 percent, the all-others rate determined in the LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Background: The Council advises the Secretary of Commerce on matters relating to the U.S. manufacturing industry.

Public Participation: The meeting will be open to the public and will be physically accessible to people with disabilities. All guests are required to register in advance by the deadline identified under the DATES caption. The meeting room will be provided upon registration. Seating is limited and will be on a first come, first served basis. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids must be submitted by the registration deadline. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill. There will be fifteen (15) minutes allotted for oral comments from members of the public attending the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments may be limited to three (3) minutes per person. Individuals wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting must submit a request at the time of registration along with a brief statement of the general nature of the comments, as well as the name and address of the proposed speaker. If the number of registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the meeting, the International Trade Administration may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers. Speakers are requested to bring at least 25 copies of their oral comments for distribution to the members of the Manufacturing Council and to the public at the meeting.

In addition, any member of the public may submit pertinent written comments concerning the Council's affairs at any time before or after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to Archana Sahgal at the contact information indicated above. To be considered during the meeting, comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on July 15, 2015, to ensure transmission to the Council prior to the meeting. Comments received after that date will be distributed to the members but may not be considered at the meeting. Copies of Council meeting minutes will be available within 90 days of the meeting.

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

The 60-day Notice soliciting comments was published on December 10, 2014 on pate 73280. No public comments were received.

Description: CNCS is seeking approval of the Senior Corps Grant Application, as revised. The Grant Application is used by RSVP, Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion Program grantees, and for potential applicants. The Senior Corps Grant Application is currently approved through September 30, 2016.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

Title: Senior Corps Grant Application.

OMB Number: 3045-0035.

Agency Number: None.

Affected Public: Current and potential grantees of the RSVP, Foster Grandparent, and Senior Companion programs.

Total Respondents: 1,519.

Frequency: Annual.

Average Time per Response: 5 hours.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 7,595.

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program Annual Performance Report.

OMB Control Number: 1840-0763.

Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection..

Respondents/Affected Public: Private Sector.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 89.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 801.

Abstract: This is a revision of the Child Care Access Means Parent In School Program (CCAMPIS) Annual Performance Report (APR). This report provides the Department of Education with information needed to evaluate a grantee's performance and compliance with program requirements in accordance with the program authorizing statute. The data collected is aggregated to provide national information on project participants and the results demonstrated by program outcomes. The burden hours are increased due to additional queries that have been added to the APR that capture more specific data needed to enhance the understanding of results demonstrated by this program in accordance with OMB mandates.

On February 10, 2015, we published in the Federal Register (80 FR 7440) a proposed waiver of 34 CFR 75.261(a) and (c)(2) and extension of the project period (proposed waiver and extension) in order to—

(1) Enable the Secretary to provide additional funds to the current NACTEP grantees with FY 2015 funds and possibly FY 2016 funds for project periods through FY 2016 and possibly through FY 2017; and

(2) Request comments on the proposed waiver and extension.

There are no substantive differences between the proposed waiver and extension and the final waiver and extension.

Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the proposed waiver and extension, we received 22 comments. Generally, we do not address comments that raise concerns not related to the proposed waiver and extension.

An analysis of the comments received in response to the proposed waiver and extension follows.

Comments: The 22 comments we received supported the proposed waiver and extension of the NACTEP project period. We heard from a variety of commenters, including tribal community college presidents, deans and administrators, teachers, students, and project evaluators. Several commenters provided a variety of reasons for their support of the waiver and extension, including: the effectiveness of work being done by current grantees, the number of students served and placed in employment under current projects, and the great need for NACTEP projects to continue in the Native American and Alaska communities served by current projects.

Several commenters stated that it would be difficult for eligible entities to prepare NACTEP applications for short-term funding prior to the expected reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (the Perkins Act). Some commenters stated that it was not in the public interest to conduct a NACTEP grant competition at this time because there are likely to be changes in the Perkins Act for NACTEP beyond FY 2015.

Several commenters expressed the view that the waiver and extension are necessary to allow current students sufficient time to complete their programs, which include programs awarding industry-recognized credentials, two-year certificates, and associate degrees.

One commenter noted that tribal colleges would not have sufficient time to plan, establish, or effectively operate viable programs, in a one-year timeframe. The commenter expressed the view that continuing the projects of current grantees would eliminate the difficulties, barriers, and inefficiencies associated with starting new programs, stating that extending the current project period and funding of current grantees would: Capitalize upon the current momentum of grantee service delivery, since service streams were already in place and operational; allow current grantees to modify their programs based on their experience to date without disruption to the projects' participants, partnerships, programs, or plans; and increase the likelihood of student attainment of associate degrees and certificates and subsequent job placement. The commenter further stated that, under NACTEP, grantees must evaluate the long-term impact of each project, which will be facilitated by extending the project duration beyond two years.

Another commenter noted that a lapse of funds would create a set-back in the progress made in cultivating successful relationships with the local community college to provide in-demand training within their Native American community.

A commenter provided examples of exemplary NACTEP programs that are making substantial gains in combating poverty and unemployment, long-term joblessness, and other problems that contribute to the lack of gainful employment. The commenter stated that the grantees have partnered with local community colleges to provide students opportunities to earn college credits, as well as State and national certifications that prepare students for employment. This commenter expressed the need for the Department to approve the NACTEP waiver and extension for current grantees.

Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support and agree that extending the current NACTEP grant period will allow current NACTEP grantees to continue to work towards accomplishing the goals and objectives stated in their 2013 NACTEP applications, including providing specialized career and technical education programs to Native American students. We agree that it is important that there not be a lapse in the programming provided by NACTEP grantees to students.

Changes: None.

NACTEP, as authorized by section 116(a) through (g) of the Perkins Act, supports grants to federally recognized Indian tribes, tribal organizations, Alaska Native entities and eligible Bureau of Indian Education-funded schools to improve career and technical education programs that benefit Native Americans and Alaskan Natives.

On February 26, 2013, we published in the Federal Register (78 FR 13030) a notice inviting applications for NACTEP grants (2013 NIA). Although in previous NACTEP competitions the Secretary invited applications with a proposed project period of five years, in anticipation of congressional reauthorization of the Perkins Act, in the FY 2013 competition, the Department invited applications with proposed project periods of only two years. The project period for the current 31 NACTEP grantees is scheduled to end in FY 2015.

Because there is the potential for changes in the Perkins Act for NACTEP beyond FY 2015, we do not believe it is in the public interest to hold a new NACTEP competition in FY 2015 for projects that may then operate for just one year, or to announce a competition under which eligible entities would be expected to proceed through the application preparation and submission process while lacking critical information about the future of the program. Further, we do not think that it is in the public interest to have a lapse in the services currently provided by the NACTEP grantees.

For these reasons, the Secretary waives the requirements of 34 CFR 75.261(a) and (c)(2) that generally prohibit project extensions involving the obligation of additional Federal funds and extends the NACTEP project periods for up to 24 months. The waiver and extension will allow the current NACTEP grantees to request and continue to receive Federal funding annually for project periods through FY 2016 and possibly through FY 2017. We will fund the extended project period by using funds appropriated for FY 2015 or FY 2016, depending on whether the grants are extended for one or two years.

Any activities carried out during the period of a NACTEP continuation award will have to be consistent with, or a logical extension of, the scope, goals, and objectives of the grantee's application as approved in the FY 2013 NACTEP competition. The requirements applicable to continuation awards for this competition set forth in the 2013 NIA and the requirements in 34 CFR 75.253 will apply to any continuation awards sought by the current NACTEP grantees. We will base our decisions regarding continuation awards on the program narratives, budgets, budget narratives, and program performance reports submitted by the current grantees, and the requirements in 34 CFR 75.253.

The waiver and extension will not exempt the current NACTEP grantees from the appropriation account closing provisions of 31 U.S.C. 1552(a), nor will they extend the availability of funds previously awarded to current NACTEP grantees. As a result of 31 U.S.C. 1552(a), appropriations available for a limited period may be used for payment of valid obligations for only five years after the expiration of their period of availability for Federal obligation. After that time, the unexpended balance of those funds is canceled and returned to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and is unavailable for restoration for any purpose (31 U.S.C. 1552(b)).

The Secretary certifies that the waiver and extension and the activities required to support two additional years of NACTEP funding will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small entities that will be affected by the waiver and extension are the 31 currently-funded NACTEP grantees and any other potential applicants.

The Secretary certifies that the waiver and extension will not have a significant economic impact on these entities because the extension of an existing project imposes minimal compliance costs, and the activities required to support the additional years of funding will not impose additional regulatory burdens or require unnecessary Federal supervision.

This waiver and extension does not contain any information collection requirements.

NACTEP is not subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to either of the contact persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Under sections 112(d)(6) and 112(f)(2) of the CAA, EPA has a mandatory duty to take actions relative to the review/revision of national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (“NESHAP”) within eight years of the issuance of such standards. The proposed consent decree would resolve a deadline suit filed by Plaintiffs alleging EPA's failure to take the above actions within eight years of issuing the NESHAP for the POTW source category (40 CFR part 63, subpart VVV). The proposed consent decree establishes that EPA will propose action by December 8, 2016 and take final action by October 16, 2017. See the proposed consent decree for further details.

For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or interveners to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the terms of the decree will be affirmed.

The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2015-0430) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566-1752.

An electronic version of the public docket is available through www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select “search.”

It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, information that is claimed as confidential business information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments.

If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail (email) system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an email comment directly to the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

On October 13, 2005, the final Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR) was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 59848) and codified as part 3 of title 40 of the CFR. CROMERR establishes electronic reporting as an acceptable regulatory alternative to paper reporting and establishes requirements to assure that electronic documents are as legally dependable as their paper counterparts. Subpart D of CROMERR requires that state, tribal or local government agencies that receive, or wish to begin receiving, electronic reports under their EPA-authorized programs must apply to EPA for a revision or modification of those programs and obtain EPA approval. Subpart D provides standards for such approvals based on consideration of the electronic document receiving systems that the state, tribe, or local government will use to implement the electronic reporting. Additionally, § 3.1000(b) through (e) of 40 CFR part 3, subpart D provides special procedures for program revisions and modifications to allow electronic reporting, to be used at the option of the state, tribe or local government in place of procedures available under existing program-specific authorization regulations. An application submitted under the subpart D procedures must show that the state, tribe or local government has sufficient legal authority to implement the electronic reporting components of the programs covered by the application and will use electronic document receiving systems that meet the applicable subpart D requirements.

On January 4, 2010, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) submitted an application titled “Department of Health and Environment Enterprise System” for revisions/modifications of its EPA-authorized programs under title 40 CFR. EPA reviewed KDHE's request to revise/modify its EPA-authorized programs and, based on this review, EPA determined that the application met the standards for approval of authorized program revisions/modifications set out in 40 CFR part 3, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice of EPA's decision to approve Kansas' request to revise/modify its following EPA-authorized programs to allow electronic reporting under 40 CFR parts 51, 70-71, 122, 141, 144, 146, 257, 258, 262, 264-266, 268, 270, 403, 412, and 437, is being published in the Federal Register:

KDHE was notified of EPA's determination to approve its application with respect to the authorized programs listed above.

Also, in this notice, EPA is informing interested persons that they may request a public hearing on EPA's action to approve the State of Kansas' request to revise its authorized public water system program under 40 CFR part 142, in accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(f). Requests for a hearing must be submitted to EPA within 30 days of publication of today's Federal Register notice. Such requests should include the following information: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the individual, organization or other entity requesting a hearing;

(2) A brief statement of the requesting person's interest in EPA's determination, a brief explanation as to why EPA should hold a hearing, and any other information that the requesting person wants EPA to consider when determining whether to grant the request;

(3) The signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.

In the event a hearing is requested and granted, EPA will provide notice of the hearing in the Federal Register not less than 15 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for hearing may be denied by EPA. Following such a public hearing, EPA will review the record of the hearing and issue an order either affirming today's determination or rescinding such determination. If no timely request for a hearing is received and granted, EPA's approval of the State of Kansas' request to revise its part 142—National Primary Drinking Water Regulations Implementation program to allow electronic reporting will become effective 30 days after today's notice is published, pursuant to CROMERR section 3.1000(f)(4).

On March 12, 2015, Virginia notified EPA that Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of Federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards, as they were published in final form in the Code of Federal Regulations dated July 1, 2014. On May 7, 2015, EPA sent Virginia a letter acknowledging that Virginia now has the authority to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS as specified by Virginia in its notice to EPA, as provided for under previously approved automatic delegation mechanisms. All notifications, applications, reports and other correspondence required pursuant to the delegated NESHAP and NSPS must be submitted to both the US EPA Region III and to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, unless the delegated standard specifically provides that such submittals may be sent to EPA or a delegated State. In such cases, the submittals should be sent only to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. A copy of EPA's letter to Virginia follows:

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously delegated to the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) the authority to implement and enforce various federal National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which are found at 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63.1 In those actions, EPA also delegated to Virginia the authority to implement and enforce any future EPA NESHAP or NSPS on the condition that Virginia legally adopt the future standards, make only allowed wording changes, and provide specified notice to EPA.

In a letter dated March 12, 2015, Virginia informed EPA that Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards, as they were published in final form in the Code of Federal Regulations dated July 1, 2014. Virginia noted that its intent in updating its incorporation by reference of the NESHAP and NSPS was to retain the authority to enforce all standards included in the revisions, as per the provisions of EPA's previous delegation actions. Virginia committed to enforcing the federal standards in conformance with the terms of EPA's previous delegations of authority. Virginia made only allowed wording changes.

Virginia provided copies of its revised regulations specifying the NESHAP and NSPS which Virginia has adopted by reference. These revised regulations are entitled 9 VAC 5-50 “New and Modified Stationary Sources,” and 9 VAC 5-60 “Hazardous Air Pollutant Sources.” These revised regulations have an effective date of March 11, 2015.

Accordingly, EPA acknowledges that Virginia now has the authority, as provided for under the terms of EPA's previous delegation actions, to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS standards which Virginia has adopted by reference in Virginia's revised regulations 9 VAC 5-50 and 9 VAC 5-60, both effective on March 11, 2015.

Please note that on December 19, 2008, in Sierra Club v. EPA,2 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated certain provisions of the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 relating to exemptions for startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). On October 16, 2009, the Court issued a mandate vacating these SSM exemption provisions, which are found at 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1).

Accordingly, EPA no longer allows sources the SSM exemption as provided for in the vacated provisions at 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1), even though EPA has not yet formally removed these SSM exemption provisions from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63. Because Virginia incorporated 40 CFR part 63 by reference, Virginia should also no longer allow sources to use the former SSM exemption from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 due to the Court's ruling in Sierra Club v. EPA.

EPA appreciates Virginia's continuing NESHAP and NSPS enforcement efforts, and also Virginia's decision to take automatic delegation of additional and more recent NESHAP and NSPS by adopting them by reference.

This notice acknowledges the update of Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce NESHAP and NSPS.

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency request or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, ACL is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document. With respect to the following collection of information, ACL invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of ACL's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of ACL's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques when appropriate, and other forms of information technology. The Protection and Advocacy Voting Access Annual Narrative Report from the Protection and Advocacy Systems is required by federal statute and regulation, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), Public Law 107-252, Title II, Subtitle D, Section 291, Payments for Protection and Advocacy to Assure Access for Individuals with Disabilities (42 U.S.C. 15461). The report is provided in writing to the Administration for Community Living, Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AIDD). Each eligible Protection and Advocacy System (P&As) must prepare and submit an annual report at the end of every fiscal year by the 31st of December. The report addresses the activities conducted with the funds provided during the year. The information collected from the annual report will be aggregated into an annual profile of how the P&As have utilized the funds and review the P&As activities carried out for each of the seven mandated area. These areas include full participation in the electoral process; education, training and assistance; advocacy and education around HAVA implementation efforts; training and education of election officials, poll workers and election volunteers regarding the rights of voters with disabilities and best practices; assistance in filing complaints; assistance to State and other governmental entities regarding the physical accessibility of polling places; and obtaining training and technical assistance on voting issues. The PAVA annual narrative report will also provide an overview of the goals and accomplishments for each P&A as well as permit the Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AIDD) to track voting progress to monitor grant activities and create the bi-annual report to Congress. ACL estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows: 55 Protection and Advocacy Systems (P&A) respond annually which should be an average burden of 20 hours per State per year or a total of 1,100 hours for all states annually.

The PCPID acts in an advisory capacity to the President and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on a broad range of topics relating to programs, services and support for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The PCPID executive order stipulates that the Committee shall: (1) Provide such advice concerning intellectual disabilities as the President or the Secretary of Health and Human Services may request; and (2) provide advice to the President concerning the following for people with intellectual disabilities: (A) expansion of educational opportunities; (B) promotion of homeownership; (C) assurance of workplace integration; (D) improvement of transportation options; (E) expansion of full access to community living; and (F) increasing access to assistive and universally designed technologies.

We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “DSCSA Implementation: Product Tracing Requirements for Dispensers—Compliance Policy.” We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). We are implementing this guidance without prior public comment because we have determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate (21 CFR 10.115(g)(2)). We made this determination because this guidance document provides information pertaining to statutory requirements that take effect on July 1, 2015, regarding the provisions to provide and capture product tracing information under section 582(d)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C 360eee-1(d)(1)). It is important that FDA provide this information before that date. Although this guidance document is immediately in effect, it remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency's good guidance practices (21 CFR 10.115(g)(3)).

On November 27, 2013, the DSCSA (Title II of Pub. L. 113-54) was signed into law. Section 202 of DSCSA adds sections 581 and 582 to the FD&C Act, which set forth new definitions and requirements for the tracing of products through the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain. Starting in 2015, trading partners (manufacturers, wholesale distributors, dispensers, and repackagers) are required under sections 582(b)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1), and (e)(1) of the FD&C Act to exchange product tracing information when engaging in transactions involving certain prescription drugs. For dispensers, requirements for the tracing of products through the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain under section 582(d)(1) of the FD&C Act go into effect on July 1, 2015.

Some dispensers have expressed concern that electronic systems used to exchange, capture, and maintain product tracing information will not be operational by this effective date. Although the DSCSA allows product tracing information to be exchanged through paper in certain circumstances, FDA understands that many dispensers intend to utilize electronic systems to capture and maintain product tracing information. Thus, FDA recognizes that some dispensers may need additional time beyond July 1, 2015, to work with trading partners to ensure that the product tracing information required by section 582 is captured and maintained by dispensers. In light of these concerns, FDA does not intend to take action against dispensers who, prior to November 1, 2015: (1) Accept ownership of product without receiving product tracing information, prior to or at the time of a transaction, as required by section 582(d)(1)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act or (2) do not capture and maintain the product tracing information, as required by section 582(d)(1)(A)(iii) of the FD&C Act. This compliance policy does not extend to other requirements of the FD&C Act applicable to dispensers and other trading partners, including those in section 582, such as verification related to suspect and illegitimate product (including quarantine, investigation, notification and recordkeeping) and requirements related to engaging in transactions only with authorized trading partners. The guidance document explains the scope of the compliance policy in further detail.

The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

Interested persons may submit either electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify all comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, or http://www.regulations.gov.

Notice of these meetings is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(a)(1) and (a)(2)).

Topics of the Meeting: The Advisory Council will hear from experts on related dementias, such as Frontotemporal dementia, Lewy Body dementia, and others. Following this session, the Advisory Council will also hold a discussion of the expected bypass budget from NIA, required in the CRomnibus Bill. The Council will also discuss updates to international events on dementia.

Procedure and Agenda: This meeting is open to the public. Please allow 30 minutes to go through security and walk to the meeting room. The meeting will also be webcast at www.hhs.gov/live .

This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 23281) on April 27, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

Title: Importers of Merchandise Subject to Actual Use Provisions.

OMB Number: 1651-0032.

Abstract: In accordance with 19 CFR 10.137, importers of goods subject to the actual use provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) are required to maintain detailed records to establish that these goods were actually used as contemplated by the law, and to support the importer's claim for a free or reduced rate of duty. The importer shall maintain records of use or disposition for a period of three years from the date of liquidation of the entry, and the records shall be available at all times for examination by CBP.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 12,000.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 65 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 13,000.

This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 23282) on April 27, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

Title: Transfer of Cargo to a Container Station.

OMB Number: 1651-0096.

Abstract: Before the filing of an entry of merchandise for the purpose of breaking bulk and redelivering cargo, containerized cargo may be moved from the place of unlading or may be received directly at the container station from a bonded carrier after transportation in-bond. This also applies to loose cargo as part of containerized cargo. In accordance with 19 CFR 19.42, the container station operator may make a request for the transfer of a container to the station by submitting to CBP an abstract of the manifest for the transferred containers including the bill of lading number, marks, numbers, description of the contents and consignee.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 14,327.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 25.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 358,175.

Estimated Time per Response: 7 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 41,548.

Executive Order 13691 can be found at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/13/executive-order-promoting-private-sector-cybersecurity-information-shari.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The ICR documentation is available at http://www.reginfo.gov. Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to—

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 114(m), and 106(l) and (m), TSA has authority to enter into agreements with participants to reimburse expenses incurred by airport operators for the provision of LEOs in support of screening at airport checkpoints. Consistent with this authority, TSA created the LEO Reimbursement Program, which is run by the Office of Law Enforcement/Federal Air Marshal Service (OLE/FAMS).

TSA OLE/FAMS requires that participants in the LEO Reimbursement Program record the details of all reimbursements sought. In order to provide for the orderly tracking of reimbursements, the LEO Reimbursement Program uses TSA Form 3503, LEO Reimbursement Request which captures and tracks reimbursement information.

The LEO Reimbursement Request form is available at www.tsa.gov. Upon completion, participants submit the LEO Reimbursement Request form directly to the OLE/FAMS LEO Reimbursement Program via fax, electronic upload via scanning the document, mail, or in person. The OLE/FAMS LEO Reimbursement Program reviews all request for reimbursement forms received. Based on the prior year participation, TSA estimates that there will be 326 participant responses monthly or 3,912 yearly.

TSA estimates each respondent will spend approximately one hour to complete the request for reimbursement form, for a total annual hour burden of 3,912 hours.

The Department will submit the proposed information collection to OMB for review, .13 required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended).

This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden hours of the proposed collection of information; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

This Notice also lists the following information:

Title of Proposal: Ginnie Mae Mortgage-Backed Securities Guide 5500.3, Revision 1 (Forms and Electronic Data Submissions).

OMB Control Number, if applicable: 2503-0033.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use:Ginnie Mae's Mortgage-Backed Securities Guide 5500.3, Revision 1 (“Guide”) provides instructions and guidance to participants in the Ginnie Mae Mortgage-Backed Securities (“MBS”) programs (“Ginnie Mae I and Ginnie Mae II”). Under the Ginnie Mae I program, securities are backed by single-family or multifamily loans. Under the Ginnie Mae II pr.hgram securities are only backed by single-family loans. Both the Ginnie Mae I and II MBS are modified pass-through securities. The Ginnie Mae II multiple Issuer MBS is structured so that small issuers, who do not meet the minimum number of loans and dollar amount requirements of the Ginnie Mae I MBS, can participate in the secondary mortgage market. In addition, the Ginnie Mae II MBS permits the securitization of adjustable rate mortgages (“ARMs”).

Description of Proposed New Requirements:Due to the elimination of the application used for Fingerprint Enrollment used by Ginnie Mae issuers and document custodians to access the GinnieNET system, Ginnie Mae is revising our Appendix III-29 to include the following:

The name of the appendix will be changed to: Ginnie Mae Systems Access Appendix will have six (6) clearing defined sections. They are as follows:

The addition of the new sections and increase in Appendix III-29 is the reason for the increase of burden hours. There is no increase in burden hours with regard to Appendix III-13.

There are 15 forms and appendices in our collection which are volume driven rather than participant driven: these have increased as our portfolio has grown.

Included in the Guide are the appendices, forms, and documents necessary for Ginnie Mae to properly administer its MBS programs.

Agency form numbers, if applicable: 11700, 11701, 11702, 11704, 11705, 11706, 11707, 11708, 11709, 11709-A, 11710A, 1710-B, 1710-C, 11710D, 11710E, 11711-A, 11711-B, 11714, 11714-SN, 11720, 11715, 11732, 11785

While most of the calculations are based on number of respondents multiplied by the frequency of response, there are several items whose calculations are based on volume.

We announce the availability of our draft Polar Bear Conservation Management Plan (Polar Bear Plan). The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was listed throughout its range as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA). Because of its threatened status under the ESA, the species is also considered “depleted” under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) (MMPA). As required under the ESA section 4(f), the draft Polar Bear Plan identifies “objective, measurable” recovery criteria and site-specific recovery actions with estimated time and cost to completion for the polar bear. The Polar Bear Plan also serves as a conservation plan under the MMPA with a goal of conserving and restoring depleted marine mammals to their optimum sustainable population level, and will contribute to our international polar bear conservation efforts under the 1973 Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears (T.I.A.S. No. 8409). We request review and comment on the Polar Bear Plan from agencies, organizations, and individuals with an interest in polar bear conservation.

We listed the polar bear as threatened on May 15, 2008 (73 FR 28212). For description, taxonomy, distribution, status, breeding biology and habitat, and a summary of factors affecting the species, please see the final listing rule. Recovery of endangered or threatened animals and plants is a primary goal of our endangered species program and the ESA. To help guide the recovery effort, we prepare recovery plans for most listed species native to the United States. Further, the ESA requires that we develop recovery plans for listed species, unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a particular species, and that we provide public notice and an opportunity for public review and comment during recovery plan development. Recovery plans describe actions considered necessary for the conservation and survival of the species, establish criteria for delisting listed species, and estimate time and cost for implementing needed recovery measures.

MMPA Conservation Plans have the purpose of conserving and restoring a species or stock to its optimum sustainable population. The MMPA further provides that Conservation Plans shall be modeled on ESA recovery plans. Therefore, once finalized, the Polar Bear Plan will provide us with recommended management actions for the survival and recovery of the species, and to conserve and restore the species to its optimum sustainable population.

Polar bears evolved to utilize the Arctic sea ice niche and are distributed throughout most ice-covered seas of the United States, Canada, the Russian Federation, Norway and Greenland/Denmark (Range States), in the Northern Hemisphere (see Figure 1 of the May 15, 2008, Listing Rule; 73 FR 28216). At the time of our 2008 final listing rule, we estimated the worldwide population of polar bears to be between 20,000 and 25,000 (73 FR 28215).

At the time of the listing, we determined that ongoing and projected loss of the polar bear's crucial sea ice habitat threatens the species throughout all of its range. Productivity, abundance, and availability of ice seals, the polar bear's primary prey base, would be diminished by the projected loss of sea ice, and energetic requirements of polar bears for movement and obtaining food would increase. Access to traditional denning areas would be affected. In turn, these factors would cause declines in the condition of polar bears from nutritional stress and reduced productivity. The eventual effect of this loss of sea ice is that the polar bear population would decline. The rate and magnitude of decline would vary geographically, based on differences in the rate, timing, and magnitude of impacts. However, within the foreseeable future, the worldwide population would be affected, and the species is likely to become in danger of extinction throughout all of its range (73 FR 28292-28293). As the Service explained in its listing determination, global climate change resulting from greenhouse gas emissions is the root cause of the loss of Arctic sea ice.

The Polar Bear Plan is more broadly focused than a typical recovery or conservation plan. At its core, the Polar Bear Plan contains a set of fundamental goals reflecting shared values of its diverse stakeholders. The fundamental goals express the intentions of the Polar Bear Plan and will be used to guide management, research, monitoring, and communication. They include the goals of the MMPA and the ESA, as they relate to polar bear conservation and recovery. Beyond the statutory mandates, the fundamental goals also reflect the input and aspirations of stakeholders closely connected with polar bears and their habitat, including the State of Alaska, the North Slope Borough, Alaska Native peoples, the Polar Bear Range States, conservation groups, and the oil and gas industry. In most cases, the fundamental goals represent range-wide objectives, but the specific applications under this Polar Bear Plan pertain primarily to the polar bear subpopulations (or stocks) present in Alaska. The goals call for a focus on conservation of polar bears while recognizing values associated with subsistence take, human safety, and economic activity. The draft Polar Bear Plan also contains specific recovery criteria, expressed in demographic and threats-based terms, to determine when the polar bear should be considered for delisting under the ESA, and demographic criteria to guide satisfying the conservation goals of the MMPA.

Conservation and recovery actions are specified in the Polar Bear Plan. The single most important action for the recovery of polar bears is global reduction of atmospheric greenhouse gases, which, if achieved, should result in reduced global climate change, including Arctic warming and sea ice loss. Along with communicating that fact, the Polar Bear Plan identifies a suite of high-profile actions designed to ensure that polar bears remain in sufficient number and diversity so that they are in a position to recover once climate change is addressed. Those actions include the following:

• Limit global atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases to levels appropriate for supporting polar bear recovery and conservation, primarily by reducing greenhouse gas emissions Support international conservation efforts through the Range States relationships

• Manage human-bear conflicts

• Collaboratively manage subsistence harvest

• Protect denning habitat

• Minimize risks of contamination from spills

• Conduct strategic monitoring and research

The full cost of implementing this Polar Bear Plan over the next 5 years is approximately $12,921,200.

We request written comments on the draft Polar Bear Plan. All comments received by the date specified in DATES will be considered prior to finalization of the Polar Bear Plan. If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials concerning this Plan by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES.

Comments and materials received, as well as supporting documentation used in preparation of the recovery plan, will be available for inspection, during normal business hours at the Service's Anchorage office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

This draft Polar Bear Plan represents the views and interpretations of the Service regarding the conservation and recovery of the polar bear only. The Service's approach set forth in this draft Polar Bear Plan does not necessarily preclude other approaches in developing ESA recovery plans or MMPA conservation plans. We seek comments from the public regarding viable alternatives for plans involving ice-dependent species and will consider all comments prior to finalizing this plan.

In addition, we specifically seek comments on the following:

(1) The scope and description of the six fundamental goals.

(2) The suitability and feasibility of the MMPA demographic criteria related to human-caused removals and to the health of the marine ecosystem of which polar bears are part.

(3) The suitability and feasibility of the ESA fundamental, demographic, and threats-based recovery criteria.

(4) The use of ecoregions as recovery units to represent the genetic, behavioral, life-history, and ecological diversity of the species.

(5) The conservation strategy and specific suite of high-priority conservation and recovery actions.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

We developed our draft recovery plan under the authority of ESA section 4(f), 16 U.S.C. 1533(f), as well as section 115(b) of the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1383b(b). We publish this notice under ESA section 4(f) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) and OMB regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 provide that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond. In order to obtain and renew an OMB control number, Federal agencies are required to seek public comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d) and 1320.12(a)).

As required at 5 CFR 1320.8(d), the BLM published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register on December 24, 2014 (79 FR 77523), and the comment period ended February 23, 2015. The BLM received one comment in response to the notice, from DJ Environmental, Inc.

The commenter expressed confusion owing to the lack of a specific proposal in the notice, and asked if the notice is a simple matter of continuing a geophysical Notice of Intent as currently written. The BLM responded to the commenter via email, explaining that the notice pertains to a collection of information defined in the PRA, the BLM is planning to seek renewal of control number 1004-0162, and the notice is the first step in the renewal process. The collection of information was not modified in response to this comment.

During the approval period, the BLM consulted with several respondents via email, to solicit comments on the burden hours and cost estimates, availability of data, frequency of collection, and clarity of instructions. Two respondents provided feedback.

One respondent suggested limiting the scope of what is reported on item 5, page 1 of the Notice of Completion form, to places where surface disturbance has not been reclaimed and to show those areas on a U.S. Geological Survey topographic map. At present, that item reads, “Describe any surface disturbance and how you reclaimed it.” In response to the respondent's comment, the BLM decided to change this item to “Describe any surface disturbance, its location, and how you reclaimed it.” The BLM needs this description in order to locate all disturbed areas and ensure that reclamation is completed adequately.

Both respondents addressed items on the Notice of Intent form. One respondent requested better guidance on what is needed for “Describe the survey type” and better definition for “Describe the survey method.” The other respondent suggested changing “Describe the survey type” to seismic type, and the “Describe the survey method” to seismic method. This respondent also suggested that item 1 include geographic information system (GIS) shape files, and that item 4 should ask when the starting date will be for the casual use survey, as well as for exploration.

Item 1 of the Notice of Intent form already requires submission of GIS data in a format that is useful for the BLM and will not be modified to include GIS shape files. However, item 1 will be changed to “A separate Plan of Operations is attached addressing items 1-5 below, in order to improve the clarity of the instruction.” The BLM will leave item 4 the same since it is common for the casual use surveys to be started and completed as soon as possible. The BLM's main concern is when the equipment will be on location. Regarding the survey type and method, the BLM will not make the requested change. Seismic is a type of survey or method, in addition to other types of surveys or methods used, for example, electromagnetic.

The BLM now requests comments on the following subjects:

1. Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper functioning of the BLM, including whether the information will have practical utility;

2. The accuracy of the BLM's estimate of the burden of collecting the information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

3. The quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and

4. How to minimize the information collection burden on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other forms of information technology.

Please send comments as directed under ADDRESSES and DATES. Please refer to OMB control number 1004-0162 in your correspondence. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The following information pertains to this request:

Title: Onshore Oil and Gas Geophysical Exploration (43 CFR Part 3150 and 36 CFR Parts 228 and 251).

Forms: BLM Form 3150-4/FS Form 2800-16, Notice of Intent and Authorization to Conduct Oil and Gas Geophysical Exploration Operations; and

BLM Form 3150-5/FS Form 2800-16a, Notice of Completion of Oil and Gas Geophysical Exploration Operations.

OMB Control Number: 1004-0162.

Abstract: Respondents supply information that enables the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) to ensure that geophysical exploration is conducted in a manner consistent with applicable statutes, regulations, land use plans, and environmental documents.

Frequency: On occasion.

Description of Respondents: 100 entities undertaking oil and gas geophysical exploration, i.e., activity relating to the search for evidence of oil and gas on lands managed by the BLM and the FS.

Estimated Number of Responses Annually: 100.

Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Hour” Burden Annually: 65.

Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Non-Hour Cost” Burden Annually: $25.

The following table details the individual components and respective hour burdens of this information collection request:

The Commission was reestablished pursuant to Public Law 87-126, as amended by Public Law 105-280. The purpose of the Commission is to consult with the Secretary of the Interior, or her designee, with respect to matters relating to the development of Cape Cod National Seashore, and with respect to carrying out the provisions of sections 4 and 5 of the Act establishing the Seashore.

Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

SRC meetings are open to the public and will have time allocated for public testimony. The public is welcome to present written or oral comments to the SRC. SRC meetings will be recorded and meeting minutes will be available upon request from the Superintendent for public inspection approximately six weeks after the meeting. Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The meeting is open to the public. Interested persons may make oral/written presentations to the Commission or file written statements. Such requests should be made to the Superintendent at least seven days prior to the meeting. Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The Preserve staff reviewed the Primary Eligibility Criteria in Section 6.2.1.1 of the NPS Management Policies 2006 to evaluate the Preserve's wilderness eligibility. This wilderness eligibility assessment was prepared in support of the Preserve's Backcountry Access Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. More detailed analysis and intensive review of the eligibility of these lands will be carried out through a formal wilderness study in the context of the BAP/EIS. According to NPS Director's Order 41, the completed wilderness study may result in revised eligibility determinations for lands within the original Preserve as well as the identification of a need to re-assess adjacent areas added to the Preserve in 1988.

Public notices announcing the Preserve's intention to conduct this eligibility assessment were published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2014, and through a press release sent to local media outlets on September 12, 2014.

The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-11) of March 30, 2009, designated the Virgin Wild and Scenic River, to be administered by the Secretary of Interior. As specified by law (16 U.S.C. 1274(b)), the boundary becomes effective 90 days after the boundary amendments are forwarded to Congress. Since the boundary amendments were forwarded on July 28, 2014, the boundaries became effective on October 26, 2014.

Additional portions of the Virgin Wild and Scenic River are managed by the Bureau of Land Management. In accordance with national BLM policies outlined in BLM's Manual 6120, section .12, Congressionally Required Maps and Legal Boundary Descriptions for NLCS Designations requires that legal boundary description must be developed in conformance with BLM's Manual of Surveying Instructions, 2009 and be finalized by the State Office Chief Cadastral Surveyor. Utah BLM will prepare these maps and legal boundary descriptions specific to the BLM segments of the Virgin River. Utah BLM will submit them to Congress as an amended submittal and to the Eastern States Office (in accordance with Manual 6120) at a later date.

The Commission instituted Investigation No. 337-TA-928, Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”), on September 2, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Valeo North America, Inc. of Troy, MI, and Delmex de Juarez S. de R.L. de C.V. of Mexico (collectively, “Valeo”). The complaint alleges a violation of section 337 by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,891,044 (“the `044 patent”); 7,937,798 (“the `798 patent”); and 8,220,106 by Federal-Mogul Corp. of Southfield, Michigan; Federal-Mogul Vehicle Component Solutions, Inc. of Southfield, Michigan; and Federal-Mogul S.A. of Aubange, Belgium (collectively, “Federal-Mogul”). 79 FR 52041-42 (Sep. 2, 2014).

On November 21, 2014, the Commission instituted Investigation No. 337-TA-937, Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof, based on a separate complaint filed by Valeo. The complaint alleges a violation of section 337 by reason of infringement of certain claims of the `044 patent and the `798 patent by Trico Products Corporation of Rochester Hills, Michigan, Trico Products of Brownsville, Texas; and Trico Componentes SA de CV of Tamaulipas, Mexico. 79 FR 69525-26 (Nov. 21, 2014).

On December 9, 2014, the ALJ consolidated Investigation Nos. 337-TA-928 and 337-TA-937. See ALJ Order No. 8 in the investigation 337-TA-928. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations does not participate as a party in these consolidated investigations.

On May 19, 2015, complainants Valeo and respondents Federal-Mogul, inter alia, filed a joint motion pursuant to 19 CFR 210.21(a)(2) and (b) to terminate by settlement the Federal-Mogul respondents. No responses were filed.

On June 5, 2015, the ALJ issued Order No. 24 in which he, inter alia, granted the joint motion to terminate the investigation as to respondents Federal-Mogul based on a settlement agreement. This portion of Order No. 24 represents the subject ID. The ALJ found that the joint motion complies with the Commission Rules, and that termination of the investigation as to Federal-Mogul is in the public interest and will conserve public and private resources. No party petitioned for review of Order No. 24, and the Commission has determined not to review it.

The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

Background. On June 5, 2015, the Commission determined that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (80 FR 11221, March 2, 2015) of the subject five-year reviews was adequate and that the respondent interested party group response was inadequate. The Commission did not find any other circumstances that would warrant conducting full reviews.1 Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would conduct expedited reviews pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)).

For further information concerning the conduct of these reviews and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).

Staff report. A staff report containing information concerning the subject matter of these reviews was placed in the nonpublic record on June 19, 2015, and made available to persons on the Administrative Protective Order service list for these reviews. A public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.62(d)(4) of the Commission's rules.

Written submissions. As provided in section 207.62(d) of the Commission's rules, interested parties that are parties to these reviews and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of institution,2 and any party other than an interested party to these reviews may file written comments with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in these reviews. Comments are due on or before July 6, 2015 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to these five-year reviews nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the reviews by July 6, 2015. However, should the Department of Commerce extend the time limit for its completion of the final results of its reviews, the deadline for comments (which may not contain new factual information) on Commerce's final results is three business days after the issuance of Commerce's results. If comments contain business proprietary information (BPI), they must conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. Please be aware that the Commission's rules with respect to filing have changed. The most recent amendments took effect on July 25, 2014. See 79 FR 35920 (June 25, 2014), and the revised Commission Handbook on E-filing, available from the Commission's Web site at http://edis.usitc.gov.

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.

Determination. The Commission has determined these reviews are extraordinarily complicated and therefore has determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B).

By notice dated February 11, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on February 19, 2015, 80 FR 8901, Johnson Matthey, Inc., Custom Pharmaceuticals Department, 2003 Nolte Drive, West Deptford, New Jersey 08066-1742 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.

The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Johnson Matthey, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed:

The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for sale to its customers.

The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on March 3, 2015, United States Pharmacopeial Convention, 12601 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville, Maryland 20852 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

The company plans to import the listed controlled substances in bulk powder form from foreign sources for the manufacture of analytical reference standards for sale to their customers.

The company plans to import analytical reference standards for distribution to its customers for research and analytical purposes. Placement of these drug codes onto the company's registration does not translate into automatic approval of subsequent permit applications to import controlled substances. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under to 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

By notice dated January 9, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2015, 80 FR 3979, Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc., 30 North Jefferson Road, Whippany, New Jersey 07981 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted to this notice.

The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances:

The company plans to manufacture Hydromorphone HCL for sale to other manufacturers and to manufacture other controlled substances for distribution to its customers. Dihydromorphine is an intermediate in the manufacture of Hydromorphone and is not for commercial distribution.

The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on January 12, 2015, Kremers Urban Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1101 C Avenue West, Seymour, Indiana 47274 applied to be registered as an importer of methylphenidate (1724), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.

The company plans to import the listed substances in finished dosage form (FDF) from foreign sources for analytical testing and clinical trials in which the foreign FDF will be compared to the company's own domestically-manufactured FDF. This analysis is required to allow the company to export domestically-manufactured FDF to foreign markets.

The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on March 20, 2015, AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC, Highway 50 and Hazel Avenue, Building 05001, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

The company is a contract manufacturer. In reference to Poppy Straw Concentrate the company will manufacture thebaine intermediates for sale to its customers for further manufacture. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration.

By notice dated January 21, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on January 28, 2015, 80 FR 4593, Rhodes Technologies, 498 Washington Street, Coventry, Rhode Island 02816 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. One objection was received on March 27, 2015. However, after a thorough review of this matter, the Drug Enforcement Administration has concluded that the issues raised in the objection do not warrant the denial of this application.

The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Rhodes Technologies to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances:

The company plans to manufacture the above-listed controlled substances in bulk for conversion and sale to dosage form manufacturers.

In reference to drug code 7370, the company plans to bulk manufacture a synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration.

The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on March 31, 2014, Lipomed, Inc., One Broadway, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

By notice dated January 9, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2015, 80 FR 3978, Euticals, Inc., 2460 W. Bennett Street, Springfield, Missouri 65807-1229 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted to this notice.

The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Euticals, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances:

The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution and sale to its customers.

In reference to Amphetamine (1100), the company plans to acquire the listed controlled substance in bulk from a domestic source in order to manufacture other controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers.

The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on February 4, 2015, Navinta, LLC, 1499 Lower Ferry Road, Ewing, New Jersey 08618-1414 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

The company plans initially to manufacture API quantities of the listed controlled substances for validation purposes and FDA approval, then eventually upon FDA approval to produce commercial size batches for distribution to dosage form manufacturers.