Federal Register Vol. 80, No.139,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 139 (July 21, 2015)

Page Range43007-43297
FR Document

80_FR_139
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 43297 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to the Former Liberian Regime of Charles TaylorPDF
80 FR 43140 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
80 FR 43012 - Policy Regarding Living History Flight Experience Exemptions for Passenger Carrying Operations Conducted for Compensation and Hire in Other Than Standard Category AircraftPDF
80 FR 43089 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
80 FR 43051 - Availability of the Final Environmental Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact for the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service Brooksville, Florida Land Transfer to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical UniversityPDF
80 FR 43114 - Omaha Tribe of Nebraska-Amendment to Alcoholic Beverage Control OrdinancePDF
80 FR 43122 - Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency MeetingPDF
80 FR 43112 - Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) Liquor Control Ordinance 14-01PDF
80 FR 43110 - Pueblo of San Ildefonso-Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015PDF
80 FR 43116 - Final Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project; Record of Decision.PDF
80 FR 43292 - Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health; Request for NominationsPDF
80 FR 43292 - Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health; Notice of Advisory Board EstablishmentPDF
80 FR 43100 - Request for Public Comment; 60-Day Proposed Information Collection; Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions (OMB NO. 0917-0028)PDF
80 FR 43114 - Notice of Extension of Concession ContractsPDF
80 FR 43107 - Announcement of Funding Awards Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security Grants Fiscal Year 2015PDF
80 FR 43107 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Pay for Success Demonstration ApplicationPDF
80 FR 43061 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 127-West Columbia, South Carolina; Authorization of Production Activity; Isola USA Corporation; (Dielectric Prepreg and Copper-Clad Laminate); Ridgeway, South CarolinaPDF
80 FR 43086 - FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 43088 - Delegation of Authority To Implement and Enforce Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations to the Maryland Department of the EnvironmentPDF
80 FR 43085 - Notification of a Public Teleconference of the Chartered Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary NAAQS Review PanelPDF
80 FR 43123 - Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; Before Administrative Judges: Michael M. Gibson, Chair; Dr. Richard E. Wardwell; Brian K. Hajek; Alan S. Rosenthal (Special Assistant to the Board); In the Matter of Crow Butte Resources, INC.; (License Renewal for the In Situ Leach Facility, Crawford, Nebraska); Notice (Regarding Weapons at Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Proceeding)PDF
80 FR 43007 - Emerald Ash Borer; Quarantined AreasPDF
80 FR 43064 - Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014PDF
80 FR 43053 - Monsanto Co.; Availability of Preliminary Plant Pest Risk Assessment and Draft Environmental Assessment of Maize Genetically Engineered for Increased Ear BiomassPDF
80 FR 43072 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43015 - Safety Zone; Maritime Museum Party, San Diego Bay; San Diego, CAPDF
80 FR 43009 - Khapra Beetle; New Regulated Countries and Regulated ArticlesPDF
80 FR 43055 - Notice of Affirmation of Addition of a Treatment Schedule for Methyl Bromide Fumigation of FigsPDF
80 FR 43052 - Notice of Affirmation; New and Revised Treatments for Various Plant CommoditiesPDF
80 FR 43065 - Certain Preserved Mushrooms from India: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015PDF
80 FR 43089 - Labor-Management Relations Information Collection RequestsPDF
80 FR 43063 - Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty OrderPDF
80 FR 43109 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments on the National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding ProgramPDF
80 FR 43062 - Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review; 2014-2015PDF
80 FR 43090 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
80 FR 43121 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Tax Performance SystemPDF
80 FR 43120 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Round Four EvaluationPDF
80 FR 43072 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory NotePDF
80 FR 43158 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
80 FR 43136 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 43017 - Automatic Docket Closure ProceduresPDF
80 FR 43091 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43158 - U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors MeetingPDF
80 FR 43102 - Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used in Calculating Interest on Overdue Accounts and Refunds on Customs DutiesPDF
80 FR 43105 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary ImportationPDF
80 FR 43102 - Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 43061 - Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 43104 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessels and Certificate of UsePDF
80 FR 43104 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Screening Requirements for CarriersPDF
80 FR 43061 - Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 43078 - Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 43085 - TransSource, LLC v. The PJM Interconnection, LLC; Notice of Supplemented ComplaintPDF
80 FR 43080 - Northern Indiana Public Service Company v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 43080 - UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of ApplicationPDF
80 FR 43096 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Restaurant Facility TypesPDF
80 FR 43078 - City Water and Light Plant of the City of Jonesboro; Notice of FilingPDF
80 FR 43084 - Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 43074 - Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Chicago Market Expansion Project, and Request for Comments on Environmental IssuesPDF
80 FR 43076 - Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Supplemental Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed White Oak Mainline Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental IssuesPDF
80 FR 43077 - Sky River Asset Holdings, LLC; Supplemental Notice that Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 43084 - Milo Wind Project, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 43033 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Regulatory Amendment 20PDF
80 FR 43093 - Medical Device Patient Labeling; Request for Comments; Public WorkshopPDF
80 FR 43081 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
80 FR 43083 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 Take Notice That the Commission Received the Following Electric Corporate Filings:PDF
80 FR 43057 - Notice of Proposed Changes to the National Handbook of Conservation Practices for the Natural Resources Conservation ServicePDF
80 FR 43052 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43095 - Cooperative Agreement for Research, Education, and Outreach in Support of the Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization ActPDF
80 FR 43093 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43090 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
80 FR 43159 - Proposed Information Collection: Evaluation of the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health ServicesPDF
80 FR 43073 - Siting Renewables, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
80 FR 43078 - Northwest Pipeline, LLC: Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kalama Lateral ProjectPDF
80 FR 43079 - Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Informal Settlement ConferencePDF
80 FR 43082 - Ocean Renewable Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
80 FR 43073 - Century Marketer LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 43060 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Mississippi Advisory Committee to Vote on Its Advisory Memorandum on the Civil Rights Concerns Relating to Distribution of Federal Child Care Subsidies in MississippiPDF
80 FR 43135 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 43134 - Rate Adjustment ProductPDF
80 FR 43119 - Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From China and India; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year ReviewsPDF
80 FR 43137 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and Order Approving on an Accelerated Basis a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3, To List and Trade Shares of the SPDR® SSgA Flexible Allocation ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600PDF
80 FR 43148 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Consisting of an Amendment to MSRB Rule G-45, on Reporting of Information on Municipal Fund SecuritiesPDF
80 FR 43046 - Pacific Island Fisheries; 2015 Annual Catch Limits and Accountability MeasuresPDF
80 FR 43099 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Public Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43068 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 43106 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Petition for Alien Fiancé (e), Form I-129F; Revision of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
80 FR 43068 - 36(b)(1) Arms Sales NotificationPDF
80 FR 43118 - Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam; Notice of Commission Determination To Conduct Full Five-Year ReviewsPDF
80 FR 43156 - African Growth and Opportunity Act: Notice of Initiation of an Out-of-Cycle Review of South Africa Eligibility for Benefits; Scheduling of Hearing, and Request for Public CommentsPDF
80 FR 43115 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
80 FR 43056 - Kootenai National Forest; Lincoln and Sanders Counties; Montana; Kootenai National Forest Young Growth Environmental Impact StatementPDF
80 FR 43065 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Alaska Recreational Charter Vessel Guide and Owner Data CollectionPDF
80 FR 43122 - Information Collection: NRC FORM 171, “DUPLICATION REQUEST”PDF
80 FR 43067 - Intent To Grant an Exclusive License of U.S. Government-Owned PatentsPDF
80 FR 43058 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Missouri Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Hear Testimony Regarding Police and Community Interaction in MissouriPDF
80 FR 43141 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Extending the Pilot Period Applicable to the Customer Best Execution Auction per Rule 971.1NY Until July 18, 2016PDF
80 FR 43150 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Rules 11.6, 11.8, 11.9, 11.10 and 11.11 of EDGA Exchange, Inc.PDF
80 FR 43143 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify NASDAQ Rule 7018 Governing Fees and Credits Assessed for Execution and RoutingPDF
80 FR 43151 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Rules 11.6, 11.8, 11.9, 11.10 and 11.11 of EDGX Exchange, Inc.PDF
80 FR 43146 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Provide for the Clearance of Additional Western European Sovereign Single NamesPDF
80 FR 43151 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Customer Rebate Program, Multiply Listed Options, and Singly-Listed OptionsPDF
80 FR 43101 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 43101 - National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 43066 - Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
80 FR 43059 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Washington Advisory Committee for the Purpose of Hearing Testimony on School IntegrationPDF
80 FR 43060 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 43059 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 43118 - Crepe Paper From China; Scheduling of an Expedited Five-Year ReviewPDF
80 FR 43266 - Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early-Season Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations; Notice of MeetingsPDF
80 FR 43031 - NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 43011 - Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan EnginesPDF
80 FR 43159 - Debt Management Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
80 FR 43123 - Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards ConsiderationsPDF
80 FR 43040 - Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida; Secretary's Decision and Referendum Order on Proposed Amendments to Marketing Order No. 905PDF
80 FR 43019 - Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2015PDF
80 FR 43162 - Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat PumpsPDF
80 FR 43216 - Loans in Areas Having Special Flood HazardsPDF

Issue

80 139 Tuesday, July 21, 2015 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Marketing Orders: Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida, 43040-43046 2015-17588 Agricultural Research Agricultural Research Service NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Agricultural Research Service, Brooksville, FL, Land Transfer to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, 43051-43052 2015-17912 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Agricultural Research Service

See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Forest Service

See

Natural Resources Conservation Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43052 2015-17796
Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES New Regulated Countries and Regulated Articles: Khapra Beetle, 43009-43011 2015-17842 Quarantined Areas: Emerald Ash Borer, 43007-43009 2015-17847 NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Monsanto Co.; Maize Genetically Engineered for Increased Ear Biomass, 43053-43055 2015-17845 Guidance: New and Revised Treatments for Various Plant Commodities, 43052-43053 2015-17840 Treatment Schedule for Methyl Bromide Fumigation of Figs, 43055-43056 2015-17841 Army Army Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43068 2015-17776 Exclusive Licenses of U.S. Government-Owned Patents, 43067 2015-17761 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43090-43091 2015-17792 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43091-43093 2015-17824 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43093 2015-17793 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Mississippi Advisory Committee, 43060-43061 2015-17785 Missouri Advisory Committee, 43058-43059 2015-17760 Vermont Advisory Committee, 43059-43060 2015-17745 2015-17746 Washington Advisory Committee, 43059-43060 2015-17747 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Maritime Museum Party, San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA, 43015-43017 2015-17843 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency RULES Loans in Areas Having Special Flood Hazards, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Defense Department Defense Department See

Army Department

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43072 2015-17844 Arms Sales, 43068-43072 2015-17774
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note, 43072-43073 2015-17829 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

RULES Energy Conservation Programs: Standards for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, 43162-43213 2015-16897
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES Delegation of Authority to Implement and Enforce Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations to the Maryland Department of the Environment, 43088-43089 2015-17850 Meetings: Chartered Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee and the CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary NAAQS Review Panel, 43085-43086 2015-17849 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel, 43086-43088 2015-17854 Farm Credit Farm Credit Administration RULES Loans in Areas Having Special Flood Hazards, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Pratt and Whitney Turbofan Engines, 43011-43012 2015-17710 Policy Regarding Living History Flight Experience Exemptions for Passenger Carrying Operations Conducted for Compensation and Hire in Other Than Standard Category Aircraft, 43012-43015 2015-17966 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2015, 43019-43031 2015-17288 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Loans in Areas Having Special Flood Hazards, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43089 2015-17957 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Siting Renewables, LLC, 43073-43074 2015-17790 UGI Sunbury, LLC, 43080-43081 2015-17810 Combined Filings, 43081-43084 2015-17798 2015-17799 Complaints: Northern Indiana Public Service Co. v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, LLC, 43080 2015-17811 TransSource, LLC v. The PJM Interconnection, LLC, 43085 2015-17812 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Eastern Shore Natural Gas Co.; Proposed White Oak Mainline Expansion Project, 43076-43077 2015-17805 Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC; Chicago Market Expansion Project, 43074-43076 2015-17806 Northwest Pipeline, LLC: Proposed Kalama Lateral Project, 43078-43079 2015-17789 Filings: City Water and Light Plant of the City of Jonesboro, 43078 2015-17808 Hydroelectric Applications: Ocean Renewable Power Co., 43082-43083 2015-17787 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Century Marketer LLC, 43073 2015-17786 Milo Wind Project, LLC, 43084 2015-17803 Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC, 43084-43085 2015-17807 Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC, 43078 2015-17813 Sky River Asset Holdings, LLC, 43077-43078 2015-17804 Meetings: Florida Gas Transmission Co., LLC; Informal Settlement Conferences, 43079 2015-17788 Federal Mediation Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Labor-Management Relations, 43089-43090 2015-17837 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Petitions for Waiver of Compliance, 43158 2015-17827 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Loans in Areas Having Special Flood Hazards, 43216-43263 2015-15956 NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 43090 2015-17833 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed Frameworks for Early Season Migratory Bird Hunting; Meetings, 43266-43290 2015-17718 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Restaurant Facility Types, 43096-43099 2015-17809 Cooperative Agreements: Research, Education, and Outreach in Support of the Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act, 43095-43096 2015-17795 Meetings: Medical Device Patient Labeling; Public Workshops, 43093-43095 2015-17800 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Production Activities: Isola USA Corp., Foreign-Trade Zone 127, West Columbia, SC, 43061 2015-17855 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Kootenai National Forest Young Growth; Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln and Sanders Counties, MT, 43056-43057 2015-17770 Geological Geological Survey NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program, 43109-43110 2015-17835 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Indian Health Service

See

National Institutes of Health

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43099-43100 2015-17777
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Pay for Success Demonstration Application, 43107 2015-17861 Funding Awards: Fiscal Year 2015 Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security Grants, 43107-43109 2015-17863 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinances: Omaha Tribe of Nebraska; Amendments, 43114 2015-17906 Liquor Control Act: Pueblo of San Ildefonso, 43110-43112 2015-17887 Liquor Control Ordinances: Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah), 43112-43114 2015-17903 Indian Health Indian Health Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions, 43100-43101 2015-17872 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee, 43061-43062 2015-17817 Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee, 43061 2015-17814 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Geological Survey

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China, 43062-43063 2015-17834 Large Residential Washers from the Republic of Korea, 43064 2015-17846 Preserved Mushrooms from India, 43065 2015-17839 Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand from the People's Republic of China, 43063-43064 2015-17836 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from China and India; Five-Year Reviews, 43119-43120 2015-17781 Crepe Paper from China; Expedited Five-Year Review, 43118 2015-17741 Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam; Full Five-year Reviews, 43118-43119 2015-17773 Labor Department Labor Department See

Workers Compensation Programs Office

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Tax Performance System, 43121-43122 2015-17831 Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Round Four Evaluation, 43120-43121 2015-17830
Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Meetings: U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors, 43158-43159 2015-17821 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Correction, 43031-43033 2015-17717 National Credit National Credit Union Administration RULES Loans in Areas Having Special Flood Hazards, 43216-43263 2015-15956 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43122 2015-17905 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: National Institute on Aging, 43101 2015-17752 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 2015-17750 43101-43102 2015-17751 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Regulatory Amendment 20, 43033-43039 2015-17801 PROPOSED RULES Pacific Island Fisheries: 2015 Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures, 43046-43050 2015-17778 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Alaska Recreational Charter Vessel Guide and Owner Data Collection, 43065-43066 2015-17768 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Concession Contracts; Extensions, 43114-43115 2015-17871 National Register of Historic Places: Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 43115-43116 2015-17771 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Meetings: Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, 43066-43067 2015-17748 National Resources Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Guidance: National Handbook of Conservation Practices; Proposed Changes, 43057-43058 2015-17797 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Duplication Request, 43122-43123 2015-17765 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Proceeding: Crow Butte Resources, Inc., 43123 2015-17848 Facility Operating and Combined Licenses: Applications and Amendments Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations, etc., 43123-43134 2015-17651 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission RULES Automatic Docket Closure Procedures, 43017-43019 2015-17825 NOTICES New Postal Products, 43135-43136 2015-17826 2015-17783 2015-17784 Rate Adjustment Products, 43134-43135 2015-17782 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Liberia, Former Regime of Charles Taylor; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of July 17, 2015), 43295-43297 2015-18044 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43140-43141 2015-17970 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: EDGA Exchange, Inc., 43150-43151 2015-17758 EDGX Exchange, Inc., 43151 2015-17756 ICE Clear Credit LLC, 43146-43148 2015-17755 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 43148-43150 2015-17779 NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, 43151-43156 2015-17754 NYSE Arca, Inc., 43137-43140 2015-17780 NYSE MKT LLC, 43141-43143 2015-17759 The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 43143-43146 2015-17757 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, 43102 2015-17818 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Record of Decision: Final Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project, 43116-43118 2015-17881 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES African Growth and Opportunity Act: Out-of-Cycle Review of South Africa Eligibility for Benefits; Hearings, 43156-43157 2015-17772 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Maritime Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

NOTICES Meetings: Debt Management Advisory Committee, 43159 2015-17680
U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Petition for Alien Fiance(e), 43106-43107 2015-17775 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary Importation, 43105-43106 2015-17819 Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessels and Certificate of Use, 43104-43105 2015-17816 Screening Requirements for Carriers, 43104 2015-17815 Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used in Calculating Interest on Overdue Accounts and Refunds on Customs Duties, 43102-43104 2015-17820 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Evaluation of the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Services, 43159-43160 2015-17791 Workers' Workers Compensation Programs Office NOTICES Advisory Board Establishment: Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health, 43292 2015-17877 Requests for Nominations: Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health, 43292-43293 2015-17879 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Energy Department, 43162-43213 2015-16897 Part III Farm Credit Administration, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Federal Reserve System, 43216-43263 2015-15956 National Credit Union Administration, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Treasury Department, Comptroller of the Currency, 43216-43263 2015-15956 Part IV Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 43266-43290 2015-17718 Part V Labor Department, Workers Compensation Programs Office, 2015-17877 43292-43293 2015-17879 Part VI Presidential Documents, 43295-43297 2015-18044 Reader Aids

Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.thefederalregister.org and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.

80 139 Tuesday, July 21, 2015 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 301 [Docket No. APHIS-2015-0028] Emerald Ash Borer; Quarantined Areas AGENCY:

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Interim rule and request for comments.

SUMMARY:

We are amending the emerald ash borer regulations by adding areas in the States of Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia to the list of quarantined areas. In addition, we are adding the States of Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia in their entirety to the list of quarantined areas. This action is necessary to prevent the spread of emerald ash borer into noninfested areas of the United States.

DATES:

This interim rule is effective July 21, 2015. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before September 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0028.

Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2015-0028, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0028 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Paul Chaloux, National Policy Manager, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2064.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

Emerald ash borer (EAB), Agrilus planipennis, is an invasive wood-boring beetle from Asia threatening the ash trees (Fraxinus spp.) of the United States. EAB larvae feed on ash phloem, cutting off the movement of resources within the tree and killing the tree within 4 to 5 years. EAB is able to attack and kill healthy trees in both natural and urban environments and is well suited for climate conditions in the continental United States.

The regulations in “Subpart Emerald Ash Borer” (7 CFR 301.53-1 through 301.53-9, referred to below as the regulations) restrict the interstate movement of certain regulated articles from quarantined areas in order to prevent the spread of EAB into noninfested areas of the United States.

The regulations in § 301.53-3 provide that the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will list as a quarantined area each State, or each portion of a State, in which EAB is present, or that the Administrator considers necessary to regulate because of its inseparability for quarantine enforcement purposes from localities in which EAB has been found. The regulations further provide that less than an entire State will be designated as a quarantined area only if the Administrator determines that:

• The State has adopted and is enforcing a quarantined area and regulations that impose restrictions on the intrastate movement of regulated articles that are equivalent to those imposed by the regulations on the interstate movement of those articles; and

• The designation of less than the entire State as a quarantined area will otherwise be adequate to prevent the artificial interstate spread of EAB.

Based on these criteria, APHIS issues Federal Orders to immediately restrict the interstate movement of regulated articles for EAB from areas designated as quarantined areas. After a Federal Order is issued, APHIS publishes a document in the Federal Register to update the regulations to reflect the changes made by the Federal Order. The last update to the regulations was published in May 2010. Since then, APHIS has issued several Federal Orders for EAB that designate areas in the States of Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia to the list of quarantined areas and the States of Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia in their entirety as quarantined areas.1 As a result, our regulations have become outdated.

1 To review the Federal Orders issued for EAB, go to http://www.aphis.usda.gov/planthealth/eab_quarantine.

Therefore, in accordance with the criteria described above, we are amending § 301.53-3 by adding areas in the States of Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia and the States of Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia in their entirety to the list of quarantined areas for EAB. As a result of this rule, the interstate movement of regulated articles from these areas will be restricted. A full list of the areas we are adding to the regulations is provided in the regulatory text at the end of this document.

Emergency Action

The rulemaking is necessary on an emergency basis to prevent the spread of EAB to noninfested areas of the United States. Under these circumstances, the Administrator has determined that prior notice and opportunity for public comment are contrary to the public interest and that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

We will consider comments we receive during the comment period for this interim rule (see DATES above). After the comment period closes, we will publish another document in the Federal Register. The document will include a discussion of any comments we receive and any amendments we are making to the rule.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

This interim rule is subject to Executive Order 12866. However, for this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review under Executive Order 12866.

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, we have performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, which is summarized below, regarding the economic effects of this rule on small entities. The full analysis may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov) or obtained from the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

The States added, either partially or entirely, to the list of EAB regulated areas include about 51 percent of U.S. sawmills, 46 percent of wood container and pallet manufacturing establishments, 53 percent of landscaping services, 36 percent of nursery and garden centers, 34 percent of recreational vehicles parks and campgrounds, 37 percent of logging operations, and 36 percent of forest nurseries.

Based on our review of available information, APHIS does not expect the interim rule to have a significant economic impact on small entities. Affected industries in the quarantined areas we are adding to the regulations are already operating under EAB quarantine restrictions imposed by Federal Orders. In the absence of significant economic impacts, we have not identified alternatives that would minimize such impacts.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This interim rule contains no information collection or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Accordingly, we are amending 7 CFR part 301 as follows:

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES 1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

Section 301.75-15 issued under Sec. 204, Title II, Public Law 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501A-293; sections 301.75-15 and 301.75-16 issued under Sec. 203, Title II, Public Law 106-224, 114 Stat. 400 (7 U.S.C. 1421 note).

2. Section 301.53-3, paragraph (c) is amended as follows: a. In the entries for Maryland, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, by adding new counties in alphabetical order. b. By revising the entries for Kentucky, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. c. By adding, in alphabetical order, entries for Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 301.53-3 Quarantined areas.

(c) * * *

Arkansas

Ashley County. The entire county.

Bradley County. The entire county.

Calhoun County. The entire county.

Clark County. The entire county.

Cleveland County. The entire county.

Columbia County. The entire county.

Dallas County. The entire county.

Drew County. The entire county.

Garland County. The entire county.

Grant County. The entire county.

Hempstead County. The entire county.

Hot Spring County. The entire county.

Howard County. The entire county.

Jefferson County. The entire county.

Lafayette County. The entire county.

Lincoln County. The entire county.

Little River County. The entire county.

Miller County. The entire county.

Montgomery County. The entire county.

Nevada County. The entire county.

Ouachita County. The entire county.

Pike County. The entire county.

Saline County. The entire county.

Sevier County. The entire county.

Union County. The entire county.

Colorado

Boulder County. The entire county.

Boulder County/Larimer County. The 15 acre property at 8200 Highway 7 on the Boulder County/Larimer County line.

Jefferson County. The portion of Jefferson County that is bounded by a line starting at the Boulder County line proceeding south along the west side of CO-93 to West 80th Avenue; then east on W. 80th Avenue (Lyden Road) to the Northwest Boundary marker of Pettridge Park; then northeast from the Pettridge Park boundary marker, crossing W. 80th Avenue, to the east fence line, crossing the riparian area, and east wind fence of the landfill; then north along the east fence line of the power generation facility; then north, crossing the railroad tracks, following the fence and power lines to CO-72 (Coal Creek Hwy); then north, crossing CO-72, following the power line along the west side of the cell tower site to the Southwest Boundary marker of Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge (RFNWR); continuing north along the west fence line of RFNWR to the east fence line of National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Wind Technology Center to CO-128 (West 120th Avenue) to the Boulder County line.

Weld County. The Township of Erie.

Connecticut

The entire State.

District of Columbia

The entire district.

Georgia

Clayton County. The entire county.

Cobb County. The entire county.

DeKalb County. The entire county.

Fayette County. The entire county.

Fulton County. The entire county.

Gwinnett County. The entire county.

Henry County. The entire county.

Newton County. The entire county.

Rockdale County. The entire county.

Walton County. The entire county.

Whitfield County. The entire county.

Iowa

The entire State.

Kansas

Johnson County. The entire county.

Leavenworth County. The entire county.

Wyandotte County. The entire county.

Kentucky

The entire State.

Maryland

Allegany County. The entire county.

Anne Arundel County. The entire county.

Baltimore City. The entire city.

Baltimore County. The entire county.

Calvert County. The entire county.

Carroll County. The entire county.

Fredrick County. The entire county.

Garrett County. The entire county.

Harford County. The entire county.

Howard County. The entire county.

Montgomery County. The entire county.

Saint Mary's County. The entire county.

Washington County. The entire county.

Massachusetts

The entire State.

Minnesota

Dakota County. The entire county.

Olmsted County. The entire county.

Winona County. The entire county.

Missouri

The entire State.

New Hampshire

Hillsborough County. The entire county.

Merrimack County. The entire county.

Rockingham County. The entire county.

New York

The entire State.

North Carolina

Granville County. The entire county.

Person County. The entire county.

Vance County. The entire county.

Warren County. The entire county.

Pennsylvania

The entire State.

Tennessee

Anderson County. The entire county.

Blount County. The entire county.

Bradley County. The entire county.

Campbell County. The entire county.

Carter County. The entire county.

Claiborne County. The entire county.

Clay County. The entire county.

Cocke County. The entire county.

Davidson County. The entire county.

Fentress County. The entire county.

Grainger County. The entire county.

Greene County. The entire county.

Hamblen County. The entire county.

Hamilton County. The entire county.

Hancock County. The entire county.

Hawkins County. The entire county.

Jackson County. The entire county.

Jefferson County. The entire county.

Johnson County. The entire county.

Knox County. The entire county.

Loudon County. The entire county.

Macon County. The entire county.

McMinn County. The entire county.

Meigs County. The entire county.

Monroe County. The entire county.

Morgan County. The entire county.

Overton County. The entire county.

Pickett County. The entire county.

Polk County. The entire county.

Putnam County. The entire county.

Rhea County. The entire county.

Roane County. The entire county.

Scott County. The entire county.

Sevier County. The entire county.

Smith County. The entire county.

Sullivan County. The entire county.

Unicoi County. The entire county.

Union County. The entire county.

Washington County. The entire county.

Virginia

The entire State.

Wisconsin

Adams County. The entire county.

Buffalo County. The entire county.

Calumet County. The entire county.

Columbia County. The entire county.

Dane County. The entire county.

Dodge County. The entire county.

Door County. The entire county.

Douglas County. The entire county.

Grant County. The entire county.

Iowa County. The entire county.

Jackson County. The entire county.

Juneau County. The entire county.

Kewaunee County. The entire county.

La Crosse County. The entire county.

Lafayette County. The entire county.

Manitowoc County. The entire county.

Monroe County. The entire county.

Oneida County. The entire county.

Oneida Indian Reservation. The entire reservation.

Richland County. The entire county.

Rock County. The entire county.

Trempealeau County. The entire county.

Walworth County. The entire county.

Winnebago County. The entire county.

Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of July 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-17847 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 7 CFR Part 319 [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0079] Khapra Beetle; New Regulated Countries and Regulated Articles AGENCY:

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting as a final rule, with changes, an interim rule that amended the khapra beetle regulations by adding additional regulated articles and regulated countries, updating the regulations to reflect changes in industry practices and country names that have changed since the regulations were originally published, and removing the list of countries where khapra beetle is known to occur from the regulations and moving it to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Web site. These actions were necessary to prevent the introduction of khapra beetle from infested countries on commodities that have been determined to be hosts for the pest, reflect current industry practices, and make it easier to make timely changes to the list of regulated countries.

DATES:

This final rule is effective July 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. George Apgar Balady, Senior Regulatory Policy Specialist, Regulatory Coordination and Compliance, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 851-2240.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

In an interim rule 1 effective and published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2014 (79 FR 77839-77841, Docket No. APHIS-2013-0079), we amended the khapra beetle regulations in 7 CFR part 319 by adding rice (Oryza sativa), chick peas (Cicer spp.), safflower seeds (Carthamus tinctorius), and soybeans (Glycine max) to the list of regulated articles in § 319.75-2 and prohibiting their entry into the United States unless accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate with an additional declaration stating that the articles in the consignment were inspected and found free of khapra beetle in accordance with § 319.75-9. We also added bulk, unpackaged seeds to the list of regulated articles due to their potential for infestation by khapra beetle. In addition, we updated the list of regulated countries in § 319.75-2(b) and moved that list to the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/kb.pdf. Countries will be added to the list of regulated areas when we receive official notification from the country that it is infested or when we intercept the pest in a commercial shipment from that country. Any future additions to the list of regulated areas will be conveyed through publication of a notice in the Federal Register.

1 To view the interim rule and the comments we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2013-0079.

Finally, we updated the regulations for certain commodities due to changes in industry practices that have affected the risk of khapra beetle being introduced into the United States. These actions were necessary to prevent the introduction of khapra beetle from infested countries on commodities that have been determined to be hosts for the pest, reflect current industry practices, and make it easier to make timely changes to the list of regulated countries.

We solicited comments concerning the interim rule for 60 days ending February 27, 2015. We received one comment by that date from a private citizen. The commenter discussed the rule in general terms without supporting or opposing any of its provisions.

Miscellaneous

Currently, the regulations state that plant gums and seeds shipped as bulk cargo in an unpackaged state are regulated articles. We are making a minor change to clarify that the seeds in this case are plant gum seeds and not all plant seeds. In addition, we are making corrections to the names of several taxa that were misspelled in § 319.75-2, footnote 2.

In the preamble of the interim rule, we stated that we were codifying the requirements of two Federal Orders that, among other things, prohibited the entry into the United States of rice, chick peas, safflower seeds, and soybeans in passenger baggage and personal effects. However, we inadvertently omitted that requirement from the regulations in § 319.75-2. We are correcting that omission in this final rule.

Therefore, for the reasons given in the interim rule and in this document, we are adopting the interim rule as a final rule, with the changes discussed in this document.

This final rule also affirms the information contained in the interim rule concerning Executive Order 12988 and the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Further, for this action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review under Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This final rule follows an interim rule that amended the khapra beetle regulations by adding additional regulated articles and regulated countries, updating the regulations to reflect changes in industry practices and country names that have changed since the regulations were originally published, and removing the list of countries where khapra beetle is known to occur from the regulations and moving it to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Web site.

The U.S. entities that may be impacted by the rule are likely to be those involved in importing, handling, moving, processing, or selling regulated articles. The 2012 County Business Patterns (North American Industry Classification System) statistics corresponding to the Small Business Administration small-entity standards indicate that between 93 and 100 percent of these entities can be considered small. However, impacts of the rule are expected to be limited; the khapra beetle restrictions on rice imports have been in place since July 2012 and on the latter three crops since December 2011. In addition, none of the newly regulated areas (Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and South Sudan, and the Palestinian Authority—West Bank) is an important source for the United States of major commodities known to host khapra beetle.

Under these circumstances, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 319

Coffee, Cotton, Fruits, Imports, Logs, Nursery stock, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rice, Vegetables.

Accordingly, the interim rule amending 7 CFR part 319 that was published at 79 FR 77839-77841 on December 29, 2014, is adopted as a final rule with the following changes:

PART 319—FOREIGN QUARANTINE NOTICES 1. The authority citation for part 319 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 450 and 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

2. Section 319.75-2 is amended as follows: a. By revising paragraph (a)(1). b. In paragraph (a)(3), by adding the words “plant gum” before the word “seeds”. c. By revising the introductory text of paragraph (b).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 319.75-2 Regulated articles.1

1 The importation of regulated articles may be subject to prohibitions or additional restrictions under other provisions of 7 CFR part 319, such as Subpart—Foreign Cotton and Covers (see § 319.8) and Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables (see § 319.56).

(a) * * *

(1) Seeds of the plant family Cucurbitaceae 2 if in shipments greater than 2 ounces, if not for propagation;

2 Seeds of the plant family Cucurbitaceae include but are not limited to: Benincasa hispida (wax gourd), Citrullus lanatus (watermelon), Cucumis melo (muskmelon, cantaloupe, honeydew), Cucumis sativus (cucumber), Cucurbita pepo (pumpkin, squashes, vegetable marrow), Lagenaria siceraria (calabash, gourd), Luffa cylindrica (dishcloth gourd), Mormordica charantia (bitter melon), and Sechium edule (chayote).

(b) The following articles are regulated articles from all countries designated in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section as infested with khapra beetle or that have the potential to be infested with khapra beetle and are prohibited entry into the United States in passenger baggage and personal effects. Commercial shipments must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued in accordance with § 319.75-9 and containing an additional declaration stating: “The shipment was inspected and found free of khapra beetle (Trogoderma granarium).”

Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of July 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-17842 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2014-1127; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-16-AD; Amendment 39-18203; AD 2015-14-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-217C and JT8D-219 turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the low-pressure turbine (LPT) shaft. This AD requires removing affected LPT shafts from service using a drawdown plan. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the LPT shaft, which could lead to an uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

DATES:

This AD is effective August 25, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-8770; fax: 860-565-4503. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-1127; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jo-Ann Theriault, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7105; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all PW JT8D-217C and JT8D-219 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2015 (80 FR 11140). The NPRM was prompted by in-shop findings of fatigue cracks on the No. 4.5 bearing thread undercut adjacent to the oil feed holes. The cracks were discovered during routine fluorescent penetrant inspections (FPIs). Both shafts had oil feed hole enlargement rework accomplished. The root cause is increased stress on the fillet of the thread undercut region in front of the oil feed holes caused by oil feed hole rework. The increased stress reduces the low cycle fatigue life of the shaft. The NPRM proposed to require removing affected LPT shafts from service using a drawdown plan. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the LPT shaft, which could lead to an uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

Related Service Information

We reviewed PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. JT8D 6504, dated November 5, 2014. The SB contains additional information regarding removal of the LPT shaft.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (80 FR 11140, March 2, 2015) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Withdraw the NPRM

Delta Air Lines (DAL) and Allegiant Air requested that the current LPT shaft life limit of 25,000 cycles-since-new (CSN) be retained rather than removing the LPT shaft from service at 20,000 CSN as proposed in the NPRM. The commenters stated that reducing the life limit is unjustified because there has not been an in-service LPT shaft failure of the type addressed.

We do not agree. We determined that an acceptable level of safety would not be maintained if LPT shafts are allowed to remain in service until accumulating 25,000 CSN. We reduced the life of the LPT shaft to 20,000 CSN to minimize the risk of LPT shaft failure. We did not change this AD.

Proposal To Increase Repetitive Inspections

DAL and Allegiant Air proposed increasing the occurrence of FPIs to increase the opportunity of identifying LPT shaft cracks. The commenters stated that routine FPIs have been successful in detecting LPT shaft cracks in the past.

We do not agree. Recurring inspections are not adequate as a final corrective action. Relying on recurring FPIs to detect cracks, rather than shaft removal at 20,000 CSN, would likely result in an increased number of LPT shafts cracking in service, a greater risk of undetected cracked shafts being returned to service, and an unacceptable risk of shaft failure. We determined that long-term continued operational safety is enhanced by a terminating action that removes affected shafts from service rather than by increasing the occurrence of repetitive inspections. We did not change this AD.

Request To Reduce Costs

DAL and Allegiant Air requested retaining the existing life limit or increasing the occurrence of inspections. The commenters stated that the life reduction in the NPRM places an undue economic burden on the U.S. fleet by forcing early engine removals.

We do not agree. We mitigated the operational and financial impacts by providing a drawdown plan rather than requiring removal before further flight, while providing an acceptable level of safety. We did not change this AD.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD will affect about 744 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We estimate the pro-rated replacement cost would be $28,230. We also estimate that shaft replacement would be accomplished during an engine shop visit at no additional labor cost. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $21,003,120.

Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and

(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2015-14-05 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 39-18203; Docket No. FAA-2014-1127; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-16-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective August 25, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-217C and JT8D-219 turbofan engines with low-pressure turbine (LPT) shaft part numbers 783319, 783319-001, 783319-003, 783319-004, 783320, 783320-001, 783320-003, 783320-004, 820514-001, 820514-003, 820514-004, or 820514-005, installed.

(d) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the LPT shaft. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the LPT shaft, which could lead to an uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(1) If the LPT shaft has 15,000 or fewer cycles-since-new (CSN) on the effective date of this AD, remove it from service before it accumulates 20,000 CSN.

(2) If the LPT shaft has more than 15,000 CSN on the effective date of this AD, remove it from service before it accumulates 5,000 additional cycles in service, or at the next piece-part exposure after accumulating 20,000 CSN, whichever occurs first.

(3) After the effective date of this AD, do not install any LPT shaft listed in paragraph (c) of this AD that is at piece-part exposure and exceeds the new life limit of 20,000 CSN, into any engine.

(f) Definition

For the purpose of this AD, piece-part exposure is when the LPT shaft is completely disassembled from the engine.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may email your request to: [email protected]

(h) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Jo-Ann Theriault, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7105; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

(2) PW Service Bulletin No. JT8D 6504, dated November 5, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD, can be obtained from PW using the contact information in paragraph (h)(3) of this AD.

(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-8770; fax: 860-565-4503.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

None.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on June 26, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-17710 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 91 and 119 [Docket No. FAA-FAA-2015-0517] Policy Regarding Living History Flight Experience Exemptions for Passenger Carrying Operations Conducted for Compensation and Hire in Other Than Standard Category Aircraft AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Notice of policy statement.

SUMMARY:

With this document, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) cancels all previous agency policies pertaining to the carriage of passengers for compensation on Living History Flight Experience (LHFE) flights. This policy statement announces the end of FAA moratorium on new petitions for exemption, or amendments to exemptions from certain sections of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) for the purpose of carrying passengers for compensation or hire on LHFE Flights.

DATES:

The moratorium will end on July 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

General Aviation and Commercial Division, General Aviation Operations Branch (AFS-830), Flight Standards Service, FAA, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-1100; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

The FAA has historically found the preservation of U.S. aviation history to be in the public interest, including preservation of certain former military aircraft transferred to private individuals or organizations for the purpose of restoring and operating these aircraft. In 1996, the FAA received exemption requests from not-for-profit organizations to permit the carriage of persons for compensation in both Limited and Experimental category, former-military, historically-significant aircraft. These requests offered to provide a short in-flight experience to these aircraft in exchange for compensation, leading to the term Nostalgia Flights, then later Living History Flight Experience (LHFE), and provided a means for private civilian owners to offset the considerable restoration, maintenance and operational costs. The FAA determined that, in certain cases, operators could conduct LHFE flights at an acceptable level of safety and in the public interest, in accordance with appropriate conditions and limitations.

These original requests involved large, crew-served, piston-powered, multi-engine World War II (WWII) vintage aircraft. In order to maintain safe operations of these aircraft, the FAA required flight crewmembers to meet certain qualifications and training requirements that included FAA-approved training, maintaining training records, and reporting procedures. As the public availability of purchase for former military aircraft increased, along with an increase in public interest for maintaining and operating these aircraft, so grew the requests for LHFE relief.

In 2004, to address a range of new aircraft requests and clarify the FAA's position, the FAA published a notice of policy statement (FAA-2004-17648). The policy limited LHFE relief to slower, piston-powered, multi-engine airplanes of WWII or earlier vintage, citing the unique opportunity to experience flight in aircraft such as the B-17 Flying Fortress and B-24 Liberator which could still be operated safely, considering limited parts and specialty-fuel supplies. In addition, qualifying aircraft would have no similar standard airworthiness counterpart that could allow a similar experience without the need for regulatory relief. The FAA also determined supersonic jets would not be considered because their operational speeds made it likely that any in-flight emergency may result in serious injuries or fatalities. The policy detailed that, in permitting the carriage of passengers, flight crewmembers were required to meet more stringent pilot qualifications as well as training requirements that included an FAA-approved training program, maintenance of training records, and reporting procedures.

In the years that followed, the FAA received petitions to operate a broad range of aircraft, including large turbojet-powered aircraft, foreign-manufactured aircraft and aircraft models that remained in military service, or were readily available in the open market. The petitions raised significant concerns within the FAA, and led to a reexamination and refinement of the criteria for issuing exemptions pertaining to LHFE flights.

In 2007, after requesting and receiving public comment on the matter, the FAA published an updated policy statement (72 FR 57196) that provided consideration for any aircraft on a case-by-case basis, so long as the petitioner demonstrates that (1) there is an overriding public interest in providing a financial means for a non-profit organization to continue to preserve and operate these historic aircraft, and (2) adequate measures, including all conditions and limitations stipulated in the exemption, will be taken to ensure safety. Additionally, the FAA refined and expanded its previous list of criteria, requiring numerous aircraft-operation components, including crew qualification and training, aircraft maintenance and inspection, passenger safety and training, safety of the non-participating public, as well as manufacturing criteria, and a petitioner's non-profit status. The FAA also included consideration for the number of existing operational aircraft and petitioners available to provide the historic service to the public.

The evolution of LHFE operations in the private sector, along with the availability of newer and more capable former military aircraft, raised new public safety and public policy concerns. The FAA accommodated several requests to operate more modern military jet aircraft. Conditions and limitations for operations grew in number, and were, in some cases, misinterpreted as permitting operations that the FAA did not contemplate or intend. Examples included cases of passengers manipulating the aircraft flight controls to proposals of LHFE flights performing aerobatic maneuvers, simulating aerial combat in the interest of “historical experience.”

Consequently, in 2011, the FAA published a new policy statement announcing a moratorium on LHFE exemptions for new operators and the addition of aircraft to existing LHFE exemptions. The moratorium permitted existing exemption holders to continue operations, and to renew their exemptions, but stated that the FAA would add clarifying limitations to all LHFE petitions renewed or extended during that time.

In June of 2012, the FAA held public meetings to gather additional technical input. Discussion addressed 35 questions posed by the FAA and included as part of the meeting notice. In addition to statements provided by the public meeting attendees, over 500 comments were received in the docket (Docket No. FAA-2012-0374) established for public input. The meeting was focused to address industry comments related to the LHFE policy notices of 2004 and 2007 and areas of concern based on safety recommendations, FAA internal discussions, and post 2007 developments. Small work groups were formed to discuss general policy, exemption issuance, limitations, weather minimums, pilot qualification and currency, and maintenance and inspection. The area of interest that generated the most discussion was regarding limitations placed on LHFE operations—specifically, passengers occupying crew seats or positions, aerobatics, and requirements for arresting gear for high performance jets. The largest general policy topic discussed was regarding whether the FAA planned on excluding turbojets or supersonic aircraft in the policy. The work groups also explored criteria for determining historical significance, replicas, operational control and responsible persons, manuals, compliance history, and training requirements.

The majority of the 519 written comments were either in favor of keeping the existing exemption policy or expanding on its provisions. Fifty-nine (11%) comment submissions desired no changes to the current LHFE policy. Eight commenters provided detailed comments to each of the questions posed within the FAA's areas of interest. In regards to training, safety and operational control, a commenter stated his belief that the employees/pilots/crew of the aircraft for hire have annual training and that the aircraft should be on an FAA/manufacturer approved inspection program, and that this training and adherence to the required and recommended inspections/maintenance provides a reasonable level of government protection to the flying and non-flying public. Eight commenters suggested a more restrictive LHFE Exemption policy, and one commenter supported the use of drug testing for LHFE flight crews. One commenter suggested that good guidance already exists in the A008 Operations Specification of Part 135 certificate holders, and that much of that guidance can be reasonably applied to LHFE. The FAA concurs and finds good reason to include certain elements found in part 135; specifically those related to operational control and document structure. 516 (99%) written comments expressed support for LHFE exemptions, while three (1%) were opposed.

The FAA also held meetings with curators at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum and reviewed the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) report on Preserving DOD Aircraft Significant to Aviation History to understand how other organizations determine “historical significance” as part of determining criteria to satisfy “public interest”.

Also during the moratorium, two accidents involving LHFE operators occurred which led the FAA to further research and develop safety mitigations to operational and maintenance issues highlighted by the investigations. The need to develop a safety and risk management system as part of the new policy was evident, and supported by comments received. One such comment stated, in part that it is important to try and mitigate some of the risks and to inform the public about the risks of the activity.

Therefore, based on FAA research, comments and transcripts of the public meeting, as well as an evaluation of public safety risks, the FAA finds good reason to publish a new policy. While the FAA is lifting the 2011 moratorium with this policy, we are also setting forth specific criteria that the FAA will use in considering any LHFE petition for exemption, or petition to extend or amend an existing exemption.

FAA Policy

The FAA announces the end of the FAA-imposed moratorium on new petitions for exemption, or amendments to existing exemptions, from certain sections of 14 CFR for the purpose of carrying passengers for compensation or hire on LHFE flights. The FAA is also cancelling all previously issued LHFE policy statements. The FAA will now consider new petitions for exemption, or requests for extensions or amendments to current exemptions in accordance with the following criteria.

A. Aircraft Must Be “Historically Significant”

Each aircraft must be “historically significant” according to the following criteria:

1. U.S. operated: The aircraft must meet a documented set of U.S. military standards for its airworthiness and operations in U.S. military service.

2. Not in service: Aircraft currently operated by the U.S. military or in civilian service will not be considered. This exclusion includes variants of those aircraft.

3. Fragile: The aircraft must be “fragile.” Accepted practices in the collection of aircraft include “fragility” as a factor that necessitates preservation. If there are hundreds of models of a particular aircraft still flying, that aircraft's existence would not be considered “fragile.” If, on the other hand, there are few remaining aircraft and the model could become “extinct” without preservation efforts, that aircraft would be considered “fragile.” Each aircraft request will be reviewed for “fragility” on a case-by-case basis.

4. Age: The original type design must be at least 50 years old. This requirement is consistent with the policy used by the National Register of Historical Places to determine historical significance (Reference: National Register Bulletin: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties. US Department of Interior, 1998, p. 34-35).

5. No Available Standard Category Aircraft: Aircraft for which a standard category civilian model is available will not be considered. (e.g., the T-28A achieved certification as a standard aircraft, while the other versions, T-28B/C, etc. were strictly military variants and not eligible for certification in the standard category).

Replicas will not be considered. This element relates to the “integrity” of the structure or object as defined by the National Register of Historical Places, as described in the GAO report on Aircraft Preservation (Reference: Aircraft Preservation: Preserving DOD Aircraft Significant to Aviation History, GAO/NSIAD-8-170BR, May 1988, Appendix III, p. 13).

B. Designation of a Responsible Person and Operational Control Structure

The FAA will review each petition to identify a responsible party, and an operational control structure or chain of command within the manual system for pilots, maintenance, and support personnel. Consequently, each petition should designate a responsible person whom the FAA can contact for both operations and maintenance functions.

C. Safety & Risk Analysis

The FAA will use Safety Risk Management (SRM) and Equal Level of Safety (ELoS) principles to guide its safety review in connection with any future LHFE exemption petition or request. This safety review will include, but will not be limited to, an analysis of whether hazards and risks have been identified and responded to through appropriate mitigating strategies. As such, each petitioner should be guided by the following criteria:

• An understanding and use of Safety Risk Management (SRM) principles.

• A plan to mitigate risks as they become known, or to correct an unsafe condition or practice. This includes, but is not limited to, risks in design, manufacturing, maintenance and operations.

• A detailed explanation of all supporting and historical safety-related data, such as: Maintenance history, airworthiness status, conformity to the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS—for Limited category airworthiness certificates), operational failure modes, aging aircraft factors, and civilian and military accident rates. For example, the FAA will consider:

○ Operator history, including accidents and incidents, regulatory compliance and FAA surveillance history.

○ Maintenance records, including modifications.

○ Training records.

○ The aircraft's operational history, including the operator's proposed mitigation of known risks.

○ Operating limitations to enhance safety, clarify, and remediate differences in like aircraft.

○ The FAA will assess and, if necessary, require changes to passenger safety in terms of configuration, seats, crashworthiness, and emergency egress, etc.

• The operator should be able to demonstrate to the FAA, upon request, the passenger's ability to egress each aircraft in the event of an emergency in which the crewmember(s) is unable to assist.

D. Manual System

LHFE operators should be able to demonstrate the existence of a manual system similar in terms of intent and scope of those in 14 CFR part 135. The FAA will evaluate the operator's manuals, including:

• Operations Manual (General Operations Manual-GOM).

• Pilot Training Manual and Qualifications.

• Maintenance and Line Support Training Manuals.

• Maintenance Manual (AIP) including, but not limited to:

○ Review of previously approved AIPs as provided by 14 CFR 91.415

○ Maintenance training elements.

○ Replacement plan for time-limited parts or development of an on-condition inspection program for such parts.

○ Aging aircraft inspection program.

○ Corrosion inspection program.

○ Continued Operational Safety (COS).

• SMS Manual.

E. Other Considerations

LHFE operations, as it applies to the passenger(s) experience, is limited to the sole purpose of being onboard the aircraft during flight. The FAA will not consider expanded operations such as flight training, aerobatics, and passenger manipulation of the flight controls.

The FAA will always consider whether a request benefits the public as a whole and how the request would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule in accordance with 14 CFR 11.81. Moreover, the FAA may impose additional conditions and limitations or deny petitions regardless of this policy statement to adequately mitigate safety concerns and risk factors as they become known.

Filing a Petition for Exemption or To Request an Amendment or Extension to an Existing Exemption

To submit a petition for exemption or to request an amendment or extension to an existing exemption, all petitioners must follow the procedures set forth in part 11 of title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 10, 2015. John S. Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-17966 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0647] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Maritime Museum Party, San Diego Bay; San Diego, CA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the San Diego Bay for a fireworks display on the evening of July 23, 2015. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on July 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket [USCG-2015-0647]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Nick Bateman, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego; telephone (619) 278-7656, email [email protected] If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking TFR Temporary Final Rule A. Regulatory History and Information

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule safety zone for a planned fireworks show on San Diego Bay without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to minimize potential danger to the participants and the public during the event. Furthermore, the necessary information to determine whether the marine event poses a threat to persons and vessels was provided 15 days before the event, which is insufficient time to publish an NPRM. Because fireworks barges on the navigable waterways poses significant risk to public safety and property and the likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels and congested waterways could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities, this safety zone is necessary to safeguard spectators, vessels and the event participants. For the safety concerns noted, it is important to have these regulations in effect during the event and impracticable to delay the regulations.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. For these same reasons, the Coast Guard finds good cause for implementing this rule less than thirty days before the effective July 23, 2015.

B. Basis and Purpose

The legal basis and authorities for this temporary rule are found in 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to propose, establish, and define regulatory safety zones.

The Coast Guard believes establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the San Diego Bay is necessary to ensure public safety for the fireworks display. A temporary safety zone will provide for the safety of the event participants, spectators, safety vessels, and other public users of the waterway. This event involves a planned fifteen minute fireworks display on a portion of San Diego Bay.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone that will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on July 23, 2015. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the event participants, event spectators, safety patrol craft and to protect other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or their designated representative. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish a local notice to mariners (LNM). Just prior to the event and during the enforcement of the event, the Coast Guard will issue a broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) alert via VHF Channel 16.

This temporary safety zone will be bound by a 600 foot radius of the fireworks barge, center approximately on the following coordinate (North American Datum of 1983, World Geodetic System, 1984): 32°43.14 N, 117°10.36 W

D. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based on the size, location and limited duration of the safety zone. This zone impacts a small designated area of the San Diego bay for less than one hour. Furthermore, vessel traffic can safely transit around the safety zone.

2. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of private and commercial vessels intending to transit or anchor in the impacted portion of the San Diego Bay from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 23, 2015.

This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. Vessel traffic can pass safely around the zone. The Coast Guard will publish a local notice to mariners (LNM) and will issue broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) alerts via VHF Channel 16 before the safety zone is enforced.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

This action is not a “significant energy action” under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone on the navigable waters of San Diego Bay. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority:

33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.01.

2. Add § 165.T11-647 to read as follows:
§ 165.T11-647 Safety Zone; Maritime Museum Party; San Diego, CA.

(a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will include all the navigable waters within 600 feet of the fireworks barge in approximate position of 32°43.14 N, 117°10.36 W (North American Datum of 1983, World Geodetic System, 1984).

(b) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on July 23, 2015. If the event concludes prior to the schedule termination time, the COTP will cease enforcement of this safety zone and will announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

(c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section: Designated representative means any commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, or local, state, or federal law enforcement vessels who have been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.

(d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in subpart C of this part, entry into, transit through or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port of San Diego or his designated representative.

(2) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

(3) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard or designated patrol personnel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed.

(4) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or local agencies in patrol and notification of the regulation.

Dated: July 10, 2015. J.S. Spaner, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2015-17843 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 39 CFR Part 3001 [Docket No. RM2015-8; Order No. 2589] Automatic Docket Closure Procedures AGENCY:

Postal Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Commission is issuing a set of final rules establishing new procedures concerning automatic closure of Commission dockets after an extended period of docket inactivity. The rules will permit a simplified docket closure process. Relative to the proposed rules, some of the changes are substantive and others are minor and non-substantive.

DATES:

Effective August 20, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

80 FR 26517, May 8, 2015

Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Comments III. Commission Analysis IV. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA), Public Law 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006), authorizes the Commission to develop rules and establish procedures that it deems necessary and proper to carry out Commission functions.1

1See 39 U.S.C. 503; see also Postal Reorganization Act, Public Law 91-375, 84 Stat. 759 (1970), at section 3603.

On May 4, 2015, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking establishing procedures that would simplify the docket closure process by permitting automatic closure of a docket following a significant period of inactivity.2 The Notice requested comments from interested persons regarding the proposed rules. The Commission received comments from the Postal Service and the Public Representative.3 After consideration of the comments submitted, the Commission adopts the proposed rules, modified as described below.

2 Docket No. RM2015-8, Order No. 2465, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Regarding Automatic Closure of Inactive Dockets, May 4, 2015 (Notice); see also 80 FR 26517 (May 8, 2015).

3See Initial Comments of the United States Postal Service, June 8, 2015 (Postal Service Comments); Public Representative Comments, June 8, 2015 (PR Comments).

II. Comments

The Postal Service and Public Representative offered positive comments and suggested revisions with respect to the Commission's proposed rules.

The Postal Service agrees that an automatic closure procedure would promote efficient docket management and provide clarity for the public because it would clear out items listed on the Commission's Web site. Postal Service Comments at 1. However, the Postal Service has concerns that, in certain proceedings, a docket may be automatically closed due to 12 consecutive months of inactivity prior to a final order being issued by the Commission. Id. at 1-2. The Postal Service recommends proposed rule 3001.44(a) be revised to indicate that if the final order in a docket is pending, it will not be subject to automatic closure. Id. at 2.

In addition, the Postal Service recommends that the Commission provide notice to the public of the impending docket closure at least 30 days prior to the automatic closure date. Id. The Postal Service also suggests that a motion to stay automatic closure be filed at least 15 days prior to closing, rather than 10 days prior to closing, in order to provide parties ample time to file answers pursuant to rule 3001.21. Id. at 2-3.

Finally, the Postal Service argues that because the Commission does not file motions under rule 3001.21, a separate paragraph should be added to indicate that the Commission may issue an order sua sponte keeping a docket open. Id. at 3.

The Public Representative supports the establishment of rules that create more streamlined procedures for closing inactive dockets. PR Comments at 2. However, she recommends clarifying the meaning of “good cause” found in rule 3001.44(c) as interested persons may not be aware that grounds for a motion to reopen exist, and she provides definitions and terms used by other agencies. Id.

The Public Representative does not go so far as to recommend filing a public notice with the Federal Register; however, she suggests providing notification to the public via the Commission's Web site. She argues that such a notice would “achieve due process and transparency without significant administrative burden or loss of efficiency.” Id. at 3.

Finally, the Public Representative recommends that the rules be revised in order to clarify that the Commission may issue an order sua sponte, keeping a docket open or reopening an automatically closed docket, as the Commission does not file motions pursuant to rule 3001.21. Id. at 2-3.

III. Commission Analysis

Proposed rule 3001.44(a). Paragraph (a) of proposed rule 3001.44 would permit the Commission to automatically close a docket after 12 consecutive months of inactivity, in order to ensure that information provided to the public on the status of dockets remains current. In its comments, the Postal Service describes a situation that could arise in which a docket has been automatically closed due to inactivity despite the eventual issuance of a final order. The Postal Service provides examples of similar situations including Docket No. MC2010-24, concerning the Commission's review of Nonpostal Services language for the Mail Classification Schedule (MCS). The initial notice was issued on May 5, 2010, and comments were received on June 4, 2010, and June 18, 2010.4 However, the docket saw no further activity until the Commission issued its final order on December 11, 2012.5

4See Docket No. MC2010-24, Order No. 457, Notice and Order Concerning Mail Classification Schedule Language for Nonpostal Services, May 7, 2010; see also Public Representative Comments in Response to Order No. 457, June 4, 2010; Reply Comments of the United States Postal Service Pursuant to Order No. 457, June 18, 2010.

5See Docket No. MC2010-24, Order Approving Mail Classification Schedule Descriptions and Prices for Nonpostal Service Products, December 11, 2012 (Order No. 1575). Docket No. MC2010-24 was established to consider the Postal Service's proposed nonpostal MCS language filed in different dockets and the final order was delayed pending completion of litigation and resolution of Docket No. MC2008-1 (Phase II R), which involved Commission review (on remand) of nonpostal services. Order No. 1575 at 3; see also Docket No. MC2008-1 (Phase II R), Order No. 1326, Order Resolving Issues on Remand, April 30, 2012.

The Postal Service recommends the Commission add language to paragraph (a) indicating that if the final order in a docket is pending, it will not be subject to automatic closure. Based on consideration of the Postal Service's comment and the possibility that certain dockets may take significant time to resolve, the Commission agrees with the Postal Service that a revision to the rule is necessary. Paragraph (a) will be revised to exclude from automatic closure those dockets in which a final determination by the Commission is required by rule or statute, or if the Commission has otherwise indicated a final order is forthcoming in the docket, but is still outstanding.

Proposed rule 3001.44(b) and (d). Both the Postal Service and the Public Representative recommend revisions to the proposed rules that would clarify the Commission's ability to issue an order staying automatic closure or reopening an automatically closed docket as the Commission does not file motions pursuant to rule 3001.21. The Commission recognizes that proposed paragraphs (b) and (d), could be interpreted to read that the Commission may stay automatic closure or reopen an automatically closed docket via motion. As the Commission would instead issue an order sua sponte, clarification to the rule is necessary. The Commission declines to adopt the particular revised language proposed by the Postal Service and instead revises proposed paragraphs (b) and (d) by removing both paragraphs from proposed rule 3001.44 to create new rule 3001.45. As revised, rule 3001.44 describes automatic docket closure and rule 3001.45 describes actions permitted by interested persons and the Commission concerning automatic docket closure. Subparagraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2) were added to indicate the Commission may stay an automatic docket closure or reopen an automatically closed docket upon its own order.

In addition, the Public Representative argues that proposed rule 3001.44(d) could benefit from a more detailed definition of “good cause.” PR Comments at 2. She provides terms used by other agencies such as “new and material information” not available or known at the time of the determination. Id. However, the addition of specific terms such as “new” and “material,” or requiring that information became available only after a docket was automatically closed, creates restrictive requirements that may unintentionally limit interested persons from requesting an automatically closed docket be reopened. The Commission favors the use of a broader term that puts fewer limits on an interested person's justification for a motion to reopen an automatically closed docket and prefers to use its discretion when evaluating whether the justification for reopening an automatically closed docket qualifies as “good cause.” 6 The Commission, therefore, declines to adopt the Public Representative's recommended revisions to rule 3001.44(d).

6See Docket No. RM2012-4, Order No. 2080, Order Adopting Amended Rules of Procedure for Nature of Service Proceedings Under 39 U.S.C. 3611, May 20, 2014, at 16. In Docket No. RM2012-4, when prompted by commenters to clarify the meaning of “good cause,” the Commission found it was unnecessary to specify what circumstances qualified as “good cause” because the standard was intended to be “flexible and dependent upon specific factual circumstances.” Id.

Finally, proposed rule 3001.44(b) required a motion to stay automatic closure be filed at least 10 days prior to the automatic closure date. The Postal Service suggested an increase in the time for filing a motion to stay from 10 days to 15 days prior to the automatic docket closure date, in order to provide any participant with an opportunity to answer the motion pursuant to rule 3001.21(b). Postal Service Comments at 2-3. The Commission agrees and accepts the Postal Service's recommendation. This revision is reflected in rule 3001.45(a)(1) and (a)(2).

Public notice. The Postal Service suggests some form of public notice be given 30 days prior to the automatic closure date. Postal Service Comments at 2. The Public Representative argues that a formal public notice (published in the Federal Register) is unnecessary and instead recommends a portion on the Commission's Web site be used to broadcast dockets that would automatically close in the next 6 months and provide the deadline for filing a motion to stay automatic closure. PR Comments at 3.

The Commission finds merit in providing transparency to the docket closure process as suggested by the Postal Service and Public Representative. Providing information concerning potential automatic docket closures on the Commission's Web site will not be costly nor will it materially interfere with the simplification of the docket closure process. The Commission revises the rule to include a new paragraph that states each month the Commission will post on its Web site a list of dockets that will, without action taken by parties or the Commission, be subject to automatic closure in the following month and the scheduled date of closure for each docket. This revision is reflected in rule 3001.44(b).

Additional minor correction. The Commission makes the following minor correction:

• In paragraphs (a) and (b) of rule 3001.45 “any interested party or participant” is simplified to read “interested persons.”

IV. Ordering Paragraphs

It is ordered:

1. Part 3001 of title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, is revised as set forth below the signature of this Order, effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

2. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 3001

Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends chapter III of title 39 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 3001—RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE 1. The authority citation of part 3001 continues to read as follows: Authority:

39 U.S.C. 404(d); 503; 504; 3661.

2. Add § 3001.44 to read as follows:
§ 3001.44 Automatic Closure of Inactive Docket.

(a) The Commission shall automatically close a docket in which there has been no activity of record by any interested person for 12 consecutive months, except those dockets in which the Commission must issue a final determination by rule or statute, or if the Commission has otherwise indicated a final order is forthcoming in the docket and has yet to do so.

(b) Each month the Commission shall post on the Web site a list of dockets that will be subject to automatic closure in the following month and will include the date on which the docket will automatically close.

3. Add § 3001.45 to read as follows:
§ 3001.45 Motions to Stay Automatic Closure or Reopen Automatically Closed Dockets.

(a) Motion to stay automatic closure. (1) Interested persons, including the Postal Service or a Public Representative, may file a motion to stay automatic closure, pursuant to § 3001.21, and request that the docket remain open for a specified term not to exceed 12 months. Motions to stay automatic closure must be filed at least 15 days prior to the automatic closure date.

(2) The Commission may order a docket remain open for a specified term not to exceed 12 months and must file such order at least 15 days prior to the automatic closure date.

(b) Motion to reopen automatically closed docket. (1) If, at any time after a docket has been automatically closed, interested persons, including the Postal Service or a Public Representative, may file a motion to reopen an automatically closed docket, pursuant to § 3001.21, and must set forth with particularity good cause for reopening the docket.

(2) The Commission may order an automatically closed docket to be reopened, and must set forth with particularity good cause for reopening the docket.

By the Commission.

Ruth Ann Abrams, Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17825 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 1 [MD Docket Nos. 14-92; 15-121; 15-121; FCC 15-59] Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2015 AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) eliminates the regulatory fee components of two fee categories, the amateur radio Vanity Call Sign and the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS); establishes a new Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) regulatory fee category; provides specific instructions for RespOrgs (Responsible Organizations), holders of toll free numbers that are subject to regulatory fees, and amends rule provisions to specify that debts owed to the Commission that have been delinquent for a period of 120 days shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury.

DATES:

Effective July 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roland Helvajian, Office of Managing Director at (202) 418-0444.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order, FCC 15-59, MD Docket No. 15-121, adopted on May 20, 2015 and released May 21, 2015.

I. Procedural Matters Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA),1 the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) relating to this Report and Order.

1See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 847 (1996). The SBREFA was enacted as Title II of the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA).

Congressional Review Act

2. The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order and Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

3. This Report and Order does not contain any new or modified information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506 (c) (4).

4. Finally, in the Order section of this document, we amend three sections of our rules 2 to conform to the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act) concerning when claims should be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury.3 In particular, we make the ministerial change to our rules to specify that debts owed to the Commission that have been delinquent for a period of 120 days shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury. The rules previously specified transfer of delinquent debt to the Treasury after 180 days.

2 47 CFR 1.1911(d), 1.1912(b)(1), 1.1917(c).

3 31 U.S.C. 3716(c)(6).

II. Introduction

5. In the Report and Order, the Commission adopted a proposal from our FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to add a new subcategory in the existing cable television and Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) regulatory fee category for direct broadcast satellite (DBS) providers.4 In addition, we provide specific instructions regarding our new regulatory fee requirement for toll free numbers.5 We also remove amateur radio Vanity Call Signs and General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) from the regulatory fee schedule.6 The addition of DBS to the cable television and IPTV category and removal of two wireless categories from the schedule are permitted amendments to the regulatory fee schedule and require Congressional notification.7

4Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2014, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MD Docket No. 14-92, 79 FR 63883, 63885-63886, paras. 10-15 (October 27, 2014).

5 In 2014, the Commission adopted a regulatory fee requirement for toll free numbers. See FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195-54196, paras. 28-31 (September 11, 2014).

6 We sought comment on eliminating these categories in our FY 2014 NPRM. Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2014, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Order, MD Docket No. 14-92, 79 FR 37982, 37989, para. 38 (July 3, 2014).

7 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3)-(4)(requiring Congressional notification of permitted amendments not later than 90 days before the effective date of such amendment).

III. Background

6. The Commission is required by Congress to assess regulatory fees each year in an amount that can reasonably be expected to equal the amount of its appropriation.8 Regulatory fees, assessed each fiscal year, are to “be derived by determining the full-time equivalent number of employees performing” these activities, “adjusted to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payer of the fee by the Commission's activities. . . .” 9 Regulatory fees recover direct costs, such as salary and expenses; indirect costs, such as overhead functions; and support costs, such as rent, utilities, or equipment.10 Regulatory fees also cover the costs incurred in regulating entities that are statutorily exempt from paying regulatory fees,11 entities whose regulatory fees are waived,12 and entities that provide nonregulated services. Congress sets the amount the Commission must collect each year in the Commission's fiscal year appropriations, and section 9(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act or Act) requires the Commission to collect fees sufficient to offset the amount appropriated.13 To calculate regulatory fees, the Commission allocates the total collection target, as mandated by Congress each year, across all regulatory fee categories. The allocation of fees to fee categories is based on the Commission's calculation of full time employees (FTEs) 14 in each regulatory fee category. Historically, the Commission has classified FTEs as “direct” if the employee is in one of the four “core” bureaus; otherwise, that employee was considered an “indirect” FTE.15 The total FTEs for each fee category includes the direct FTEs associated with that category, plus a proportional allocation of the indirect FTEs.

8 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(1)(B).

9 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(1)(A).

10See Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2004, Report and Order, 69 FR 41028, 4103, para. 11 (July 7, 2004).

11 For example, governmental and nonprofit entities are exempt from regulatory fees under section 9(h) of the Act. 47 U.S.C. 159(h); 47 CFR 1.1162.

12 47 CFR 1.1166.

13 47 U.S.C. 159(a)(2).

14 One FTE, a “Full Time Equivalent” or “Full Time Employee,” is a unit of measure equal to the work performed annually by a full time person (working a 40 hour workweek for a full year) assigned to the particular job, and subject to agency personnel staffing limitations established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

15 The core bureaus are the Wireline Competition Bureau (172 FTEs), Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (91 FTEs), Media Bureau (155 FTEs), and part of the International Bureau (28 FTEs), totaling 446 “direct” FTEs. The “indirect” FTEs are the employees from the following bureaus and offices: Enforcement Bureau, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, Chairman and Commissioners' offices, Office of the Managing Director, Office of General Counsel, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Communications Business Opportunities, Office of Engineering and Technology, Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, Office of Workplace Diversity, Office of Media Relations, and Office of Administrative Law Judges, totaling 1,037 “indirect” FTEs. These totals are as of Oct. 1, 2014 and exclude auctions FTEs.

7. Section 9 of the Communications Act requires the Commission to make certain changes (i.e., mandatory amendments) to the regulatory fee schedule if it “determines that the Schedule requires amendment to comply with the requirements” of section 9(b)(1)(A).16 In addition, the Commission must add, delete, or reclassify services in the fee schedule to reflect additions, deletions, or changes in the nature of its services “as a consequence of Commission rulemaking proceedings or changes in law.” 17 These “permitted amendments” require Congressional notification.18 The changes in fees resulting from both mandatory and permitted amendments are not subject to judicial review.19

16 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

17 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

18 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(4)(B).

19 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3). But see Comsat Corp. v. FCC, 114 F.3d 223, 227 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (“Where, as here, we find that the Commission has acted outside the scope of its statutory mandate, we also find that we have jurisdiction to review the Commission's action.”)

8. The Commission continues to improve the regulatory fee process by ensuring a more equitable distribution of the regulatory fee burden among categories of Commission licensees under the statutory framework in section 9 of the Communications Act. For example, in 2013, the Commission updated the FTE allocations to more accurately align regulatory fees with the costs of Commission oversight and regulation,20 as recommended in the GAO Report, a report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2012.21 The Commission also reallocated some FTEs from the International Bureau as “indirect.” 22 Subsequently, in the FY 2014 Report and Order, the Commission adopted the new toll free number regulatory fee category 23 and, in the accompanying FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission sought additional comment on a new regulatory fee category for DBS.24 In this Report and Order, we now add a subcategory for DBS providers in the cable television and IPTV regulatory fee category based on our finding that Media Bureau FTEs work on issues and proceedings that include DBS as well as other multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs).

20Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2013, Report and Order, MD Docket No. 13-140, 78 FR 52433, 52436-52437, paras. 10-15 (August 23, 2013).

21 In 2012, the GAO concluded that the Commission should conduct an overall analysis of the regulatory fee categories and perform an updated FTE analysis by fee category. GAO “Federal Communications Commission Regulatory Fee Process Needs to be Updated,” GAO-12-686 (Aug. 2012) (GAO Report) at 36, (available at http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-686).

22FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52436-52438, paras. 12-21 (August 23, 2013).

23FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195-54196, paras. 28-31 (September 11, 2014).

24FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63885-63886, paras. 10-15 (October 27, 2014).

IV. Discussion A. Report and Order 1. Eliminating Regulatory Fee Categories

9. In the FY 2014 NPRM, 25 we sought comment on eliminating several of the smaller regulatory fee categories such as amateur radio Vanity Call Signs 26 and GMRS.27 In the FY 2014 Report and Order, we concluded that we did not yet have adequate support to determine whether the cost of recovery and burden on small entities outweighed the collected revenue or whether eliminating the fee would adversely affect the licensing process.28 We stated, however, that we would reevaluate this issue in the future. Since adoption of the FY 2014 Report and Order, Commission staff have had an opportunity to obtain and analyze support concerning the collection of fees from these regulatees.

25FY 2014 NPRM, 79 FR 37982, 37989, para. 38 (July 3, 2014).

26 Call signs assigned to newly licensed stations, i.e., a sequential call sign, are assigned based on the licensee's mailing address and class of operator license. 47 CFR 97.17(d). The licensee can request a specific unassigned but assignable call sign, known as a vanity call sign. 47 CFR 97.19. There is no fee for the sequential call sign.

27 GMRS (formerly Class A of the Citizens Radio Service) is a personal radio service available for the conduct of an individual's personal and family communications. See 47 CFR 95.1. We initially proposed eliminating regulatory fees for GMRS in the FY 2008 Report and Order and Further Notice. See Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2008, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 50285, 50290-50291, para 33 (August 26, 2008) (FY 2008 Report and Order and Further Notice). The Commission has an open proceeding to review the Part 95, Personal Radio Service rules, which include GMRS. See Review of the Commission's Part 95 Personal Radio Services Rules, WT Docket No. 10-119, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, 75 FR 47142, 47143-47144, para. 4 (August 4, 2010).

28FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195, para. 26 (September 11, 2014).

10. The GMRS and amateur radio Vanity Call Sign regulatory fee categories comprise on average over 20,000 licenses that are newly obtained or renewed every five and 10 years, respectively. After five years, the GMRS licensee is responsible for renewing the license (or cancelling) and the Commission is responsible for maintaining accurate records of licenses coming up for renewal—an administrative burden on both GMRS users and on the Commission for renewing and maintaining records of these licenses. After analyzing the costs of processing fee payments for GMRS, we conclude that the Commission's cost of collecting and processing this fee exceeds the payment amount of $25. Our costs have increased over time and now that the costs exceed the amount of the regulatory fee, the increased relative administrative cost supports eliminating this regulatory fee category.

11. The Vanity Call Sign fee category has a small regulatory fee ($21.40 in FY 2014) for a 10-year license. The Commission often receives multiple applications for the same vanity call sign, but only one applicant can be issued that call sign. In such cases, the Commission issues refunds for all the remaining applicants. In addition to staff and computer time to process payments and issue refunds, there is an additional expense to issue checks for the applicants who cannot be refunded electronically. The Commission spends more resources on processing the regulatory fees and issuing refunds than the amount of the regulatory fee payment. As our costs now exceed the regulatory fee, we are eliminating this regulatory fee category.

12. The Commission will therefore eliminate the GMRS and Vanity Call Sign regulatory fee categories after the required congressional notification is provided.29 Once eliminated, these licensees will no longer be financially burdened with such payments and the Commission will no longer incur these administrative costs that exceed the fee payments. The revenue that the Commission would otherwise collect from these regulatory fee categories will be proportionally assessed on other wireless fee categories. This is a “permitted amendment” as defined in section 9(b)(3) of the Act, which, pursuant to section 9(b)(4)(B, must be submitted to Congress at least 90 days before it becomes effective.30

29 After the 90-day notification period for a permitted amendment, these two fee categories will be eliminated. We will not be issuing refunds to licensees who have paid the regulatory fee prior to the elimination of the fee.

30 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

2. Toll Free Numbers

13. Toll free numbers, defined in section 52.101(f) of our rules,31 allow callers to reach the called party without being charged for the call. Instead, the charge for the call is paid by the called party (the toll free subscriber).32 Prior to the FY 2014 Report and Order, the Commission did not assess regulatory fees on toll free numbers based on the assumption that the entities controlling the numbers—wireline and wireless common carriers—were paying regulatory fees based on either revenues or subscribers.33 In the FY 2014 NPRM, we observed this was no longer the case because many toll free numbers are now controlled or managed by RespOrgs 34 that are not common carriers.35 In the FY 2014 Report and Order, we adopted a regulatory fee obligation for toll free numbers beginning in FY 2015, finding that the Commission has both the legal authority and responsibility to assess regulatory fees on toll free numbers.36 This regulatory fee assessed on RespOrgs for toll free numbers managed by a RespOrg,37 is payable for all toll free numbers unless calls from only other countries can be completed using those toll free numbers.38 This regulatory fee is assessed on RespOrgs for each working, assigned, reserved, in transit, or any other status of toll free number as defined in section 52.103 of the Commission's rules. Interstate Telecommunications Service Providers (ITSPs) that are RespOrgs and RespOrgs that are not ITSPs will be responsible for this regulatory fee.

31 Toll free numbers are telephone numbers for which the toll charges for completed calls are paid by the toll free subscriber. See 47 CFR 52.101(f). These are 800, 888, 877, 866, 855, and 844 numbers. SMS/800 (or the 800 Service Management System) is a centralized system that performs toll free number management. For a list of RespOrgs on the SMS/800, Inc. Web site, see http://www.sms800.com/Controls/NAC/Serviceprovider.aspx.

32 47 U.S.C. 52.101 (e), (f).

33FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195, para. 28, Footnote 76 (citing Universal Service Contribution Methodology, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 77 FR 33896, 33923, para. 227 (June 7, 2012).

34 A RespOrg is a company that manages toll free telephone numbers for subscribers. RespOrgs use the SMS/800 data base to verify the availability of specific numbers and to reserve the numbers for subscribers. See 47 CFR 52.101(b).

35FY 2014 NPRM, 79 FR 37982, 37992, para. 57, Footnote 91 (citing, inter alia, Telseven, LLC, Calling 10, LLC, Patrick Hines a/k/a P. Brian Hines, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 27 FCC Rcd 15558, 15560, para. 3 (2012) (various corporations, including non-common carrier RespOrgs, owned and controlled by Patrick Hines, controlled approximately one million toll free numbers for Hines' “directory assistance” operation.))

36FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195, para. 28-29 (September 11, 2014) (summarizing the legal rationale for adoption of a fee on toll free numbers and the FTEs involved in toll free issues) (citing Toll Free Access Codes, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 95-155, 62 FR 20126, 20127 (April 25, 1997) (Toll Free Second Report and Order) (Sections 201(b) and 251(e) of the Act “empower the Commission to ensure that toll free numbers . . . are allocated in an equitable and orderly manner that serves the public interest.”)).

37 The proposed fee rate for toll free numbers for FY 2015 is in Table C (FY 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking).

38See FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54195-54196, para. 30 (September 11, 2014).

14. The decision in 2014 to expand the pool of regulatory fee obligations to all RespOrgs created a system in which there are now numerous entities that play a role in toll free number administration and are required to pay annual regulatory fees but are not common carriers and therefore may lack familiarity with the Commission's rules. In the FY 2014 Report and Order, we did not adopt a specific enforcement mechanism to address circumstances where RespOrgs do not make regulatory fee payments but instead, sought further comment on the additional procedures for enforcement in such instances.39 Instead of adopting additional enforcement procedures at this time, however, we direct SMS/800, Inc.40 to provide the necessary outreach to the RespOrgs, through its tariff, Web site, or otherwise, to advise them that: “The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted a regulatory fee category for toll free numbers, assessed for each toll free number managed by a Responsible Organization (RespOrg). This regulatory fee, assessed on RespOrgs for toll free numbers managed by a RespOrg, is payable for all toll free numbers unless calls from only other countries can be completed using those toll free numbers. A RespOrg that fails to pay the regulatory fee assessed by the FCC will be subject to penalties.” 41

39FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 63883, 63885, paras. 8-9 (October 27, 2014).

40 SMS/800, Inc. provides administration and routing for all toll free numbers in North America. The Commission has the ultimate authority over numbering resources and oversees the SMS Tariff and SMS/800 Board. See 47 U.S.C. 251 (e)(1); see generally Toll Free Service Access Codes, CC Docket No. 95-155; Petition to Change the Composition of SMS/800, Inc., WC Docket No. 12-260, 28 FCC Rcd 15328 (2013) (SMS Reauthorization Order). Previously the Commission required SMS/800, Inc. to include language prohibiting toll free number hoarding and warehousing in the SMS Tariff. See Toll Free Service Access Codes, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 62 FR 20126, 20127, para. 1 (April 25, 1997).

41See Toll Free Second Report and Order, 62 FR 20126 (April 25, 1997) (“We also may limit any RespOrg's allocation of toll free numbers or possibly decertify it as a RespOrg under section 251(e)(1) or section 4(i) [of the Communications Act].”)

15. The imposition of a regulatory fee on RespOrgs is a new rule, adopted in the FY 2014 Report and Order, and non-common carriers may be unfamiliar with our regulatory fee process and unaware that delinquencies can result in penalties imposed by SMS/800, Inc., penalties imposed by the Commission pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA), and/or enforcement action by the Enforcement Bureau, pursuant to delegated authority, or by the Commission.42 As a result, OMD will coordinate with SMS/800, Inc. to ensure that all RespOrgs owing regulatory fees have sufficient information about this process and opportunity to pay the regulatory fee before the RespOrg is placed in red light status and enforcement procedures are initiated.43

42 The Commission has a number of generally applicable mechanisms to ensure collection of delinquent debt which would also apply to RespOrgs. See generally FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54199, paras. 47-48 (September 11, 2014) (summarizing the late payment penalty on unpaid regulatory fees under 47 U.S.C. 159(c), the red-light rule set forth in section 1.1910 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1910, and additional provisions contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA), 31 U.S.C. 3701 et seq., See Amendment of Parts 0 and 1 of the Commission's Rules, MD Docket No. 02-339, Report and Order, 69 FR 27843 (May 17, 2004); 47 CFR part 1, subpart O, Collection of Claims Owed the United States).

43 Hypercube Telecom contends that the consumer end-users would be affected by our enforcement action against a RespOrg. Hypercube Telecom Reply Comments at 3-5. The notifications that are part of our delinquent bill collection process will give RespOrgs multiple opportunities to pay any delinquency before enforcement action.

16. The basis for identifying the toll free number count upon which a regulatory fee will be assessed for each RespOrg will be derived from data provided by SMS/800, Inc.44 The toll free number data will be determined by the toll free number count as of or around December 31st of each year. In addition to maintaining contact information with SMS/800, Inc., RespOrgs are also responsible for: (i) Obtaining an FRN (FCC Registration Number); 45 (ii) maintaining current contact information in the Commission Registration System (CORES); 46 (iii) reviewing the Commission's Regulatory Fees Home Page for updates on regulatory fees; 47 and (iv) making timely regulatory fee payments using the Commission's Electronic Filing and Payment System (Fee Filer) located at: www.fcc.gov/feefiler. SMS/800, Inc. will provide the Commission with up-to-date contact information for the RespOrgs as needed to facilitate the timely payment of regulatory fees for toll free numbers. Under our bill collection procedures, delinquent RespOrgs will receive notice from the Commission before the matter is referred to the Enforcement Bureau for enforcement action and/or penalties imposed by SMS/800, Inc.

44 SMS/800, Inc. observes that some of its billing and contact information may contain additional proprietary and confidential data and that it would require the Commission to ensure the confidentiality of any such information provided. See SMS/800, Inc. Comments at 6. If SMS/800, Inc. is unable to provide the necessary information without including any confidential information it should submit, along with the responsive information and/or documents, a statement in accordance with section 0.459 of the Commission's rules. 47 CFR 0.459.

45 Commission FRN numbers can be obtained by registering in the Commission's Registration System (CORES) located at: https://apps.fcc.gov/coresWeb/publicHome.do.

46 Commission's Registration System (CORES) located at: https://apps.fcc.gov/coresWeb/publicHome.do.

47 The Commission's Regulatory Fees Home Page is located at: http://www.fcc.gov/regfees.

17. Any payments RespOrgs must pay SMS/800, Inc. for toll free number management and administration are unrelated to regulatory fees assessed by the Commission. Payment of regulatory fees to the Commission does not relieve a RespOrg from any payment obligations to SMS/800, Inc.

3. Direct Broadcast Satellite Providers

18. DBS service is a nationally distributed subscription service that delivers video and audio programming via satellite to a small parabolic “dish” antenna at the subscriber's location. DBS providers are multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs), as defined in section 602(13) of the Act.48 These operators of U.S. licensed geostationary space stations, which are used to provide one-way subscription video service to consumers in the United States, currently pay a fee per U.S.-licensed satellite under the category “Space Station (Geostationary Orbit)” in the regulatory fee schedule based on the International Bureau FTEs work associated with satellite regulation. Cable television and IPTV, also MVPDs, similarly provide subscription video services to consumers in the United States. These regulated entities pay a regulatory fee per subscriber under the fee category “Cable TV System, Including IPTV.” 49 In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking accompanying the FY 2014 Report and Order, the Commission proposed to adopt a fee to recover the costs incurred by the Media Bureau for regulation of DBS.50 Under our proposal, DBS providers would be subject to two regulatory fees. The first fee would recover the burden of regulation and oversight by International Bureau FTEs incurred as a result of its operation of satellites, and the other fee would recover the burden of regulation and oversight by Media Bureau FTEs as a result of DBS status as a MVPD. We conclude that DBS providers are subject to regulation and oversight of the Media Bureau and should share in the Media Bureau FTE burden attributed to MVPDs. Accordingly, pursuant to section 9(b)(3), we amend the regulatory fee schedule to replace the category “Cable TV System, Including IPTV” with the “Cable TV System, Including IPTV and DBS” category. This category will now have two rates: One for DBS (a subcategory) and another for cable television and IPTV.

48 47 U.S.C. 522(13).

49 In FY 2014, the regulatory fee for “Cable TV System, Including IPTV” was $0.99 per subscriber. FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54208-54212 (September 11, 2014). Cumulatively, the Cable TV System, Including IPTV fee category paid $64.35 million in regulatory fees for FY 2014.

50FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63886-63887, paras. 10-15 (October 27, 2014).

19. Background. The Commission has considered the appropriate methodology for assessing regulatory fees on DBS providers on multiple occasions. The original fee schedule adopted by Congress in 1993, when the DBS service was a nascent industry,51 did not include a specific fee category for DBS providers.52 The Commission recognized this and declined to adopt a regulatory fee for DBS until fiscal year 1996.53 In the FY 1996 NPRM, the Commission determined that including the fledgling DBS service in the regulatory fee imposed on geostationary orbit geosynchronous satellite category best reflected the regulatory burden born by the Commission at that time.54 In the 2005,55 2006,56 and 2008 57 regulatory fee proceedings, the Commission also considered whether DBS should pay a subscriber-based regulatory fee related to Media Bureau oversight instead of being included in the geosynchronous satellite category related to International Bureau oversight. In those proceedings, the Commission either declined to adopt a change or made no decision on the issue. In the FY 2005 Report and Order, in declining to make a change, the Commission noted its FY 2005 NPRM had not contained a proposal on the issue.58 In the FY 2006 Report and Order, the Commission decided not to change the fee. In the FY 2009 Report and Order, the Commission declined to address the issue raised in the FY 2008 Report and Order and Further Notice. 59

51Implementation of Section 9 of the Communications Act, Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for the 1994 Fiscal Year, Report and Order, 59 FR 30984, 30994, para. 85 (June 16, 1994) (FY 1994 Report and Order) (declining to adopt a regulatory fee for DBS under the Mass Media fees and noting that DBS service is not expected to be offered prior to the time for calculating fee payments for FY 1994).

52 In the Appendix to the FY 1994 Report and Order published in the Federal Register, the Commission noted that DBS was not included in the original fee schedule adopted by Congress and observed “that the omission of DBS and FM translators and boosters was inadvertent and that Congress did not intend to exempt all DBS permittees and licensees and licensees of FM translators and boosters from regulatory fees as these services result in the Commission incurring costs for necessary regulatory functions. . . . we intend to add regulatory fee categories for DBS licenses and for FM translators and boosters. . . .” 59 FR 30984, 31006, note 2.

53Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 1996, Report and Order, 61 FR 36629, 36652, para 35 in Appendix F (July 12, 1996) (FY 1996 Report and Order) (imposing regulatory fee for the first time on DBS relying on the analysis in the FY 1996 NPRM); Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 1996, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 61 FR 16432, 16436, para. 41(April 15, 1996) (FY 1996 NPRM) (proposing to assess DBS licensees the fee applicable to all geostationary orbit geosynchronous satellite licensees and, therefore, to include DBS for regulatory fee purposes in the Space Station fee category).

54FY 1996 NPRM, 61 FR 16432, 16436, para.41 (April 15, 1996).

55Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2005, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 70 FR 41967, 41969, para 11 (July 21, 2005) (FY 2005 Report and Order). In 2005, the Commission declined to adopt changes in the regulatory fee assessment methodology for DBS providers in response to the comments of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association and American Cable Association. Id. The FY 2005 NPRM did not contain a proposal on this issue. See generally, Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2005, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 70 FR 9575 (February 28, 2005).

56Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2006, Report and Order, 71 FR 43842, 43844-43845, paras. 10-16 (August 2, 2006) (FY 2006 Report and Order) (declining to change the DBS regulatory fee from a per operational space station fee to a subscriber based fee); Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2006, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 71 FR 17410, 17411-17412, para. 8 (June 6, 2006) (FY 2006 NPRM) (seeking comment on the appropriate regulatory fee structure for both cable operators and DBS providers).

57FY 2008 Report and Order and Further Notice, 73 FR 50285, 50290, para. 26 (August 26, 2008) (seeking comment on whether the Commission should impose the same per subscriber fee on DBS that cable providers pay, or continue to assess a space station regulatory fee for the DBS industry and a subscriber-based structure for the cable industry).

58FY 2005 Report and Order, 70 FR 41967, 41969, para. 11 (July 21, 2005).

59Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2009, Report and Order, 74 FR 40089, 40089, para 3 (August 11, 2009) (FY 2009 Report and Order) (the Commission noted that the remaining outstanding issues from the FY 2008 Report and Order and Further Notice would be decided at a later time).

20. In August of 2012, the GAO Report concluded that regulatory fee reform at the Commission was long overdue.60 The GAO Report observed, among other things, that questions had been raised by commenters regarding whether the Commission's regulatory fee analysis was based on a “valid FTE analysis” of Media Bureau FTEs work related to the MVPDs including DBS.61 Following the GAO Report, in the fiscal year 2013 regulatory fee proceeding, the Commission considered and adopted a number of significant regulatory fee reforms such as updating the FTEs allocated to each of the core bureaus and reclassifying most of the International Bureau FTEs as indirect.62 The Commission also adopted other reforms such as broadening the cable television category to include IPTV providers as a “permitted amendment.” 63 As part of its overall analysis of the cable television systems category, the Commission considered a change to the DBS fee schedule.64 While the Commission declined to do so in 2013 to allow additional time to examine the proposal as part of larger reform efforts, the Commission noted its intent to revisit the issue in the future.65 In 2014, the Commission again proposed to adopt a fee to recover the costs incurred by the Media Bureau for regulation of DBS in the FY 2014 NPRM and the FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.66 Alternatively, the Commission sought comment on whether Media Bureau FTEs working on DBS issues be assigned to the International Bureau as direct FTEs or assigned as indirect FTEs for regulatory fee purposes.67

60See note 22, supra. We have adopted significant regulatory fee reforms in our annual regulatory fee proceedings in response to the GAO Report. See, e.g., FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52436, para. 12-14 (August 23, 2013) (using current FTE data to calculate regulatory fees).

61 GAO Report at 18-20.

62See FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52436-52438, para. 12-22 (August 23, 2013).

63FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52439, 52444, paras. 31, 36 (August 23, 2013).

64FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52443-52444, paras. 35-36 (August 23, 2013); Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2013, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 78 FR 34612, 34627-34628, paras. 56-58 (June 10, 2013) (FY 2013 NPRM).

65FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52439, para. 31 (August 23, 2013) (“We will continue to examine these suggestions as we continue our regulatory fee reform, as well as our proposals that we do not reach in this Report and Order: To combine the ITSP and wireless categories, to use revenues in calculating all regulatory fees, and to include DBS providers in a new MVPD category. We find additional time is necessary and appropriate to examine these proposals under Section 9 of the Communications Act and analyze how these proposals account for changes in the communications industry and the Commission's regulatory processes and staffing.”) (footnotes omitted) and para. 33.

66FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63885-63886, paras. 10-15 (October 27, 2014); FY 2014 NPRM, 79 FR 37982, 37990-37991, paras. 47-52 (July 3, 2014).

67FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63886, para. 13 (October 27, 2014).

21. Discussion. Under section 9 of the Act, the Commission may make a permitted amendment to the fee schedule if it “determines that the Schedule requires amendment to comply with the requirements of” paragraph (1)(A) which mandates that the Commission allocate fees to cover the costs of certain regulatory activities in accordance with the benefits provided to the payor and other factors that the Commission determines are in the public interest.68 The statute also provides, however, that, “[i]n making such amendments, the Commission shall add, delete, or reclassify services in the Schedule to reflect additions, deletions or changes in the nature of its services as a consequence of Commission rulemaking proceedings or changes in law.” 69 We have conducted a review of the Media Bureau work devoted to MVPD matters and find that the recommendations in the GAO Report were correct.70 Analysis of the oversight and regulation of MVPDs (including the DBS industry) by the Media Bureau in various rulemaking proceedings reveal a cumulative effect of changes in law that have taken effect since the Commission adopted the current DBS regulatory fee structure in 1996. Due to these changes, we find that the DBS providers should be included in the same fee category as the other MVPDs, such as cable television and IPTV. There are certain rules that both DBS providers and cable operators including IPTV are subject to, and Media Bureau FTEs provide the oversight and regulation of the DBS industry as required by these rules.71 For example, DBS providers (and cable television operators) are permitted to file program access complaints 72 and complaints seeking relief under the retransmission consent good faith rules.73 In addition, DBS providers are subject to MVPD requirements such as those pertaining to program carriage 74 and the requirement to negotiate retransmission consent in good faith.75 More recently, the Commission adopted a host of requirements that apply to all MVPDs and thus equally apply to DBS providers as part of its implementation of the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act (CALM Act),76 the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA),77 as well as the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELA) Reauthorization Act of 2014 (STELAR).78 These regulatory developments increased the amount of regulatory activity by the Media Bureau FTEs involving regulation and oversight of MVPDs, including the DBS providers. The Media Bureau has been responsible for adopting many of these regulations and overseeing the MVPD industry. As MVPDs, DBS providers actively participate in Media Bureau proceedings involving MVPD oversight and regulation.79

68 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

69 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

70 The GAO Report did not have a specific recommendation with respect to the DBS regulatory fee, but observed that the National Cable and Telecommunications Association had argued that our regulatory fee process was competitively disadvantaging the cable television industry. GAO Report at 18-19. Competition per se is not part of the permitted amendment analysis; however, in this case the Media Bureau FTEs work on MVPD issues that include DBS.

71See, e.g., 47 CFR 76.65(b); 76.1000-1004; 47 U.S.C. 618(b).

72 47 U.S.C. 548; 47 CFR 76.1000-1004.

73 47 U.S.C. 325(b)(1), (3)(C)(ii); 47 CFR 76.65(b).

74 47 U.S.C. 536; 47 CFR 76.1300-1302.

75 47 U.S.C. 325(b)(3)(C)(iii); 47 CFR 76.65(a)-(b).

76See Implementation of the Commercial Advertisement, Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act, Report and Order, 77 FR 40276 (July 9, 2012) (CALM Act Report and Order).

77 Public Law 111-260, 124 Stat. 2751 (2010). See also Amendment of Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Public Law 111-265, 124 Stat. 2795 (2010) (making corrections to the CVAA); 47 CFR part 79.

78 The STELA Reauthorization Act of 2014 (STELAR), 102, Public Law 113-200, 128 Stat. 2059, 2060-62 (2014) (codified at 47 U.S.C. 338(1)). The STELAR was enacted on Dec. 4, 2014 (H.R. 5728, 113th Cong.). Implementation of Section 102 of the STELA Reauthorization Act of 2014, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 15-71, FCC 15-34 (rel. Mar. 26, 2015) proposes satellite television “market modification” rules to implement section 102 of STELAR.

79 NCTA and ACA Comments at 7, 10-11; ITTA Comments at 3. DIRECTV and DISH filed comments and ex parte statements in numerous Commission proceedings, in the Media Bureau dockets as well as other dockets. As of Mar. 17, 2015, in the past 12 months, DIRECTV filed 109 comments and ex parte statements in Media Bureau (and other) dockets. There are other proceedings, such as mergers, in which DIRECTV and DISH have participated. Regardless of whether the proceeding is merger-related or pertains strictly to MVPD regulation, DBS participation, and Media Bureau staff involvement, support our conclusion that DBS providers should be added to the cable television and IPTV category.

22. DIRECTV and DISH disagree that a permitted amendment is justified, contending that there has been no “meaningful increase in the regulation of DBS.” 80 To the contrary, as discussed above, implementation of the CALM Act, CVAA, and STELAR should alone provide adequate justification for a permitted amendment in this case. A permitted amendment under section 9(b)(3), however, does not require a sudden increase in regulation or oversight over a defined period of time. Circumstances have changed in the almost 20 years since the Commission first addressed the issue of DBS regulatory fees.81 At the time we adopted a DBS regulatory fee, it was a fledging service where the business model was uncertain and there were questions concerning whether it would operate as a subscription based service or a free to air broadcaster.82 The first DBS satellite was not launched until 1993 and did not become operational until 1994.83 In 2015, however, DBS had developed into a large MVPD 84 and as such significant Media Bureau FTE resources are used in regulation and oversight of DBS. The GAO Report correctly noted that an evaluation of Media Bureau FTEs was long overdue 85 and the result of such evaluation leads us to the conclusion that the Media Bureau FTEs regulate the DBS industry together with the other MVPDs. Thus, there is no reasonable basis to exclude DBS providers from sharing in the cost of MVPD oversight and regulation. With this Report and Order, we recognize the changes in fact and law since the adoption of the DBS fee in 1996 cumulatively require us to adopt a permitted amendment to ensure that DBS providers contribute equitably to the FTE burden of MVPD oversight.86

80 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 8-9.

81 The Commission's annual MVPD Competition Report provides a history of MVPD services. Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, Report, 9 FCC Rcd 7442 (1994) (First Report); 11 FCC Rcd 2060 (1996) (Second Report); 12 FCC Rcd 4358 (1997) (Third Report); 13 FCC Rcd 1034 (1998) (Fourth Report); 13 FCC Rcd 24284 (1998) (Fifth Report); 15 FCC Rcd 978 (2000) (Sixth Report); 16 FCC Rcd 6005 (2001) (Seventh Report); 17 FCC Rcd 1244 (2002) (Eighth Report); 17 FCC Rcd 26901 (2002) (Ninth Report); 19 FCC Rcd 1606 (2004) (Tenth Report); 20 FCC Rcd 2755 (2005) (Eleventh Report); 21 FCC Rcd 2503 (2006) (Twelfth Report); 24 FCC Rcd 542 (2007) (Thirteenth Report); 27 FCC Rcd 8610 (2012) (Fourteenth Report); 28 FCC Rcd 10496 (2013) (Fifteenth Report).

82FY 1996 Report and Order, 61 FR 36629, 36652, Appendix F, para. 35 (July 12, 1996). DBS space stations applicants must indicate in their license application whether they seek to operate on a broadcast or non-broadcast basis, which affects the length of their license terms. Inquiry into the Development of Regulatory Policy in regard to Direct Broadcast Satellites for the Period Following the 1982 Regional Administrative Radio Conference, Report and Order, 90 FCC 2d 676 (1982), aff'd sub nom National Association of Broadcasters v. F.C.C., 740 F.2d 1190 (1984). To date, neither DIRECTV nor DISH has elected to operate as a broadcaster.

83First Report, 59 FR 64657, 64659, paras. 21-22 (December 15, 1994).

84Fifteenth Report, 28 FCC Rcd at 10546-49, paras. 110-117 (describing DBS MVPD business models and competitive strategies).

85 GAO Report at 17-20.

86 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3). See, e.g., 47 CFR 76.65(b); 76.1000-1004; Part 79; 47 U.S.C. 618(b).

23. We also reject the argument raised by DIRECTV and DISH that section 9 of the Act requires us to “show that DBS and cable occupy a comparable number of FTEs.” 87 The commenters' argument that DBS is not involved in certain matters such as petitions for effective competition,88 or other requirements that do not pertain to DBS,89 demonstrates that DBS is not identical to cable television. It does not, however, refute our conclusion that a significant number of Media Bureau FTEs work on MVPD issues that include DBS.90 The Commission has determined in other proceedings that services that are not technologically identical nevertheless warrant placement in the same regulatory fee category. Other fee categories, such as Interstate Telecommunications Service Providers (ITSP), also include a range of carriers that may not be regulated identically.91 For example, when interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers were added to the ITSP category in a permitted amendment the Commission observed that “the costs and benefits associated with our regulation of interconnected VoIP providers are not identical as those associated with regulating interstate telecommunications service and CMRS.” 92 The Commission stated that “Section 9 is clear, however, that regulatory fee assessments are based on the burden imposed on the Commission, not benefits realized by regulatees.” 93 Concerning many aspects of MVPD regulation, Media Bureau FTEs bear the same burden regardless of the specific technology used by the service provider. Thus, although DBS is not identical to cable television and IPTV, the services all receive oversight and regulation as a result of the work of Media Bureau FTEs on MVPD issues. The burden imposed on the Commission is therefore similar.

87 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 11 & Reply Comments at 4-9.

88 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 12.

89 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 12 (these are (1) a requirement to encrypt the basic service tier, (2) the viewability requirements in sections 614 and 615 of the Act, and (3) the requirement to include certain digital interfaces on high definition set-top boxes).

90See, e.g ., Closed Captioning Report and Order, 79 FR 17911 (March 31, 2014), 79 FR 17093 (March 31, 2014); CALM Act Report and Order, 77 FR 40276 (July 9, 2012); 76.1000-1004; part 79; 47 U.S.C. 618(b).

91 ITSP, regulated by the Wireline Competition Bureau, includes interexchange carriers (IXCs), incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs), toll resellers, Voice over Internet Providers (VoIP), and other service providers, all of which involve different degrees of regulatory oversight. See NCTA and ACA Comments at 9 & Reply Comments at8-9.

92See Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2007, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 45908, 45912, para. 19 (August 16, 2007) (FY 2007 Report and Order).

93FY 2007 Report and Order, 72 FR 45908, 45912, para. 19 (August 16, 2007).

24. DIRECTV and DISH also observe that there are more cable operators and cable systems than DBS operators, and that the cable industry has a larger filing and recordkeeping requirement than DBS.94 While we agree that the two DBS providers and their trade association had fewer filings than the top 25 cable operators and their two trade associations (combined), we are not persuaded that this demonstrates a lack of Media Bureau oversight and regulation of the DBS industry.95 We are therefore including DBS providers into the same regulatory fee category as cable television and IPTV because many Media Bureau issues involve the entire MVPD industry. We find that it is appropriate under section 9 of the Act to recover the costs associated with Media Bureau FTE work.96 As we explain below, however, DBS will have an opportunity to raise questions concerning the rate calculation between it and other members of the same fee category for fiscal year 2015 and in the future.97 The video programming and distribution industry continues to change 98 and the appropriate allocation between and among regulatees with respect to Media Bureau FTEs working on MVPD issues may change over time as different regulatory and legal issues are presented to the Commission.

94 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 13. DIRECTV and DISH compare the number of filings in our electronic comment filing system (ECFS) and observe that over a two year period DIRECTV and DISH and their trade association filed 4,870 pages in 401 proceedings and the top 25 cable companies and their two trade associations filed 93,673 pages in 2,217 proceedings. DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 13, note 53.

95 In the 12 months prior to Mar. 17, 2015, Comcast Corporation (the largest cable company in the country) had 297 total ECFS filings, DIRECTV had 109, and DISH Network had 134 (some filings were by DIRECTV and DISH together), a not unexpected relative volume of ECFS filings for the top three MVPDs in the country.

96 47 U.S.C. 159(a)(1).

97 Even when an industry has oversight generally by one organizational unit within the Commission, we are sensitive to the fact that balance between members of the same industry may require adjustments to FTE allocations. See, e.g., recent changes in FTE allocations between space station and earth stations even though such systems are may operate in the same spectrum and be part of the same telecommunication system. FY 2014 Report and Order, 79 FR 54190, 54192-54193, paras. 11-15 (September 11, 2014).

98See, e.g., Promoting Innovation and Competition in the Provision of Multichannel Video Programming Distribution Services, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 29 FCC Rcd 15995 (2014) (seeking comment on, inter alia, expanding the definition of MVPD to include providers of multiple linear streams of video programming, regardless of the technology used to distribute it.)

25. To the extent that DIRECTV and DISH are suggesting by these arguments that the number of FTEs dedicated to a service is wholly determinative of their regulatory fees, we disagree. Although the statute requires us to calculate FTEs initially, we are also required to “adjust[]” that number “to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payor of the fee by the Commission's activities.” 99 Since DBS providers generally benefit from the regulatory activities of the Media Bureau, much like cable operators and IPTV providers, the Commission can attribute Media Bureau FTEs to DBS providers and require them to pay Media Bureau regulatory fees.

99 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(1)(A).

26. DIRECTV and DISH also argue that because we declined to include DBS in the cable television and IPTV regulatory fee category previously, we must provide a reasoned explanation for changing our fee determination.100 We agree that it serves the public interest to explain our rationale. A prior decision, however, does not preclude us from making a different determination in light of the facts and circumstances presented to the Commission in 2015. When the Commission first determined to include DBS in the geosynchronous satellite regulatory fee, DBS was a new service with an uncertain business model. Imposing a subscription based fee derived from Media Bureau FTEs risked failing to compensate the Commission for the substantive work regulating DBS as a satellite industry.101 When we examined the issue again in 2005, 2006, and 2008, contemporaneously there was a significant amount of regulatory work being done by the International Bureau related to making new spectrum available for satellite based video services.102 Thus, it is not surprising that the Commission concluded in 2006 that the existing methodology adequately ensured recovery of International Bureau FTE burden of oversight and regulation. Further, removing DBS from the geosynchronous satellite regulatory fee category at a time when that fee category bore the burden of substantial rulemakings relating to new satellite spectrum would have been a complex issue. While the burden of new satellite rulemakings was not mentioned by the Commission in the FY 2006 Report and Order, review of the context in which decisions are made is appropriate here. Further, in the past, changes to the DBS regulatory fee was frequently described as either a fee assessed based on International Bureau FTEs or a fee based on Media Bureau FTEs. In contrast, our proposal presents a more nuanced approach of recognizing that the work of both the International Bureau FTEs and the Media Bureau FTEs provide oversight and regulation of DBS. As a result, while the decisions made in the past are understandable in their context, we are not bound to disregard the FTE burden born by the Media Bureau in regulating DBS as a MVPD simply because we previously declined to change the methodology of assessing fees on DBS providers.

100 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 15-17 & Reply Comments at 10-11.

101FY 1996 NPRM, 61 FR 16432, 16436, para. 41 (April 15, 1996) (“Moreover, because DBS licensees are not restricted to the provision of video programming, but rather may provide various non-video services, we concluded that a facility-based fee would ensure that each DBS licensee contributed equitably to the cost of DBS regulation without the need to impose possibly burdensome and overly intrusive reporting requirements necessary to gather information identifying the services offered by individual DBS operators.”)

102Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the Broadcasting Satellite Service at the 17.3-17.7 GHz Frequency Band and at the 17.7-17.8 GHz Frequency Band Internationally, and at the 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Satellite Services Providing Feeder Links to the Broadcasting-Satellite Service and for the Broadcasting Satellite Service Operating Bidirectionally in the 17.3-17.7 GHz Frequency Band, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 46939 (August 22, 2007), Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 50000 (August 29, 2007); Amendment of the Commission's Policies and Rules for Processing Applications in the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 21 FCC Rcd 9443 (2006). See Thirteenth Report, 74 FR 11102, at para. (March 16, 2009).

27. Regulatory fee reform is a logistical challenge due to the time constraints in regulatory fee proceedings which typically must be completed in a year in order to satisfy our statutory mandate. Unfortunately, at times we must decline to adopt a proposal or take an incremental approach, not because a proposal lacks merit, but simply because there is insufficient time to address the substantive comments raised in the record in the time allotted.103 In this instance, however, we have the benefit of comments regarding this issue from the FY 2013 NPRM, the FY 2014 NPRM, and the FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. As a result, unlike prior review of this issue, we have had more time within which to review the significant issue of adopting an additional fee category for DBS providers. The GAO Report also brought new focus to conducting the necessary analysis of Media Bureau FTEs as part of our overall regulatory fee reform.104 Had the Commission performed this analysis of Media Bureau FTEs and regulation and oversight of DBS earlier, we may have reached this result at that time. The Commission may update its regulatory fee methodology when, among other things, it is supported by updated data, analysis, and changes in the regulation and oversight of the industry. As the GAO Report observed, it is important to “regularly update analyses to ensure that fees are set based on relevant information.” 105

103See, e.g ., FY 2006 Report and Order, 71 FR 43842, 43845, para 16 (August 6, 2006) (“Finally, as a practical matter, we do not have sufficient time available to modify the section 9 regulatory fee classification and methodology as proposed by NCTA and still comply with the 90-day congressional notification requirement before we start our regulatory fee collections in the August/September time frame.”)

104See, e.g., FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52436, paras. 12-14 (August 23, 2013).

105 GAO Report at 12.

28. Finally, DISH and DIRECTV contend that a “fee increase will cause rate shock” 106 and argue that we must explain the basis of any regulatory fee increase exceeding 7.5 percent relying upon a cap we adopted for FY 2013.107 We note first that it is somewhat premature to address this concern since the rate for DBS providers is merely proposed in the accompanying NPRM, and DISH and DIRECTV, the two DBS providers, may provide comments on the rate for this year and in subsequent years. As to the substance of the complaint, we note that this cap was adopted due to the significant regulatory fee changes adopted that year and our concern on the impact on small entities; neither DISH nor DIRECTV claim that they are small entities. We are not required to adopt a cap every year and we are not seeking comment on such a cap for FY 2015 in our NPRM above. Due to their concern that the regulatory fee would have such an impact on their customers, we have decided to phase in the DBS fee and introduce it initially as a subcategory of the cable television and IPTV category.108 This phased approach is consistent with the interim approach the Commission took in the FY 2013 Report and Order to “avoid sudden and large changes in the amount of fees” 109 and addresses DIRECTV and DISH's concerns.110

106 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 11.

107 DIRECTV and DISH Comments at 15-17 & Reply Comments at 10-11.

108 Commenters propose a three-year phase-in period. See NCTA and ACA Comments at 14-15.

109FY 2013 Report and Order, 78 FR 52433, 52439, para. 28 (August 23, 2013).

110 In FY 2014, DIRECTV and DISH paid approximately $2.49 million in international regulatory fees for 20 satellites and 141 earth stations. Assuming these DBS providers pay for the same number of satellite and earth station units, the Commission estimates that in FY 2015 their total fees paid would be $2.72 million (satellites and earth stations) plus $2.72 million (media services) for a total of $5.44 million.

29. We also note that we sought comment on whether the operator of the satellite or the provider of DBS service should be the entity that pays the regulatory fee.111 As the fee is based on subscriber numbers, the DBS service provider would be the entity with this information and it would be more efficient for those DBS providers to be responsible for the regulatory fee. For purposes of calculating regulatory fees, the subscriber count includes single family dwellings as well as individuals in multiple dwelling units (e.g., apartments, condominiums, mobile home parks) based on the formula in the footnote below.112

111FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63886, para. 13 (October 27, 2014).

112 DBS providers, cable television system operators, and IPTV providers should compute their number of basic subscribers as follows: Number of single family dwellings + number of individual households in multiple dwelling unit (apartments, condominiums, mobile home parks, etc.) paying at the basic subscriber rate + bulk rate customers + courtesy and free service. Note: Bulk-Rate Customers = Total annual bulk-rate charge divided by basic annual subscription rate for individual households. Providers and operators may base their count on “a typical day in the last full week” of December 2014, rather than on a count as of December 31, 2014.

30. In the FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we further sought comment on whether, in lieu of a permitted amendment, Media Bureau FTEs working on DBS issues should be assigned to the International Bureau as direct FTEs or assigned as indirect FTEs.113 These alternatives would, in some ways, allocate the Media Bureau FTEs for regulatory fee purposes in a way that is fairer than the current allocation. DBS providers would be paying regulatory fees for some of the Media Bureau FTEs, if reallocated as direct FTEs to the International Bureau. If we reallocated some Media Bureau FTEs as indirect, the regulatory fee burden would be spread among all regulatory fee payors, which would relieve the burden on the cable television and IPTV industry. Although these two alternatives would serve to reallocate a portion of the Media Bureau FTEs, such reallocation would either shift the burden to all International Bureau regulatees or to all regulatory fee payors, instead of to the DBS providers. Thus, although those two alternative proposals might be an improvement over the status quo, including DBS in the same category as cable television and IPTV, and basing the regulatory fee on Media Bureau FTEs, is the more straightforward and equitable approach because the DBS regulation and oversight is done by the Media Bureau FTEs.

113FY 2014 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 63883, 63886, para. 13 (October 27, 2014).

31. Under section 9 of the Act, the Commission must add, delete, or reclassify services in the fee schedule to reflect additions, deletions, or changes in the nature of its services “as a consequence of Commission rulemaking proceedings or changes in law.” 114 As explained above, after analyzing the oversight and regulation of MVPDs (including DBS) by the Media Bureau in various rulemaking proceedings, MVPDs (including DBS providers) are subject to increased regulation and oversight due to changes in law, and therefore DBS should be included in the same fee category as cable television and IPTV, as a permitted amendment. Since two different sets of FTE resources are involved, the Commission is assessing two separate fees on DBS providers, a satellite fee based on International Bureau FTEs and a fee based on Media Bureau FTEs, assessed per DBS subscriber. This adoption of a fee subcategory for DBS within the cable television and IPTV category is a permitted amendment as defined in section 9(b)(3) of the Act, which, pursuant to section 9(b)(4)(B), must be submitted to Congress at least 90 days before it becomes effective.115

114 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(3).

115 47 U.S.C. 159(b)(4)(B).

32. In the Order portion of the rulemaking, the Commission makes ministerial changes to sections 1.911(d), 1.1912(b)(1), and 1.1917(c) of the Commission's rules 116 to conform to the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act).117 In particular, the Commission amends the rule provisions to specify that debts owed to the Commission that have been delinquent for a period of 120 days shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury.118 These amendments are to conform the Commission's rules to the DATA Act and the notice and comment and effective date provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act are inapplicable.119

116 47 CFR 1.1911(d), 1.1912(b)(1), 1.1917(c).

117 31 U.S.C. 3716(c)(6).

118 The full text of the new rules is contained in the Rule Change section of this document.

119 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),120 an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was included in the Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.121 The Commission sought written public comment on these proposals including comment on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the IRFA.122

120 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601-612 has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 847 (1996).

121Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2014, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MD Docket No. 14-92, 79 FR 63883 (October 27, 2014) (Further Notice).

122 5 U.S.C. 604.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order

2. In this Report and Order, we eliminate two categories from the regulatory fee schedule: Amateur radio Vanity Call Signs and General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). We also include direct broadcast satellite (DBS) providers in the cable television and IPTV regulatory fee category, as a subcategory. To aid in the implementation of new regulatory fees for Responsible Organizations (RespOrgs) adopted in the fiscal year 2014 proceeding, we direct the Managing Director to coordinate with SMS/800, Inc. to ensure that all RespOrgs owing regulatory fees have sufficient information about this process and opportunity to pay the regulatory fee before the RespOrg is placed in red light status and enforcement procedures are initiated.

3. Our regulatory fee for DBS providers, adopted herein, will include DBS providers in the category of cable television operators and IPTV providers, but at a lower regulatory fee rate. This rule was adopted because the Media Bureau staff spend approximately as much time working on issues that include DBS as cable television and IPTV. For the most part, the rules and policies addressed by the Media Bureau include DBS and cable television, as well as IPTV. Under section 9 of the Commission's rules, the DBS industry should contribute to these regulatory fees, otherwise the cable television and IPTV industries are paying for costs that should be shared with DBS.

B. Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the IRFA

4. None.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rules Will Apply

5. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules and policies, if adopted.123 The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” 124 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act.125 A “small business concern” is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.126 Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.9 million small businesses, according to the SBA.127

123 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).

124 5 U.S.C. 601(6).

125 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register.”

126 15 U.S.C. 632.

127See SBA, Office of Advocacy, “Frequently Asked Questions,” http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/FAQ_Sept_2012.pdf.

6. Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census Bureau defines this industry as “establishments primarily engaged in operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, establishments providing satellite television distribution services using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in this industry.” 128 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which consists of all such companies having 1,500 or fewer employees.129 Census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,144 operated with less than 1,000 employees.130 Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms in this industry can be considered small.

128http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch.

129See 13 CFR 120.201, NAICS Code 517110.

130http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

7. Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses specifically applicable to local exchange services. The closest applicable NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.131 According to Commission data, census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,144 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.132 The Commission therefore estimates that most providers of local exchange carrier service are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

131 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

132http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

8. Incumbent LECs. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The closest applicable NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.133 According to Commission data, 3,188 firms operated in that year. Of this total, 3,144 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.134 Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted. Three hundred and seven (307) Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers reported that they were incumbent local exchange service providers.135 Of this total, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or fewer employees.136

133 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

134http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

135See Trends in Telephone Service, Federal Communications Commission, Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry Analysis and Technology Division at Table 5.3 (Sept. 2010) (Trends in Telephone Service).

136Id.

9. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs), Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers, as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.137 U.S. Census data for 2007 indicate that 3,188 firms operated during that year. Of that number, 3,144 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.138 Based on this data, the Commission concludes that the majority of Competitive LECS, CAPs, Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers, are small entities. According to Commission data, 1,442 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of either competitive local exchange services or competitive access provider services.139 Of these 1,442 carriers, an estimated 1,256 have 1,500 or fewer employees.140 In addition, 17 carriers have reported that they are Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and all 17 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees.141 Also, 72 carriers have reported that they are Other Local Service Providers.142 Of this total, 70 have 1,500 or fewer employees.143 Consequently, based on internally researched FCC data, the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange service, competitive access providers, Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

137 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

138http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

139See Trends in Telephone Service, at tbl. 5.3.

140Id.

141Id.

142Id.

143Id.

10. Interexchange Carriers (IXCs). Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition for Interexchange Carriers. The closest NAICS Code category is Wired Telecommunications Carriers as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. The applicable size standard under SBA rules is that such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.144 U.S. Census data for 2007 indicates that 3,188 firms operated during that year. Of that number, 3,144 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.145 According to internally developed Commission data, 359 companies reported that their primary telecommunications service activity was the provision of interexchange services.146 Of this total, an estimated 317 have 1,500 or fewer employees.147 Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of interexchange service providers are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

144 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

145http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

146See Trends in Telephone Service, at Table 5.3.

147Id.

11. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for prepaid calling card providers. The appropriate NAICS Code category for prepaid calling card providers is Telecommunications Resellers. This industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and households. Mobile virtual networks operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry.148 Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.149 U.S. Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.150 Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of these prepaid calling card providers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 193 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards.151 All 193 carriers have 1,500 or fewer employees.152 Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

148http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ssd/naics/naicsrch.

149 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517911.

150http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

151See Trends in Telephone Service, at Table 5.3.

152Id.

12. Local Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.153 Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.154 Under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of these local resellers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 213 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services.155 Of this total, an estimated 211 have 1,500 or fewer employees.156 Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of local resellers are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

153 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517911.

154http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

155See Trends in Telephone Service, at tbl. 5.3.

156Id.

13. Toll Resellers. The Commission has not developed a definition for Toll Resellers. The closest NAICS Code Category is Telecommunications Resellers, and the SBA has developed a small business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.157 Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.158 Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of these resellers can be considered small entities. According to Commission data, 881 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services.159 Of this total, an estimated 857 have 1,500 or fewer employees.160 Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of toll resellers are small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted.

157http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

158Id.

159Trends in Telephone Service, at Table 5.3.

160Id.

14. Other Toll Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a definition for small businesses specifically applicable to Other Toll Carriers. This category includes toll carriers that do not fall within the categories of interexchange carriers, operator service providers, prepaid calling card providers, satellite service carriers, or toll resellers. The closest applicable NAICS Code category is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers as defined in paragraph 6 of this FRFA. Under the applicable SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.161 Census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,144 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees.162 Thus, under this category and the associated small business size standard, the majority of Other Toll Carriers can be considered small. According to internally developed Commission data, 284 companies reported that their primary telecommunications service activity was the provision of other toll carriage.163 Of these, an estimated 279 have 1,500 or fewer employees.164 Consequently, the Commission estimates that most Other Toll Carriers are small entities that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted.

161 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

162http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

163Trends in Telephone Service, at Table 5.3.

164Id.

15. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the airwaves, such as cellular services, paging services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services.165 The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is that such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this industry, Census data for 2007 show that there were 1,383 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,368 firms had fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus under this category and the associated size standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless telecommunications carriers (except satellite) are small entities. Similarly, according to internally developed Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, Personal Communications Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) services.166 Of this total, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer employees.167 Consequently, the Commission estimates that approximately half of these firms can be considered small. Thus, using available data, we estimate that the majority of wireless firms can be considered small.

165 NAICS Code 517210. See http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ssd/naics/naiscsrch.

166Trends in Telephone Service, at Table 5.3.

167Id.

16. Cable Television and Other Subscription Programming.168 Since 2007, these services have been defined within the broad economic census category of Wired Telecommunications Carriers. That category is defined as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of technologies.” 169 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees.170 Census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,144 had fewer than 1,000 employees.171 Thus under this size standard, the majority of firms offering cable and other program distribution services can be considered small and may be affected by rules adopted.

168 In 2014, “Cable and Other Subscription Programming,” NAICS Code 515210, replaced a prior category, now obsolete, which was called “Cable and Other Program Distribution.” Cable and Other Program Distribution, prior to 2014, was placed under NAICS Code 517110, Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Wired Telecommunications Carriers is still a current and valid NAICS Code Category. Because of the similarity between “Cable and Other Subscription Programming” and “Cable and other Program Distribution,” we will, in this proceeding, continue to use Wired Telecommunications Carrier data based on the U.S. Census. The alternative of using data gathered under Cable and Other Subscription Programming (NAICS Code 515210) is unavailable to us for two reasons. First, the size standard established by the SBA for Cable and Other Subscription Programming is annual receipts of $38.5 million or less. Thus to use the annual receipts size standard would require the Commission either to switch from existing employee based size standard of 1,500 employees or less for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, or else would require the use of two size standards. No official approval of either option has been granted by the Commission as of the time of the release of this Regulatory Fees NPRM and its associated Report and Order and Order. Second, the data available under the size standard of $38.5 million dollars or less is not applicable at this time, because the only currently available U.S. Census data for annual receipts of all businesses operating in the NAICS Code category of 515210 (Cable and other Subscription Programming) consists only of total receipts for all businesses operating in this category in 2007 and of total annual receipts for all businesses operating in this category in 2012. The data do not provide any basis for determining, for either year, how many businesses were small because they had annual receipts of $38.5 million or less. See http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2012_US_51I2&prodType=table.

169 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions, “517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers” (partial definition), (Full definition stated in paragraph 6 of this IRFA) available at http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch.

170 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.

171http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US-51SSSZ5&prodType=Table.

17. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has developed its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a “small cable company” is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers, nationwide.172 Industry data indicate that at the end of June 2012, 1,141 cable companies were in operation.173 Of this total, all but ten cable operators were small under this size standard. In addition, under the Commission's rules, a “small system” is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers.174 Industry data indicate that of 4,945 systems nationwide, 4,380 systems have fewer than 20,000.175 Thus, under this second size standard, most cable systems are small and may be affected by the rules adopted.

172See 47 CFR 76.901(e). The Commission determined that this size standard equates approximately to a size standard of $100 million or less in annual revenues. See Implementation of Sections of the 1992 Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act: Rate Regulation, MM Docket Nos. 92-266, 93-215, Sixth Report and Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, 60 FR 35854, 35855, para. 7 (July 12, 1995).

173 NCTA, Industry Data, Number of Cable Operating Companies. See http://www.ncta.com/Statistics.aspx.

174See 47 CFR 76.901(c).

175 The number of active, registered cable systems comes from the Commission's Cable Operations Licensing System (COALS) database on August 28, 2013.

18. All Other Telecommunications. “All Other Telecommunications” is defined as follows: This U.S. industry is comprised of establishments that are primarily engaged in providing specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Establishments providing Internet services or voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications connections are also included in this industry.176 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for “All Other Telecommunications,” which consists of all such firms with gross annual receipts of $32.5 million or less.177 For this category, census data for 2007 show that there were 2,383 firms that operated for the entire year. Of these firms, a total of 2,346 had gross annual receipts of less than $25 million.178 Thus, a majority of “All Other Telecommunications” firms potentially affected by the rules adopted can be considered small.

176http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ssssd/naics/naicsrch.

177 13 CFR 121.201; NAICS Code 517919.

178http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ECN_2007_US_51SSSZ5&prodType=table.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements

19. This Report and Order does not adopt any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements, other than the requirement that DBS providers pay regulatory fees based on Media Bureau FTEs, as a subcategory of the cable television operators and IPTV category. These two companies are already subject to our regulatory fee requirements.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

20. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its approach, which may include the following four alternatives, among others: (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.179

179 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).

21. This Report and Order does not adopt any new reporting requirements. Therefore no adverse economic impact on small entities will be sustained based on reporting requirements. There will be a regulatory fee increase on DBS providers, but these companies are not small entities. We are also advising SMS/800, Inc. to provide information to Responsible Organizations, or RespOrgs, to ensure that they comply with their new previously adopted regulatory fee requirements. These entities may be small entities; however, the regulatory fee per toll free number is very small and could easily be paid and then passed on to the subscriber if the number is in use, in which case compliance would not be an issue. (We also note that there is a previously adopted de minimis threshold of $500, per year.) If the toll free number is not used by a subscriber, the RespOrg can either choose to pay the regulatory fee or return the toll free number to the 800/SMS, Inc. database. The Commission expends resources to address toll free issues, and so parties should either be responsible for the payment of the resources used or the toll free numbers should be returned for others to use.

22. In keeping with the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have considered certain alternative means of mitigating the effects of fee increases to a particular industry segment. In addition, the Commission's rules provide a process by which regulatory fee payors may seek waivers or other relief on the basis of financial hardship. See 47 CFR 1.1166.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict

23. None.

V. Ordering Clauses

24. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j), 9, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 159, and 303(r), this Report and Order and Order is hereby adopted.

25. It is further ordered that Part 1 of the Commission's rules are amended as set forth in paragraph 32 and in the rule change section of this document, effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

26. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report and Order and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 1

Administrative practice and procedure.

Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Rule Changes

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 1 as follows:

PART 1—PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority:

15 U.S.C. 79 et seq., 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 157, 225, 303, and 309.

Subpart O—Collection of Claims Owed the United States
2. Revise § 1.1911(d) to read as follows:
§ 1.1911 Demand for payment.

(d) The Commission may, as circumstances and the nature of the debt permit, include in demand letters such items as the Commission's willingness to discuss alternative methods of payment; its policies with respect to the use of credit bureaus, debt collection centers, and collection agencies; the Commission's remedies to enforce payment of the debt (including assessment of interest, administrative costs and penalties, administrative garnishment, the use of collection agencies, Federal salary offset, tax refund offset, administrative offset, and litigation); the requirement that any debt delinquent for more than 120 days be transferred to the Department of the Treasury for collection; and, depending on applicable statutory authority, the debtor's entitlement to consideration of a waiver. Where applicable, the debtor will be provided with a period of time (normally not more than 15 calendar days) from the date of the demand in which to exercise the opportunity to request a review.

3. Revise § 1.1912(b)(1) to read as follows:
§ 1.1912 Collection by administrative offset.

(b) Mandatory centralized administrative offset. (1) The Commission is required to refer past due, legally enforceable nontax debts which are over 120 days delinquent to the Treasury for collection by centralized administrative offset. Debts which are less than 120 days delinquent also may be referred to the Treasury for this purpose. See FCCS for debt certification requirements.

4. Revise § 1.1917(c) to read as follows:
§ 1.1917 Referrals to the Department of Justice and transfer of delinquent debt to the Secretary of Treasury.

(c) All non-tax debts of claims owed to the Commission that have been delinquent for a period of 120 days shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury. Debts which are less than 120 days delinquent may also be referred to the Treasury. Upon such transfer the Secretary of the Treasury shall take appropriate action to collect or terminate collection actions on the debt or claim. A debt is past-due if it has not been paid by the date specified in the Commission's initial written demand for payment or applicable agreement or instrument (including a post-delinquency payment agreement) unless other satisfactory payment arrangements have been made.

[FR Doc. 2015-17288 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 1837 and 1852 RIN 2700-AE01 and 2700-AE09 NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Correction AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION:

Correcting amendments.

SUMMARY:

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) published a final rule in the Federal Register on Thursday, March 12, 2015 (80 FR 12935), as part of the NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NFS) regulatory review. That document (80 FR 12835) inadvertently removed sections of the NFS that relate to access and release of sensitive information in the performance of advisory and assistance services in NFS parts 1837 and 1852. This document corrects the final rule by reinstating these original sections of the regulation.

DATES:

Effective: July 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marilyn J. Seppi, NASA, Office of Procurement, Contract and Grant Policy Division, via email at [email protected], or telephone (202) 358-0447.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

NASA published a final rule in the Federal Register on March 12, 2015, inadvertently removing from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) those sections of the NASA FAR Supplement that contained information related to access and release of sensitive information while performing contracted advisory and assistance contracts. As published, the rule contains errors due to inadvertent deletion of text that needs to be corrected. Specifically, in amendatory instruction 49 on page 12944 of that final rule, NFS sections 1837.203-70, 1837.203-71, and 1837.203-72 were erroneously deleted and need to be restored. In addition, in amendatory instruction 94 on page 12953 of the final rule, the associated clauses at NFS 1852.237-72 and 1852.237-73 were also removed in error and need to be restored. NASA is not altering these policies and regulations, but rather, correcting an inadvertent deletion. This document corrects the final rule by revising these sections.

List of Subject in 48 CFR Parts 1837 and 1852

Government procurement.

Cynthia Boots, Alternate Federal Register Liaison.

Accordingly, 48 CFR parts 1837 and 1852 are amended as follows:

PART 1837—SERVICE CONTRACTING 1. The authority citation for part 1837 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

51 U.S.C. 20113(a) and 48 CFR chapter 1.

2. Revise subpart 1837.2 to read as follows: Subpart 1837.2—Advisory and Assistance Services Sec. 1837.203 Policy. 1837.203-70 Providing contractors access to sensitive information. 1837.303-71 Release of contractors' sensitive information. 1837.203-72 NASA contract clauses. Subpart 1837.2—Advisory and Assistance Services
1837.203 Policy.

(c) Advisory and assistance services of individual experts and consultants shall normally be obtained by appointment rather than by contract (see NPR 3300.1, Appointment of Personnel To/From NASA, Chapter 4, Employment of Experts and Consultants).

1837.203-70 Providing contractors access to sensitive information.

(a)(1) As used in this subpart, “sensitive information” refers to information that the contractor has developed at private expense or that the Government has generated that qualifies for an exception to the Freedom of Information Act, which is not currently in the public domain, may embody trade secrets or commercial or financial information, and may be sensitive or privileged, the disclosure of which is likely to have either of the following effects: To impair the Government's ability to obtain this type of information in the future; or to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained. The term is not intended to resemble the markings of national security documents as in sensitive-secret-top secret.

(2) As used in this subpart, “requiring organization” refers to the NASA organizational element or activity that requires specified services to be provided.

(3) As used in this subpart, “service provider” refers to the service contractor that receives sensitive information from NASA to provide services to the requiring organization.

(b)(1) To support management activities and administrative functions, NASA relies on numerous service providers. These contractors may require access to sensitive information in the Government's possession, which may be entitled to protection from unauthorized use or disclosure.

(2) As an initial step, the requiring organization shall identify when needed services may entail access to sensitive information and shall determine whether providing access is necessary for accomplishing the Agency's mission. The requiring organization shall review any service provider requests for access to information to determine whether the access is necessary and whether the information requested is considered “sensitive” as defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.

(c) When the requiring organization determines that providing specified services will entail access to sensitive information, the solicitation shall require each potential service provider to submit with its proposal a preliminary analysis of possible organizational conflicts of interest that might flow from the award of a contract. After selection, or whenever it becomes clear that performance will necessitate access to sensitive information, the service provider must submit a comprehensive organizational conflicts of interest avoidance plan.

(d) This comprehensive plan shall incorporate any previous studies performed, shall thoroughly analyze all organizational conflicts of interest that might arise because the service provider has access to other companies' sensitive information, and shall establish specific methods to control, mitigate, or eliminate all problems identified. The contracting officer, with advice from Center counsel, shall review the plan for completeness and identify to the service provider substantive weaknesses and omissions for necessary correction. Once the service provider has corrected the substantive weaknesses and omissions, the contracting officer shall incorporate the revised plan into the contract, as a compliance document.

(e) If the service provider will be operating an information technology system for NASA that contains sensitive information, the operating contract shall include the clause at 1852.204-76, Security Requirements for Unclassified Information Technology Resources, which requires the implementation of an Information Technology Security Plan to protect information processed, stored, or transmitted from unauthorized access, alteration, disclosure, or use.

(f) NASA will monitor performance to assure any service provider that requires access to sensitive information follows the steps outlined in the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information, to protect the information from unauthorized use or disclosure.

1837.203-71 Release of contractors' sensitive information.

Pursuant to the clause at 1852.237-73, Release of Sensitive Information, offerors and contractors agree that NASA may release their sensitive information when requested by service providers in accordance with the procedures prescribed in 1837.203-70 and subject to the safeguards and protections delineated in the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information. As required by the clause at 1852.237-73, or other contract clause or solicitation provision, contractors must identify information they claim to be “sensitive” submitted as part of a proposal or in the course of performing a contract. The contracting officer shall evaluate all contractor claims of sensitivity in deciding how NASA should respond to requests from service providers for access to information.

1837.203-72 NASA contract clauses.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information, in all solicitations and contracts for services that may require access to sensitive information belonging to other companies or generated by the Government.

(b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.237-73, Release of Sensitive Information, in all solicitations, contracts, and basic ordering agreements.

PART 1852—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 3. The authority citation for part 1852 continues to read as follows: Authority:

51 U.S.C. 20113(a) and 48 CFR chapter 1.

4. In subpart 1852.2, add sections 1852.237-72 and 1852.237-73 to read as follows:
1852.237-72 Access to Sensitive Information.

As prescribed in 1837.203-72(a), insert the following clause:

ACCESS TO SENSITIVE INFORMATION

(JUNE 2005)

(a) As used in this clause, “sensitive information” refers to information that a contractor has developed at private expense, or that the Government has generated that qualifies for an exception to the Freedom of Information Act, which is not currently in the public domain, and which may embody trade secrets or commercial or financial information, and which may be sensitive or privileged.

(b) To assist NASA in accomplishing management activities and administrative functions, the Contractor shall provide the services specified elsewhere in this contract.

(c) If performing this contract entails access to sensitive information, as defined above, the Contractor agrees to—

(1) Utilize any sensitive information coming into its possession only for the purposes of performing the services specified in this contract, and not to improve its own competitive position in another procurement.

(2) Safeguard sensitive information coming into its possession from unauthorized use and disclosure.

(3) Allow access to sensitive information only to those employees that need it to perform services under this contract.

(4) Preclude access and disclosure of sensitive information to persons and entities outside of the Contractor's organization.

(5) Train employees who may require access to sensitive information about their obligations to utilize it only to perform the services specified in this contract and to safeguard it from unauthorized use and disclosure.

(6) Obtain a written affirmation from each employee that he/she has received and will comply with training on the authorized uses and mandatory protections of sensitive information needed in performing this contract.

(7) Administer a monitoring process to ensure that employees comply with all reasonable security procedures, report any breaches to the Contracting Officer, and implement any necessary corrective actions.

(d) The Contractor will comply with all procedures and obligations specified in its Organizational Conflicts of Interest Avoidance Plan, which this contract incorporates as a compliance document.

(e) The nature of the work on this contract may subject the Contractor and its employees to a variety of laws and regulations relating to ethics, conflicts of interest, corruption, and other criminal or civil matters relating to the award and administration of government contracts. Recognizing that this contract establishes a high standard of accountability and trust, the Government will carefully review the Contractor's performance in relation to the mandates and restrictions found in these laws and regulations. Unauthorized uses or disclosures of sensitive information may result in termination of this contract for default, or in debarment of the Contractor for serious misconduct affecting present responsibility as a government contractor.

(f) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (f), suitably modified to reflect the relationship of the parties, in all subcontracts that may involve access to sensitive information.

(End of clause)
1852.237-73 Release of Sensitive Information.

As prescribed in 1837.203-72(b), insert the following clause:

RELEASE OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION

(JUNE 2005)

(a) As used in this clause, “sensitive information” refers to information, not currently in the public domain, that the Contractor has developed at private expense, that may embody trade secrets or commercial or financial information, and that may be sensitive or privileged.

(b) In accomplishing management activities and administrative functions, NASA relies heavily on the support of various service providers. To support NASA activities and functions, these service providers, as well as their subcontractors and their individual employees, may need access to sensitive information submitted by the Contractor under this contract. By submitting this proposal or performing this contract, the Contractor agrees that NASA may release to its service providers, their subcontractors, and their individual employees, sensitive information submitted during the course of this procurement, subject to the enumerated protections mandated by the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information.

(c)(1) The Contractor shall identify any sensitive information submitted in support of this proposal or in performing this contract. For purposes of identifying sensitive information, the Contractor may, in addition to any other notice or legend otherwise required, use a notice similar to the following:

Mark the title page with the following legend:

This proposal or document includes sensitive information that NASA shall not disclose outside the Agency and its service providers that support management activities and administrative functions. To gain access to this sensitive information, a service provider's contract must contain the clause at NFS 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information. Consistent with this clause, the service provider shall not duplicate, use, or disclose the information in whole or in part for any purpose other than to perform the services specified in its contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use this information if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The information subject to this restriction is contained in pages [insert page numbers or other identification of pages].

Mark each page of sensitive information the Contractor wishes to restrict with the following legend:

Use or disclosure of sensitive information contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal or document.

(2) The Contracting Officer shall evaluate the facts supporting any claim that particular information is “sensitive.” This evaluation shall consider the time and resources necessary to protect the information in accordance with the detailed safeguards mandated by the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information. However, unless the Contracting Officer decides, with the advice of Center counsel, that reasonable grounds exist to challenge the Contractor's claim that particular information is sensitive, NASA and its service providers and their employees shall comply with all of the safeguards contained in paragraph (d) of this clause.

(d) To receive access to sensitive information needed to assist NASA in accomplishing management activities and administrative functions, the service provider must be operating under a contract that contains the clause at 1852.237-72, Access to Sensitive Information. This clause obligates the service provider to do the following:

(1) Comply with all specified procedures and obligations, including the Organizational Conflicts of Interest Avoidance Plan, which the contract has incorporated as a compliance document.

(2) Utilize any sensitive information coming into its possession only for the purpose of performing the services specified in its contract.

(3) Safeguard sensitive information coming into its possession from unauthorized use and disclosure.

(4) Allow access to sensitive information only to those employees that need it to perform services under its contract.

(5) Preclude access and disclosure of sensitive information to persons and entities outside of the service provider's organization.

(6) Train employees who may require access to sensitive information about their obligations to utilize it only to perform the services specified in its contract and to safeguard it from unauthorized use and disclosure.

(7) Obtain a written affirmation from each employee that he/she has received and will comply with training on the authorized uses and mandatory protections of sensitive information needed in performing this contract.

(8) Administer a monitoring process to ensure that employees comply with all reasonable security procedures, report any breaches to the Contracting Officer, and implement any necessary corrective actions.

(e) When the service provider will have primary responsibility for operating an information technology system for NASA that contains sensitive information, the service provider's contract shall include the clause at 1852.204-76, Security Requirements for Unclassified Information Technology Resources. The Security Requirements clause requires the service provider to implement an Information Technology Security Plan to protect information processed, stored, or transmitted from unauthorized access, alteration, disclosure, or use. Service provider personnel requiring privileged access or limited privileged access to these information technology systems are subject to screening using the standard National Agency Check (NAC) forms appropriate to the level of risk for adverse impact to NASA missions. The Contracting Officer may allow the service provider to conduct its own screening, provided the service provider employs substantially equivalent screening procedures.

(f) This clause does not affect NASA's responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act.

(g) The Contractor shall insert this clause, including this paragraph (g), suitably modified to reflect the relationship of the parties, in all subcontracts that may require the furnishing of sensitive information.

(End of clause)
[FR Doc. 2015-17717 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 140611492-5605-02] RIN 0648-BE30 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Regulatory Amendment 20 AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

NMFS issues regulations to implement Regulatory Amendment 20 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP) (Regulatory Amendment 20), as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council). This final rule revises the snowy grouper annual catch limits (ACLs), commercial trip limit, and recreational fishing season. The purpose of this rule is to help achieve optimum yield (OY) and prevent overfishing of snowy grouper while enhancing socio-economic opportunities within the snapper-grouper fishery.

DATES:

This rule is effective August 20, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Electronic copies of the regulatory amendment, which includes an environmental assessment and an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/s_atl/sg/2015/reg_am20/index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nikhil Mehta, telephone: 727-824-5305, or email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Snowy grouper is in the snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic and is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

On April 8, 2015, NMFS published a proposed rule for Regulatory Amendment 20 and requested public comment (80 FR 18797). The proposed rule and Regulatory Amendment 20 outline the rationale for the actions contained in this final rule. A summary of the actions implemented by Regulatory Amendment 20 and this final rule is provided below.

Management Measures Contained in This Final Rule

This final rule revises the snowy grouper ACLs for both the commercial and recreational sectors, the commercial trip limits, and the recreational fishing season. All weights described in the preamble of this final rule are in gutted weight.

Snowy Grouper Commercial and Recreational ACLs

In 2013, a standard stock assessment for snowy grouper was conducted using the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) process (SEDAR 36). SEDAR 36 indicates that the snowy grouper stock is no longer undergoing overfishing, remains overfished, and is rebuilding.

This final rule increases the ACLs for snowy grouper based on the acceptable biological catch (ABC) chosen by the Council, as recommended by their Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) based on the results of SEDAR 36. The current snowy grouper commercial ACL is 82,900 lb (37,603 kg). This final rule revises the commercial ACL to 115,451 lb (52,368 kg) in 2015; 125,760 lb (57,044 kg) in 2016; 135,380 lb (61,407 kg) in 2017; 144,315 lb (65,460 kg) in 2018; and 153,935 lb (69,824 kg) in 2019, and subsequent fishing years. The current snowy grouper recreational ACL is 523 fish. This final rule revises the snowy grouper recreational ACL to 4,152 fish in 2015; 4,483 fish in 2016; 4,819 fish in 2017, 4,983 fish in 2018; and 5,315 fish in 2019, and subsequent fishing years.

Applying the existing allocation formula for snowy grouper to the change in landings from the SEDAR 36 assessment resulted in a shift in the sector ACLs from 95 percent commercial and 5 percent recreational to 83 percent commercial and 17 percent recreational.

Snowy Grouper Commercial Trip Limit

This final rule revises the snowy grouper commercial trip limit from the current 100 lb (45 kg) to 200 lb (91 kg). The Council determined that since the commercial ACL would be increasing yearly from 2015 to 2019, a relatively small increase in the commercial trip limit to 200 lb (91 kg) would help to maintain a longer fishing season when combined with the commercial ACL increase. Furthermore, because the fishing year for snowy grouper begins on January 1, an increased trip limit could enhance profits for commercial snapper-grouper fishermen during the winter. This is because shallow-water grouper species are closed during January-April, leaving snowy grouper (a deep-water species) as one of few options for purchase by dealers at that time.

Snowy Grouper Recreational Fishing Season

The current snowy grouper fishing season is year-round with a recreational bag limit of one snowy grouper per vessel per day. This final rule revises the recreational fishing season to one snowy grouper per vessel per day from May through August, with no retention of snowy grouper during the rest of the year. The Council determined that reducing the current year-round recreational fishing season to a 4-month season would help minimize the risk of exceeding the recreational ACL. Additionally, the fishing season dates and bag limit for the snowy grouper recreational sector would match those for a co-occurring species, blueline tilefish. The Council determined that similar recreational management measures and fishing seasons for snowy grouper and blueline tilefish would be beneficial to both fish stocks as they are caught at the same depths and have similar high release mortality rates; thereby, discards of both species could be reduced.

Comments and Responses

A total of 24 comments were received on Regulatory Amendment 20 and the proposed rule from individuals, commercial fishing associations, fish markets, and a Federal agency. The Federal agency stated that it had no comment on the proposed rule or Regulatory Amendment 20. The comments that oppose one or more of the management measures in Regulatory Amendment 20 and the proposed rule are summarized and responded to below.

Comment 1: NMFS should not increase the commercial or recreational catch limits for snowy grouper.

Response: NMFS disagrees. In 2013, a standard stock assessment for snowy grouper was conducted through SEDAR 36. SEDAR 36 indicates the snowy grouper stock is no longer undergoing overfishing, remains overfished, and is rebuilding. The previous assessment conducted in 2004 (SEDAR 4) determined snowy grouper was undergoing overfishing and was overfished. The Council's SSC recommended an increase in the ABC to the Council; and the Council then chose a corresponding increase in the commercial and recreational ACLs. The ACLs for the commercial and recreational sectors chosen by the Council and implemented through this final rule are based on the best scientific information available, and are appropriate to maintain a sustainable harvest of the stock, while it continues to rebuild. Thus, catch levels for snowy grouper may now be increased without negatively impacting the stock.

Comment 2: NMFS should not increase the commercial quota while shortening the recreational fishing season.

Response: NMFS disagrees. This final rule for Regulatory Amendment 20 will increase both the commercial and recreational ACLs for snowy grouper based upon the results of the latest stock assessment (SEDAR 36). The ACLs may be increased for the commercial and recreational sectors because the stock is no longer undergoing overfishing, and is rebuilding at a rate that allows the ABC increase recommended by the SSC and the ACL chosen by the Council. Further, changing the recreational fishing season to May through August is expected to reduce the chance that the recreational ACL is exceeded, promote safety at sea for recreational fishermen, and reduce bycatch of snowy grouper.

The current recreational fishing season begins on January 1. Recreational landings for snowy grouper exceeded the recreational ACL by approximately 400 percent in both 2012 and 2013, and 230 percent in 2014, and as a result of the accountability measures (AMs), the recreational sector closed on May 31, in 2013, and on June 7, in 2014. Without a change to the recreational fishing season and with an increased ACL, it is expected that the recreational ACL would still be reached and harvest closed early in the year. Continuing to exceed the ACL could negatively impact the rebuilding of the snowy grouper stock, and the Council determined that changing the fishing season would help minimize the risk of exceeding the recreational ACL.

Additionally, in some areas of the South Atlantic, recreational fishermen must travel long distances offshore to fish for snowy grouper, where conditions can be more challenging for fishermen during times of the year when weather is poor. The months of May through August are when recreational fishermen throughout the South Atlantic generally have more equal access to the resource due to good weather conditions, and would thus benefit the most from the increase in the recreational ACL.

The fishing season dates and bag limit for the snowy grouper recreational sector specified in Regulatory Amendment 20 match those implemented in Amendment 32 to the FMP for blueline tilefish, a co-occurring species with snowy grouper, (80 FR 16583; March 30, 2015). Therefore, this approach could help reduce discard mortality for snowy grouper, which can be targeted along with blueline tilefish. The Council determined that similar recreational management measures and fishing seasons for snowy grouper and blueline tilefish would be beneficial to both fish stocks and reduce bycatch as they are caught at the same depths and have similar high release mortality rates.

Comment 3: NMFS should not start the commercial fishing season on January 1. Inclement weather in North Carolina in the earlier part of the year does not allow equitable access to snowy grouper, which does not conform to National Standard (NS) 4 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. NMFS should start the commercial fishing season later in the year, and implement split seasons for the commercial sector.

Response: NMFS disagrees that the commercial trip limit action violates NS 4, as the trip limit does not discriminate between residents of different states. The Council did not consider changing the start date of the commercial fishing year from January 1 in Regulatory Amendment 20, but they did consider creating split commercial seasons within the fishing year. The Council acknowledged that fishers in North Carolina have historically had limited access to snowy grouper at the beginning of the fishing year as a result of weather conditions compared to other areas within the Council's jurisdiction. However, snowy grouper are an important commercial species during January to April when the harvest of shallow-water grouper is closed, and snowy grouper sells at a higher market price during that part of the year. The Council determined that the current commercial fishing year allows for enhanced profits per trip and likely enhanced total profits for commercial snapper-grouper fishers. Additionally, if snowy grouper closes in the summer as a result of meeting its commercial quota, there are many other snapper-grouper species open to commercial harvest beginning on May 1. While weather conditions throughout the Council's area of jurisdiction may be variable throughout the year and may not impact certain areas or states in the South Atlantic at the same time in the same way, the snowy grouper fishing season dates are applied the same to all the states. Over the course of an entire fishing season, it is likely that there are comparable opportunities for individuals throughout the South Atlantic with respect to commercial harvest of snowy grouper.

While the Council did consider split seasons for the commercial sector in Regulatory Amendment 20, they determined it would have little effect on extending the fishing season when compared with the Council's preferred alternative. Due to the increase to the commercial ACL in Regulatory Amendment 20, the first split season would likely remain open because the first split season quota would not be met under any of the new trip limit alternatives considered by the Council. Thus, the split season alternative would have the same effect as the preferred alternative of implementing a 200 lb (91 kg) trip limit with no split season, because both choices would result in approximately the same fishing season length.

Therefore, the Council determined that their preferred alternative for this action best met the purpose and need to implement measures expected to prevent overfishing and achieve OY while also complying with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws, including NS 4.

Comment 4: NMFS should increase the commercial trip limit to 300 lb (136 kg), not the proposed trip limit increase to 200 lb (91 kg).

Response: NMFS disagrees. The Council considered a trip limit of 300 lb (136 kg), and determined that since the commercial ACL would be increasing yearly from 2015 to 2019, a small increase in the commercial trip limit from 100 lb (45 kg) to 200 lb (91 kg), would help to maintain a longer fishing season when combined with the commercial ACL increase. Analysis in Regulatory Amendment 20 revealed that commercial landings could increase over 100 percent throughout the calendar year with an increase in the commercial trip limit to 300 lb (136 kg). This would result in the commercial ACL being met and harvest closure occurring earlier in the year than for the 200 lb (91 kg) trip limit.

Comment 5: NMFS should not reallocate the increase in commercial and recreational ACLs using unreliable Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS)/Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) data.

Response: The Council is applying their approved existing sector allocation formula for snowy grouper to the updated MRIP landings from SEDAR 36 to specify sector ACLs. The existing sector allocation formula developed and approved in Amendment 15B to the FMP, uses average commercial and recreational landings from 1986-2005 (74 FR 58902, November 16, 2009). SEDAR 36 also included recreational data from Monroe County, Florida, that were not available when snowy grouper was first assessed in 2004 (SEDAR 4) because the recreational landings for Monroe County could not be separated from other west Florida landings. In 2013, a method was developed to separate Monroe County data from other west Florida landings. The change in landings from the SEDAR 36 assessment, as applied to the average commercial and recreational landings for 1986-2005, resulted in a shift in the sector ACLs from the current 95 percent commercial and 5 percent recreational to 83 percent commercial and 17 percent recreational. Additionally, the SEDAR 36 assessment made adjustments to the landings to account for the change from MRFSS to MRIP, and NMFS has determined that this information is the best scientific information available.

Comment 6: The Council's preferred alternative of a 1 fish per vessel per day recreational bag limit with harvest allowed only during the months of May through August will result in North Carolina recreational fishers being geographically disadvantaged. Furthermore, lack of compatible regulations in Florida state waters is not only unfair to North Carolina fishers since North Carolina implements compatible regulations in its state waters, but is potentially detrimental to the snowy grouper population, which is still considered overfished and is under a rebuilding plan.

Response: NMFS disagrees that the Council's choice of the recreational fishing season would result in a geographic disadvantage in accessing the snowy grouper resource by North Carolina fishers. The Council determined that the months of May through August are when recreational fishermen throughout the South Atlantic usually have equal access to the resource as a result of generally improved weather conditions.

NMFS agrees that the lack of consistency in compatible regulations in state waters could have detrimental effects upon the stock as it rebuilds, since the implementation of compatible state regulations can allow for fishery resources to be more effectively conserved. However, based on the most recent stock assessment, the ACLs may be increased for the commercial and recreational sectors because the stock is no longer undergoing overfishing and is rebuilding at a rate that allows the ABC increase recommended by the SSC and the ACL chosen by the Council.

Comment 7: NMFS should not allow snowy grouper to be harvested during the snowy grouper spawning season of April to September.

Response: The Council recognized that spawning for snowy grouper occurs during April to September but determined that reducing the current year-round recreational fishing season to a 4-month season from May through August should reduce the chance that the ACL is exceeded, promote safety at sea, and reduce the bycatch of snowy grouper, as discussed in the response to Comment 2 above. In the commercial sector, the snowy grouper AMs that are in place and the monitoring program to evaluate commercial landings are expected to constrain commercial landings from exceeding the commercial ACL. Therefore, the harvest of snowy grouper that may occur during the spawning season is not expected to result in the ACLs being exceeded and is not expected to negatively impact the stock.

Classification

The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS has determined that this final rule is necessary for the conservation and management of South Atlantic snapper-grouper and is consistent with Regulatory Amendment 20, the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law.

This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this rule. No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been identified. In addition, no new reporting, record-keeping, or other compliance requirements are introduced by this final rule.

In compliance with section 604 of the RFA, NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) for this final rule. The FRFA uses updated information, when available, and analyzes the anticipated economic impacts of the final actions and any significant economic impacts on small entities. The FRFA incorporates the IRFA, a summary of the significant economic issues raised by public comment, NMFS' responses to those comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to support the action. The FRFA follows.

No public comments specific to the IRFA were received and, therefore, no public comments are addressed in this FRFA. Certain comments with socio-economic implications are addressed in the comments and responses section, specifically, the response to comments 2, 3, and 6. No changes in the final rule were made in response to public comments.

NMFS agrees that the Council's choice of preferred alternatives would best achieve the Council's objectives for Regulatory Amendment 20 to the FMP while minimizing, to the extent practicable, the adverse effects on fishers, support industries, and associated communities. The preamble to this final rule provides a statement of the need for and objectives of this rule.

NMFS expects this rule to directly affect federally permitted commercial fishers who harvest snowy grouper in the South Atlantic. The Small Business Administration established size criteria for all major industry sectors in the U.S., including fish harvesters and for-hire operations. A business involved in fish harvesting is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and its combined annual receipts are not in excess of $20.5 million (NAICS code 114111, finfish fishing) for all of its affiliated operations worldwide.

Charter vessels and headboats (for-hire vessels) sell fishing services, which include the harvest of any species considered in this proposed rule, to recreational anglers. These vessels provide a platform for the opportunity to fish and not a guarantee to catch or harvest any species, though expectations of successful fishing, however defined, likely factor into the decision to purchase these services. Changing the allowable harvest of a species, including a fishery closure, only defines what species may be kept and does not explicitly prevent the continued offer of for-hire fishing services. In response to a change in the allowable harvest of a species, including a zero-fish recreational bag limit, fishing for other species could continue. Because the changes to management measures for species implemented in this final rule will not directly alter the services sold by these vessels, this final rule does not directly apply to or regulate their operations. For-hire vessels will continue to be able to offer their primary product, which is an attempt to “put anglers on fish,” provide the opportunity for anglers to catch whatever their skills enable them to catch, and keep those fish that they desire to keep and are legal to keep. Any changes in demand for these fishing services, and associated economic affects as a result of changing an ACL or establishing fishery closures, would be a consequence of behavioral change by anglers, secondary to any direct effect on anglers, and, therefore, an indirect effect of the proposed regulatory action. Because the effects on for-hire vessels are indirect, they fall outside the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA). Recreational anglers, who may be directly affected by the changes in this final rule, are not small entities under the RFA.

NMFS has not identified any other small entities that will be directly affected by this final rule.

The snapper-grouper fishery is a multi-species fishery and vessels generally land many species on the same trip. From 2009 through 2013, an annual average of 138 vessels with valid Federal permits to operate in the commercial sector of the snapper-grouper fishery landed at least 1 lb (0.45 kg) of snowy grouper. Each vessel generated annual average dockside revenues of approximately $78,000 (2013 dollars), of which $2,000 were from snowy grouper, $21,000 from other species jointly landed with snowy grouper, and $55,000 from other species on trips without snowy grouper. Vessels that caught and landed snowy grouper may also operate in other fisheries outside the snapper-grouper fishery, the revenues of which are not known and are not reflected in these totals. Based on revenue information, all commercial vessels directly affected by the final rule may be considered small entities.

Because all entities expected to be affected by this rule are small entities, NMFS has determined that this final rule would affect a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, the issue of disproportionate effects on small versus large entities does not arise in the present case.

The effect of the action to modify the rebuilding strategy for snowy grouper is to adopt the ABC chosen by the Council, as recommended by their SSC based upon the recent stock assessment. Modifying the rebuilding strategy for snowy grouper will have no direct economic effects on small entities, because it will not alter the current use or access to the snowy grouper resource. NMFS notes that the ABC resulting from the modification of the rebuilding strategy will be higher than the status quo ABC for snowy grouper.

Setting the snowy grouper ACL equal to ABC implies that the ACL will increase as a result of the ABC increase. The method for allocating the ACL between the commercial and recreational sectors will remain the same. The change in the commercial and recreational percentage allocation results from the use of the updated landings of snowy grouper from SEDAR 36. Relative to the 2014 ACL, the commercial ACLs will increase by 39 percent in 2015 and continue to increase annually through 2019 to a point where the commercial ACL in 2019 will be 86 percent greater than it was in 2014. Compared to the 2014 ACL, the recreational ACL will increase by 442 percent in 2015 and continue to increase annually through 2019 to a point where the ACL in 2019 will be 623 percent greater than it was in 2014. In principle, the increases in the snowy grouper sector ACLs are expected to result in revenue and profit increases to commercial vessels. The actual results will partly depend on the relationship to the changes in management measures affecting the commercial sector, as discussed below. As noted, for-hire vessels will only be indirectly affected by this action.

Increasing the snowy grouper commercial trip limit from 100 lb (45 kg), to 200 lb (91 kg), will tend to increase the profit per trip of commercial vessels. This higher trip limit will complement the commercial ACL increase in potentially increasing the annual profits of commercial vessels. Given the ACL increase, the commercial fishing season is expected to extend from January 1 through July 19 under the higher trip limit, or January 1 through December 26 under the status quo (No Action) trip limit. Therefore, the commercial trip limit increase will result in a higher profit per trip but a shorter commercial fishing season; whereas the status quo trip limit will be associated with lower profit per trip but a longer fishing season. Which of these two scenarios will result in higher annual profit for commercial vessels cannot be ascertained. What is less uncertain, however, is that the commercial ACL increase will result in higher annual revenues and profits. As noted, the commercial fishing season is projected to last until July 19 under the revised trip limit and ACL increases. Without the ACL increase, the commercial fishing season is projected to last until June 6 under the trip limit increase. Thus, the commercial ACL increase will allow for about 6 extra weeks of commercial fishing for snowy grouper under the revised trip limit increase. Given a longer fishing season and higher profit per trip, revenues and profits of commercial vessels that target snowy grouper are likely to increase.

The following discussion analyzes the alternatives that were not selected as preferred by the Council. Only actions that would have direct economic effects on small entities merit inclusion in the following discussion.

Three alternatives, including the preferred alternative (as described in the preamble), were considered for adjusting the ACLs. The first alternative, the no action alternative, would maintain the current (lower) commercial and recreational ACLs. This alternative would maintain the same economic benefits for commercial vessels but at levels lower than those afforded by the preferred alternative. The second alternative, which has three sub-alternatives, would set ACLs as some percentage of the ABC. The three sub-alternatives are setting the ACL at 95 percent, 90 percent, and 85 percent of the ABC. All three sub-alternatives would have lower positive effects on the profits of commercial vessels than the preferred alternative.

Five alternatives, including the preferred alternative (as described in the preamble), were considered for modifying the management measures for the snowy grouper commercial sector. The first alternative, the no action alternative, would maintain the commercial trip limit of 100 lb (45 kg). Compared to the preferred alternative, the no action alternative would have a lower profit per trip but would also leave the commercial fishing season open almost year-round. Which of these two alternatives would result in higher annual vessel profits for commercial vessels cannot be ascertained. NMFS notes that, if the trip limit is maintained at 100 lb (45 kg), commercial vessels may not take full advantage of the revised ACL that would annually increase until at least 2019.

The second alternative would split the snowy grouper commercial ACL into two quotas: 50 percent to the first period (January 1-April 30) and 50 percent to the second period (May 1-December 31). Any remaining commercial quota from the first period would carry over into the second period; any remaining commercial quota from the second period would not carry over into the next fishing year. The following three sub-alternatives on trip limits would apply to each period: 100 lb (45 kg), 150 lb (47.5 kg), or 200 lb (91 kg). Given the commercial ACL increases, commercial harvest in the first period would likely remain open under any of the alternative trip limits because the commercial quota would not be caught, but commercial harvest in the second period would not be open very long with the highest trip limit resulting in the shortest fishing season. This alternative, with the trip limit of 200 lb (91 kg), would have the same effects on commercial vessel profits as the preferred alternative, because both alternatives would have the same trip limits and the same fishing season length. At lower trip limits, this alternative would allow a longer fishing season but also lower profit per trip than the preferred alternative. It cannot be determined if this alternative, with lower trip limits and a longer fishing season, would result in higher annual profits than the preferred alternative. In an effort to address the accessibility to the snowy grouper resource, the Council considered implementing a commercial split season, as in the second alternative, that would essentially spread out effort over time so that various fishers throughout the Council's area of jurisdiction would have access to the snowy grouper resource. The Council decided to retain the current commercial fishing year as the calendar year because snowy grouper are an important commercial species in the early part of the calendar year, when shallow-water groupers are closed to commercial harvest. In addition, snowy grouper earn higher prices during the early months of the year.

The third alternative would split the snowy grouper commercial ACL into two quotas: 40 percent to the first period (January 1-April 30) and 60 percent to the second period (May 1-December 31). Any remaining commercial quota from the first period would carry over into the second period; any remaining commercial quota from the second period would not carry over into the next fishing year. This alternative would maintain the current commercial trip limit of 100 lb (45 kg), for the first period and establish one of the following trip limits for the second period: 100 lb (45 kg), 150 lb (47.5 kg), 200 lb (91 kg), 250 lb (112.5 kg), or 300 lb (135 kg). Under this alternative and given the ACL increases, commercial fishing would likely remain open throughout the first period but would not be open very long in the second period, with the highest trip limit resulting in the shortest fishing season. As with the second alternative, this alternative, when combined with lower trip limits, would provide longer fishing seasons but lower profit per trip than the preferred alternative. Similarly, this alternative, when combined with higher trip limits, would allow for a higher profit per trip but result in shorter fishing seasons. It cannot be determined if this alternative, with either lower or higher trip limits, would result in greater annual profits than the preferred alternative. Similar to the second alternative, the Council considered a split season to address the accessibility to the resource. For similar reasons mentioned above, this third alternative was not selected as the preferred alternative by the Council.

The fourth alternative is similar to the preferred alternative but would establish a trip limit of either 300 lb (135 kg), or 150 lb (47.5 kg). This alternative would result in a longer fishing season but a lower profit per trip under a trip limit of 150 lb (47.5 kg), or a shorter fishing season and a higher profit per trip under a trip limit of 300 lb (135 kg), than the preferred alternative. The differential impacts on the annual profits of commercial vessels between this alternative and the preferred alternative cannot be determined. However, the preferred alternative appears to provide a better balance between season length and profit per trip than this alternative with trip limits of either 150 lb (47.5 kg), or 300 lb (135 kg).

The fifth alternative would modify the snowy grouper commercial trip limit to 150 lb (47.5 kg), year-round or until the commercial ACL is met or projected to be met, except for the period of May through August from Florida's Brevard/Indian River County line northward when the trip limit will be one of the following: 200 lb (91 kg), 250 lb (112.5 kg), or 300 lb (135 kg). This alternative would provide for a lower trip limit than the preferred alternative, except in May through August when an equal or higher trip limit would be allowed in certain areas. This alternative would likely benefit commercial vessels in areas north of Indian River County, Florida, more than vessels in other areas, at least during the period when vessels in the northern areas are allowed higher trip limits. Whether total profits from all vessels would be higher under this alternative than under the preferred alternative cannot be determined. Although this alternative was not chosen as the preferred alternative, the Council acknowledged that fishermen in North Carolina have historically had limited access to snowy grouper at the beginning of the fishing year due to generally poor winter weather conditions. However, some milder winters in recent years have benefitted fishermen through some increased access to snowy grouper.

Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such publications as small entity compliance guides. As part of the rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a fishery bulletin, which also serves as a small entity compliance guide. The fishery bulletin will be sent to all interested parties.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622

Fisheries, Fishing, South Atlantic, Snapper-Grouper, Snowy grouper.

Dated: July 15, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended as follows:

PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC 1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows: Authority:

16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

2. In § 622.183, paragraph (b)(8) is added to read as follows:
§ 622.183 Area and seasonal closures.

(b) * * *

(8) Snowy grouper recreational sector closure. The recreational sector for snowy grouper in or from the South Atlantic EEZ is closed from January 1 through April 30, and September 1 through December 31, each year. During a closure, the bag and possession limit for snowy grouper in or from the South Atlantic EEZ is zero.

3. In § 622.190, the last sentence in paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (a)(1) are revised to read as follows:
§ 622.190 Quotas.

(a) * * * The quotas are in gutted weight, that is eviscerated but otherwise whole, except for the quotas in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), (a)(5), and (a)(6) of this section which are in both gutted weight and round weight.

(1) Snowy grouper—(i) For the 2015 fishing year—115,451 lb (52,368 kg), gutted weight; 136,233 lb (61,794 kg), round weight.

(ii) For the 2016 fishing year—125,760 lb (57,044 kg), gutted weight; 148,397 lb (67,312 kg), round weight.

(iii) For the 2017 fishing year—135,380 lb (61,407 kg), gutted weight; 159,749 lb (72,461 kg), round weight.

(iv) For the 2018 fishing year—144,315 lb (65,460 kg), gutted weight; 170,291 lb (77,243 kg), round weight.

(v) For the 2019 and subsequent fishing years—153,935 lb (69,824 kg), gutted weight; 181,644 lb (82,392 kg), round weight.

4. In § 622.191, the first sentence in paragraph (a)(3) is revised to read as follows:
§ 622.191 Commercial trip limits.

(a) * * *

(3) Snowy grouper. Until the quota specified in § 622.190(a)(1) is reached—200 lb (91 kg), gutted weight; 236 lb (107 kg), round weight.* * *

5. In § 622.193, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as follows:
§ 622.193 Annual catch limits (ACLs), annual catch targets (ACTs), and accountability measures (AMs).

(b) * * *

(2) Recreational sector. (i) If recreational landings, as estimated by the SRD, exceed the recreational ACL specified in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register, at or near the beginning of the following fishing year, to reduce the length of the following recreational fishing season by the amount necessary to ensure recreational landings do not exceed the recreational ACL in the following fishing year. When NMFS reduces the length of the following recreational fishing season, the following closure provisions apply: The bag and possession limits for snowy grouper in or from the South Atlantic EEZ are zero. These bag and possession limits also apply in the South Atlantic on board a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper has been issued, without regard to where such species were harvested, i.e., in state or Federal waters. Recreational landings will be evaluated relative to the ACL based on a moving multi-year average of landings, as described in the FMP.

(ii) The recreational ACL for snowy grouper is 4,152 fish for 2015; 4,483 fish for 2016; 4,819 fish for 2017, 4,983 fish for 2018; 5,315 fish for 2019 and subsequent fishing years.

[FR Doc. 2015-17801 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
80 139 Tuesday, July 21, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 905 [Doc. No. AO-13-0163; AMS-FV-12-0069; FV13-905-1] Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida; Secretary's Decision and Referendum Order on Proposed Amendments to Marketing Order No. 905 AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Proposed rule and referendum order.

SUMMARY:

This decision proposes amendments to Marketing Order No. 905 (order), which regulates the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos (citrus) grown in Florida, and provides growers with the opportunity to vote in a referendum to determine if they favor the changes. The amendments are based on proposals made by the Citrus Administrative Committee (Committee), which is responsible for local administration of the order, and is comprised of growers and handlers. These amendments would: authorize regulation of new varieties and hybrids of citrus fruit; authorize the regulation of intrastate shipments of fruit; revise the process for redistricting the production area; change the term of office and tenure requirements for Committee members; authorize mail balloting procedures for Committee membership nominations; increase the capacity of financial reserve funds; authorize pack and container requirements for domestic shipments and authorize different regulations for different markets; eliminate the use of separate acceptance statements in the nomination process; and require handlers to register with the Committee. These proposed amendments are intended to improve the operation and administration of the order.

DATES:

The referendum will be conducted from September 14 through October 5, 2015. The representative period for the purpose of the referendum is August 1, 2014, through July 31, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, Post Office Box 952, Moab, UT 84532; Telephone: (202) 557-4783, Fax: (435) 259-1502, or Michelle Sharrow, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Small businesses may request information on this proceeding by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Prior documents in this proceeding: Notice of Hearing issued on March 28, 2013, and published in the March 28, 2013, issue of the Federal Register (78 FR 18899), and a Recommended Decision issued on February 23, 2015, and published in the March 3, 2015, issue of the Federal Register (80 FR 11335).

This action is governed by the provisions of sections 556 and 557 of title 5 of the United States Code and is therefore excluded from the requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

Preliminary Statement

The proposed amendments are based on the record of a public hearing held on April 24, 2013, in Winter Haven, Florida, to consider such amendments to the order. The hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act,” and the applicable rules of practice and procedure governing the formulation of marketing agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900). Notice of this hearing was published in the Federal Register on March 28, 2013 (78 FR 18899). The notice of hearing contained nine proposals submitted by the Committee.

The amendments in this decision would:

(1) Authorize regulation of new varieties and hybrids of citrus fruit;

(2) Authorize the regulation of intrastate shipments of fruit;

(3) Revise the process for redistricting the production area;

(4) Change the term of office and tenure requirements for Committee members;

(5) Authorize mail balloting procedures for Committee membership nominations;

(6) Increase the capacity of financial reserve funds;

(7) Authorize pack and container requirements for domestic shipments and authorize different regulations for different markets;

(8) Eliminate the use of separate acceptance statements in the nomination process; and

(9) Require handlers to register with the Committee.

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) also proposed to make such changes to the order as may be necessary, if any of the proposed changes are adopted, so that all of the order's provisions conform to the effectuated amendments.

A conforming change is needed in the title of 7 CFR part 905. It is proposed to be revised to “ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND PUMMELOS GROWN IN FLORIDA” to reflect the proposed addition of pummelos as a regulated fruit and the inclusion of tangelos as a regulated hybrid variety.

Upon the basis of evidence introduced at the hearing and the record thereof, the Administrator of AMS on February 23, 2015, filed with the Hearing Clerk, USDA, a Recommended Decision and Opportunity to File Written Exceptions thereto by April 2, 2015. None were filed.

Small Business Considerations

Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), AMS has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions so that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders and amendments thereto are unique in that they are normally brought about through group action of essentially small entities for their own benefit.

According to the 2007 US Census of Agriculture, the number of citrus growers in Florida was 6,061. According to the National Agriculture Statistic Service (NASS) Citrus Fruit Report, published September 19, 2012, the total number of acres used in citrus production in Florida was 495,100 for the 2011/12 season. Based on the number of citrus growers from the US Census of Agriculture and the total acres used for citrus production from NASS, the average citrus farm size is 81.7 acres. NASS also reported the total value of production for Florida citrus at $1,804,484,000. Taking the total value of production for Florida citrus and dividing it by the total number of acres used for citrus production provides a return per acre of $3,644.69. A small grower as defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) is one that grosses less than $750,000 annually. Multiplying the return per acre of $3,644.69 by the average citrus farm size of 81.7 acres, yields an average return of $297,720.51. Therefore, a majority of Florida citrus producers are considered small entities under SBA's standards.

According to the industry, there were 44 handlers for the 2011/12 season, down 25 percent from the 2002/03 season. A small agricultural service firm as defined by the SBA is one that grosses less than $7,000,000 annually. Based on information submitted by industry, twenty one handlers would be considered small entities under SBA's standards. A majority of citrus handlers are considered large entities under SBA's standards.

The production area regulated under the order covers the portion of the state of Florida which is bound by the Suwannee River, the Georgia Border, the Atlantic Ocean, and the Gulf of Mexico. Acreage devoted to citrus production in the regulated area has declined in recent years.

According to data presented at the hearing, bearing acreage for oranges reached a high of 605,000 acres during the 2000/01 crop year. Since then, bearing acreage for oranges has decreased 28 percent. For grapefruit, bearing acreage reached a high of 107,800 acres during the 2000/01 crop year. Since the 2000/01 crop year, bearing acreage for grapefruit has decreased 58 percent. For tangelos, bearing acreage reached a high for the 2000/01 crop year of 10,800 acres for Florida. Since the 2000/01 crop year, bearing acreage for tangelos has decreased 62 percent. For tangerines and mandarins, bearing acreage reached a high for the 2000/01 crop year of 25,500 acres. Since the 2000/01 crop year, bearing acreage for tangerines and mandarins has decreased 53 percent.

According to data presented at the hearing, the total utilized production for oranges reached a high during the 2003/04 crop year of 242 million boxes. Since the 2000/01 crop year, total utilized production for oranges has decreased 34 percent. For grapefruit, the total utilized production reached a high during the 2001/02 crop year of 46.7 million boxes. Since the 2000/01 crop year, total utilized production for grapefruit has decreased 59 percent. For tangelos, the total utilized production reached a high during the 2002/03 crop year of 2.4 million boxes. Since the 2000/01 crop year, total utilized production for tangelos has decreased 45 percent. For tangerines and mandarins, the total utilized production reached a high during the 2001/02 crop year of 6.6 million boxes. Since the 2000/01 crop year, total utilized production for tangerines and mandarins has decreased 23 percent.

During the hearing held on April 24, 2013, interested persons were invited to present evidence on the probable regulatory and informational impact of the proposed amendments to the order on small businesses. The evidence presented at the hearing shows that none of the proposed amendments would have any burdensome effects on small agricultural producers or firms.

Material Issue Number 1—Definitions of “Fruit” and “Variety”

The proposal described in Material Issue 1 would amend the definitions of “fruit” and “variety” in § 905.4 and § 905.5 to update terminology and authorize regulation of additional varieties and hybrids of citrus.

Currently, the New Varieties Development and Management Corporations, a non-profit research organization, is actively working to identify, acquire and sub-license promising citrus varieties and hybrids for the Florida citrus grower. In order to regulate these new varieties and hybrids, the definitions of fruit and variety must be amended so that these new varieties and hybrids can be regulated under the order.

Witnesses supported this proposal and stated that Florida growers have invested heavily and steadily in the development of new citrus varieties to meet changing demand and consumer preferences. Witnesses stated that it is imperative that the order be amended to keep pace with a rapidly changing industry and maximize its relevance and utility to the industry. No significant impact on small business entities is anticipated from this proposed change.

Material Issue Number 2—Intrastate Shipments

The proposal described in Material Issue 2 would amend the definition of “handle or ship” in § 905.9 to authorize regulation of intrastate shipments.

Currently, the Florida Citrus Commission, under the Florida Department of Citrus Rules Chapter 20, regulates the grade and size of intrastate shipments, while the Federal order regulates all interstate shipments and exports of fresh citrus. If the proposed amendment were implemented, authority to regulate intrastate shipments would be added to the Federal order. This amendment would allow for the eventual regulation of all fresh citrus shipments under the order if intrastate shipments were no longer regulated by the Florida Department of Citrus.

Witnesses explained that adding the authority to regulate intrastate shipments to the order would be a precautionary measure. If the Florida Department of Citrus were to stop regulating fresh citrus shipments, having the authority to do so under the Federal order would facilitate a streamlined transition of regulation from one program to the other. Such a transition would benefit growers and handlers as shipments of fresh citrus could continue without interruption.

Witnesses anticipated that handlers would incur little to no additional costs as a result of the proposed amendment. As currently proposed, the amendment would simply add an authority to the order. This authority would not be implemented unless warranted by other factors. If implemented, handlers of intrastate fresh citrus shipments would be subject to assessments under the order. However, the Florida Department of Citrus already collects assessments on intrastate shipments. Therefore, the cost of assessments collected on intrastate shipments, whether under the State or Federal program, would continue. In conclusion, it is determined that the benefits of adding the authority to regulate intrastate shipments of fresh citrus to the order would outweigh any costs.

Material Issue Number 3—Redistricting

The proposal described in Material Issue 3 would amend § 905.14 to revise the process for redistricting the production area.

The proposed amendment would grant flexibility to the Committee in redefining grower districts within the production area when the criteria and relevant factors within the production area warrant redistricting. Disease and natural disasters over the past decade have significantly affected bearing acreage. The proposed amendment would allow the Committee at any time, subject to the approval of the Secretary, to base their determination of grower districts on the number of bearing trees, volume of fresh fruit, total number of citrus acres, and other relevant factors when conditions warrant redistricting.

According to a witness, the proposed amendment would give the Committee, in future seasons, the flexibility to adjust grower districts to reflect the shift in production of fresh varieties and fresh volume. In addition, the Committee would be able to adjust grower districts based on the number of trees lost to disease and natural disasters. Thus, it is not expected that this proposal would result in any additional costs to growers or handlers.

Material Issue Number 4—Term of Office

The proposal described in Material Issue 4 would amend § 905.20 to change the term of office of Committee members from one to two years, and change the tenure limits for Committee members from three to four years.

According to a witness, a two-year term would allow for biennial nomination meetings, which would provide administrative efficiencies and stability. The current one-year term of office is administratively inefficient and requires additional Committee resources. Moreover, limiting terms to one year results in an annual effort to nominate and appoint new members. This process is costly to the Committee and requires time and resources for industry members to participate. A two-year term would reduce these costs. For the reasons described above, it is determined that the proposed amendment would benefit industry participants and improve administration of the order. The costs of implementing this proposal would be minimal, if any.

Material Issue Number 5—Mail Balloting

The proposal described in Material Issue 5 would amend § 905.22 to authorize mail balloting procedures for Committee membership nominations. Nomination meetings have low participation rates due to time, travel, and administrative costs.

The proposed amendment would allow the Committee to conduct the nomination and/or election of members and alternates by mail or other means according to the rules and regulations recommended by the Committee and approved by the Secretary. Currently, the Committee holds grower nomination meetings in each of the three grower districts and one shipper nomination meeting annually. Witnesses indicated that attending these meetings is costly due to travel expenses and time away from their growing or handling operations. While the proposed amendment would result in some increased expenses for printing and mailing of ballot materials, witnesses indicated that the potential savings to growers and handlers far exceed those costs.

Moreover, witnesses indicated that the additional benefit of increased participation in the nomination process as a result of materials being sent to all interested parties would outweigh the costs of conducting nominations by mail. This would be particularly true in the case of small business entities that have fewer resources and relatively less flexibility in managing their businesses compared to larger businesses. For these reasons, it is determined that the cost savings, increased participation, and other benefits gained from conducting nomination meetings via mail would outweigh the potential costs of implementing this proposal.

Material Issue Number 6—Financial Reserves Fund

The proposal described in Material Issue 6 would amend § 905.42 to authorize the Committee to increase the capacity of its financial reserve funds from approximately six months of a fiscal period's expenses to approximately two fiscal periods' expenses. Such reserve funds could be used to cover any expenses authorized by the Committee or to cover necessary liquidation expenses if the order is terminated.

The proposed amendment would allow the Committee to increase their reserves up to two fiscal periods' expenses. Currently, reserves are capped at approximately one half of one year's expenses. Witnesses explained that the current cap on reserves is too restrictive and could limit the Committee's ability to develop and implement projects requiring advertising, promotion or research without raising the assessment rate during the season.

As discussed earlier in this decision, witnesses considered the need to develop and promote new hybrid varieties and markets to be essential to reviving the health of the fresh citrus sector. According to them, not increasing the reserve cap would inhibit the Committee's ability to address these needs.

Also, without the proposed amendment it would become more difficult for the Committee to avoid assessment rate increases annually or during a season. According to the record, the proposed amendment would also provide greater stability in the administration of the order's assessment rate. Under the current reserve limit, the Committee would need to increase the assessment rate mid-season if the need for additional revenues for research or promotion activities occurs after the assessment rate and budget are finalized. Increasing the assessment rate mid-season confuses industry members and creates additional burdens in administering the order.

For the reasons discussed above, it is determined that the benefits of increasing the maximum level of funds that can be held in the financial reserves would outweigh the costs.

Material Issue Number 7—Regulation of Shipments

The proposal described in Material Issue 7 would amend § 905.52 to: authorize different regulations for different market destinations; allow for the regulation of pack and container requirements for interstate shipments; and, in the absence of state regulation, allow for the establishment of requirements for intrastate shipments.

This would allow shippers to meet varying customer demands in different market destinations. In addition, the proposed amendment would allow regulation and orderly marketing to continue for intrastate shipments if Florida State fresh citrus regulations were discontinued. This authority will not be implemented unless state regulations were no longer in effect.

The proposed amendment to regulate containers and establish quality standards for the production area would not have any adverse effects on small businesses if approved. Continued orderly marketing of fresh citrus shipments within the State of Florida would equally benefit all segments of the industry and consumers by maintaining quality standards and consistency.

Material Issue Number 8—Nomination Acceptance

The proposal described in Material Issue 8 would Amend § 905.28 to eliminate the use of separate acceptance statements in the nomination process. Currently, nominees complete both background and acceptance statements when they are nominated. The elimination of the acceptance statement would reduce paperwork and administrative costs. Therefore, it is determined that the proposed amendment would benefit both large and small-scale fresh citrus businesses, and would reduce costs and improve the administration of the order.

Material Issue Number 9—Handler Registration

The proposal described in Material Issue 9 would Amend § 905.7 to require handlers to register with the Committee. Currently, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Fruit and Vegetables has a registration program for handlers of Florida citrus. The Committee contracts annually with the Division to obtain information on each handler's regulated shipments, both interstate and export, on a monthly basis.

A handler registration form would serve as an efficient means for obtaining handler information that would improve communication between the Committee and handlers. It would also assist the Committee in monitoring and enforcing compliance. If a handler were to not comply with regulations in effect under the order, the Committee would have that handler's contact information on file to begin the compliance enforcement process. Moreover, if a handler failed to respond to compliance enforcement requests, the Committee could revoke a handler's registration. Without the registration, a handler would not be able to ship citrus subject to order regulation.

Witnesses stated that while a handler registration program may result in additional administrative costs, the benefits of this proposed amendment would outweigh those costs. Also, the proposal would not disproportionately disadvantage small-sized businesses as all handlers, regardless of size, would be required to register with the Committee. Furthermore, the new requirement would not result in a direct cost to handlers as the cost of administering a handler registration program would be borne by the Committee.

For these reasons, it is determined that the benefits of requiring handlers to register with the Committee would be greater than the costs.

Interested persons were invited to present evidence at the hearing on the probable regulatory and informational impact of the proposed amendments to the order on small entities. The record evidence indicates that implementation of the proposals to authorize regulation of new varieties and hybrids of citrus fruit; authorize the regulation of intrastate shipments of fruit; revise the process for redistricting the production area; change the term of office and tenure requirements for Committee members; authorize mail balloting procedures for Committee membership nominations; increase the capacity of financial reserve funds; authorize pack and container requirements for intrastate shipments and authorize different regulations for different markets; eliminate the use of separate acceptance statements in the nomination process; and, require handlers to register with the Committee would improve the operation of the order and are not anticipated to impact small businesses disproportionately.

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this proposed rule. These amendments are intended to improve the operation and administration of the order and to assist in the marketing of fresh Florida citrus.

Committee meetings regarding these proposals, as well as the hearing date and location, were widely publicized throughout the Florida citrus industry, and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and the hearing to participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. All Committee meetings and the hearing were public forums and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on these issues. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Current information collection requirements for Part 905 are approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Number 0581-0189—“Generic OMB Fruit Crops.” In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the termination of the Letter of Acceptance has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. The Letter of Acceptance has no time or cost burden associated with it due to the fact that handlers simply sign the form upon accepting nomination to the Committee. As a result, the current number of hours associated with OMB No. 0581-0189, Generic Fruit Crops, would remain the same: 7,786.71 hours.

No other changes in these requirements are anticipated as a result of this proceeding. Should any such changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.

AMS is committed to complying with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, which requires Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible.

AMS is also committed to complying with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

Civil Justice Reform

The amendments to the order proposed herein have been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. They are not intended to have retroactive effect. If adopted, the proposed amendments would not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this proposal.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed no later than 20 days after the date of entry of the ruling.

Findings and Conclusions

The findings and conclusions, rulings, and general findings and determinations included in the Recommended Decision set forth in the March 3, 2015, issue of the Federal Register are hereby approved and adopted.

Marketing Order

Annexed hereto and made a part hereof is the document entitled “Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida.” This document has been decided upon as the detailed and appropriate means of effectuating the foregoing findings and conclusions.

It is hereby ordered, That this entire decision be published in the Federal Register.

Referendum Order

It is hereby directed that a referendum be conducted in accordance with the procedure for the conduct of referenda (7 CFR 900.400-407) to determine whether the annexed order amending the order regulating the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in Florida is approved or favored by producers, as defined under the terms of the order, who during the representative period were engaged in the production of citrus in the production area.

The representative period for the conduct of such referendum is hereby determined to be August 1, 2014, through July 31, 2015.

The agents of the Secretary to conduct such referendum are hereby designated to be Christian Nissen and Jennie Varela, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1124 First Street South, Winter Haven, Florida 33880; telephone: (863) 324-3375; or fax: (863) 291-8614, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected], respectively.

Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida  1

1 This order shall not become effective unless and until the requirements of § 900.14 of the rules of practice and procedure governing proceedings to formulate marketing agreements and marketing orders have been met.

Findings and Determinations

The findings and determinations hereinafter set forth are supplementary to the findings and determinations that were previously made in connection with the issuance of the marketing order; and all said previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and affirmed, except insofar as such findings and determinations may be in conflict with the findings and determinations set forth herein.

(a) Findings and Determinations Upon the Basis of the Hearing Record

Pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), and the applicable rules of practice and procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR part 900), a public hearing was held upon proposed further amendment of Marketing Order No. 905, regulating the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in Florida.

Upon the basis of the record, it is found that:

(1) The marketing order, as amended, and as hereby proposed to be further amended, and all of the terms and conditions thereof, would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act;

(2) The marketing order, as amended, and as hereby proposed to be further amended, regulates the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in the production area in the same manner as, and are applicable only to, persons in the respective classes of commercial and industrial activity specified in the marketing order upon which a hearing has been held;

(3) The marketing order, as amended, and as hereby proposed to be further amended, is limited in its application to the smallest regional production area that is practicable, consistent with carrying out the declared policy of the Act, and the issuance of several orders applicable to subdivisions of the production area would not effectively carry out the declared policy of the Act;

(4) The marketing order, as amended, and as hereby proposed to be further amended, prescribes, insofar as practicable, such different terms applicable to different parts of the production area as are necessary to give due recognition to the differences in the production and marketing of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in the production area; and

(5) All handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in the production area as defined in the marketing order is in the current of interstate or foreign commerce or directly burdens, obstructs, or affects such commerce.

Order Relative to Handling

It is therefore ordered, That on and after the effective date hereof, all handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in Florida shall be in conformity to, and in compliance with, the terms and conditions of the said order as hereby proposed to be amended as follows:

The provisions of the proposed marketing order amending the order contained in the Recommended Decision issued on February 23, 2015, and published in the March 3, 2015, issue of the Federal Register will be and are the terms and provisions of this order amending the order and are set forth in full herein.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, Oranges, Pummelos, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tangerines.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR part 905 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND PUMMELOS GROWN IN FLORIDA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 905 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-674.

2. Revise the heading of part 905 to read as set forth above. 3. Revise § 905.4 to read as follows:
§ 905.4 Fruit.

Fruit means any or all varieties of the following types of citrus fruits grown in the production area:

(a) Citrus sinensis, Osbeck, commonly called “oranges”;

(b) Citrus paradisi, MacFadyen, commonly called “grapefruit”;

(c) Citrus reticulata, commonly called “tangerines” or “mandarin”;

(d) Citrus maxima Merr (L.); Osbeck, commonly called “pummelo”; and,

(e) “Citrus hybrids” that are hybrids between or among one or more of the four fruits in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section and the following: trifoliate orange (Poncirus trifoliata), sour orange (C. aurantium), lemon (C. limon), lime (C. aurantifolia), citron (C. medica), kumquat (Fortunella species), tangelo (C. reticulata x C. paradisi or C. grandis), tangor (C. reticulata x C. sinensis), and varieties of these species. In addition, citrus hybrids include: tangelo (C. reticulata x C. paradisi or C. grandis), tangor (C. reticulata x C. sinensis), Temple oranges, and varieties thereof.

4. Revise § 905.5 to read as follows:
§ 905.5 Variety.

Variety or varieties means any one or more of the following classifications or groupings of fruit:

(a) Oranges. (1) Early and Midseason oranges;

(2) Valencia, Lue Gim Gong, and similar late maturing oranges of the Valencia type;

(3) Navel oranges.

(b) Grapefruit. (1) Red Grapefruit, to include all shades of color;

(2) White Grapefruit.

(c) Tangerines and mandarins. (1) Dancy and similar tangerines;

(2) Robinson tangerines;

(3) Honey tangerines;

(4) Fall-Glo tangerines;

(5) US Early Pride tangerines;

(6) Sunburst tangerines;

(7) W-Murcott tangerines;

(8) Tangors.

(d) Pummelos. (1) Hirado Buntan and other pink seeded pummelos;

(2) [Reserved].

(e) Citrus hybrids—(1) Tangelos. (i) Orlando tangelo;

(ii) Minneola tangelo.

(2) Temple oranges.

(f) Other varieties of citrus fruits specified in § 905.4, including hybrids, as recommended and approved by the Secretary: Provided, That in order to add any hybrid variety of citrus fruit to be regulated under this provision, such variety must exhibit similar characteristics and be subject to cultural practices common to existing regulated varieties.

5. Revise § 905.7 to read as follows:
§ 905.7 Handler.

Handler is synonymous with shipper and means any person (except a common or contract carrier transporting fruit for another person) who, as owner, agent, or otherwise, handles fruit in fresh form, or causes fruit to be handled. Each handler shall be registered with the Committee pursuant to rules recommended by the Committee and approved by the Secretary.

6. Revise § 905.9 to read as follows:
§ 905.9 Handle or ship.

Handle or ship means to sell, transport, deliver, pack, prepare for market, grade, or in any other way to place fruit in the current of commerce within the production area or between any point in the production area and any point outside thereof.

7. Revise § 905.14 to read as follows:
§ 905.14 Redistricting.

The Committee may, with the approval of the Secretary, redefine the districts into which the production area is divided or reapportion or otherwise change the grower membership of districts, or both: Provided, That the membership shall consist of at least eight but not more than nine grower members, and any such change shall be based, insofar as practicable, upon the respective averages for the immediately preceding three fiscal periods of: The number of bearing trees in each district; the volume of fresh fruit produced in each district; the total number of acres of citrus in each district; and other relevant factors. Each redistricting or reapportionment shall be announced on or prior to March 1 preceding the effective fiscal period.

8. Revise § 905.20 to read as follows:
§ 905.20 Term of office.

The term of office of members and alternate members shall begin on the first day of August of even-numbered years and continue for two years and until their successors are selected and have qualified. The consecutive terms of office of a member shall be limited to two terms. The terms of office of alternate members shall not be so limited. Members, their alternates, and their respective successors shall be nominated and selected by the Secretary as provided in §§ 905.22 and 905.23.

9. In § 905.22, revise paragraphs (a) (1) and (b) (1) and add paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 905.22 Nominations.

(a) Grower members. (1) The Committee shall give public notice of a meeting of producers in each district to be held not later than June 10th of even-numbered years, for the purpose of making nominations for grower members and alternate grower members. The Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, shall prescribe uniform rules to govern such meetings and the balloting thereat. The chairman of each meeting shall publicly announce at such meeting the names of the persons nominated, and the chairman and secretary of each such meeting shall transmit to the Secretary their certification as to the number of votes so cast, the names of the persons nominated, and such other information as the Secretary may request. All nominations shall be submitted to the Secretary on or before the 20th day of June.

(b) Shipper members. (1) The Committee shall give public notice of a meeting for bona fide cooperative marketing organizations which are handlers, and a meeting for other handlers who are not so affiliated, to be held not later than June 10th of even-numbered years, for the purpose of making nominations for shipper members and their alternates. The Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, shall prescribe uniform rules to govern each such meeting and the balloting thereat. The chairperson of each such meeting shall publicly announce at the meeting the names of the persons nominated and the chairman and secretary of each such meeting shall transmit to the Secretary their certification as to the number of votes cast, the weight by volume of those shipments voted, and such other information as the Secretary may request. All nominations shall be submitted to the Secretary on or before the 20th day of June.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, nomination and election of members and alternate members to the Committee may be conducted by mail, electronic mail, or other means according to rules and regulations recommended by the Committee and approved by the Secretary.

10. Revise § 905.28 to read as follows:
§ 905.28 Qualification and acceptance.

Any person nominated to serve as a member or alternate member of the Committee shall, prior to selection by the Secretary, qualify by filing a written qualification and acceptance statement indicating such person's qualifications and willingness to serve in the position for which nominated.

11. In § 905.42, revise the first sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 905.42 Handler's accounts.

(a) If, at the end of a fiscal period, the assessments collected are in excess of expenses incurred, the Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, may carry over such excess into subsequent fiscal periods as a reserve: Provided, That funds already in the reserve do not exceed approximately two fiscal periods' expenses. * * *

12. In § 905.52, revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (5) and add paragraph (a)(6) to read as follows:
§ 905.52 Issuance of regulations.

(a) * * *

(4) Establish, prescribe, and fix the size, capacity, weight, dimensions, marking (including labels and stamps), or pack of the container or containers which may be used in the packaging, transportation, sale, shipment, or other handling of fruit.

(5) Provide requirements that may be different for the handling of fruit within the production area, the handling of fruit for export, or for the handling of fruit between the production area and any point outside thereof within the United States.

(6) Any regulations or requirements pertaining to intrastate shipments shall not be implemented unless Florida statutes and regulations regulating such shipments are not in effect.

Dated: July 14, 2015. Rex. A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-17588 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 665 [Docket No. 141009847-5604-01] RIN 0648-XD558 Pacific Island Fisheries; 2015 Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.

ACTION:

Proposed specifications; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

NMFS proposes annual catch limits (ACLs) for Pacific Island bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, and coral reef ecosystem fisheries, and accountability measures (AMs) to correct or mitigate any overages of catch limits. The proposed ACLs and AMs would be effective in fishing year 2015. The fishing year for each fishery begins on January 1 and ends on December 31, except for precious coral fisheries, which begins July 1 and ends on June 30 the following year. The proposed catch limits and accountability measures support the long-term sustainability of fishery resources of the U.S. Pacific Islands.

DATES:

NMFS must receive comments by August 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2014-0130, by either of the following methods:

Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0130, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

Mail: Send written comments to Michael D. Tosatto, Regional Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818.

Instructions: NMFS may not consider comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible.

NMFS prepared environmental analyses that describe the potential impacts on the human environment that would result from the proposed annual catch limits and accountability measures. NMFS provided additional background information in the 2014 proposed and final specifications (78 FR 77089, December 20, 2013; 79 FR 4276, January 27, 2014). Copies of the environmental analyses and other documents are available at www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jarad Makaiau, NMFS PIRO Sustainable Fisheries, 808-725-5176.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Fisheries in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ, or Federal waters) around the U.S. Pacific Islands are managed under archipelagic fishery ecosystem plans (FEP) for American Samoa, Hawaii, the Pacific Remote Islands, and the Mariana Archipelago (covering Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)). A fifth FEP covers pelagic fisheries. The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) developed the FEPs, and NMFS implemented them under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

Each FEP contains a process for the Council and NMFS to specify ACLs and AMs; that process is codified at Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations Section 665.4 (50 CFR 665.4). The regulations require NMFS to specify, every fishing year, an ACL for each stock and stock complex of management unit species (MUS) included in an FEP, as recommended by the Council and considering the best available scientific, commercial, and other information about the fishery. If a fishery exceeds an ACL, the regulations require the Council to take action, which may include reducing the ACL for the subsequent fishing year by the amount of the overage, or other appropriate action.

Annual Catch Limits

NMFS proposes to specify ACLs for bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, and coral reef ecosystem fishery MUS in American Samoa, Guam, the CNMI, and Hawaii. NMFS based the proposed specifications on recommendations from the Council at its 160th meeting held on June 24-27, 2014. The Council recommended 112 ACLs: 26 in American Samoa, 26 in Guam, 26 in the CNMI, and 34 in Hawaii. The Council recommended that NMFS specify multi-year ACL and accountability measures effective in fishing years 2015-2018. NMFS proposes to implement the specifications for fishing year 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 separately prior to each fishing year (January 1 through December 31 each year, except for precious coral fisheries, which is July 1 through June 30). The proposed ACLs are identical to those that NMFS specified for the 2014 fishing year for all crustaceans (except for spiny lobster), bottomfish (except Hawaii non-Deep 7 bottomfish), and precious corals. For spiny lobster, Hawaii non-Deep 7 bottomfish, and coral reef ecosystem species, the ACLs are based on new estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and would be specified at five percent below ABC (95 percent of ABC). At the 161st meeting held October 20-23, 2014, the Council maintained its recommendations from the 160th meeting.

NMFS is not proposing ACLs for MUS that are currently subject to Federal fishing moratoria or prohibitions. These MUS include all species of gold coral (78 FR 32181, May 29, 2013), the three Hawaii seamount groundfish (pelagic armorhead, alfonsin, and raftfish, 75 FR 69015, November 10, 2010), and deepwater precious corals at the Westpac Bed Refugia (75 FR 2198, January 14, 2010). The current prohibitions on fishing for these MUS serve as the functional equivalent of an ACL of zero.

Additionally, NMFS is not proposing ACLs for bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, or coral reef ecosystem MUS identified in the Pacific Remote Islands Area (PRIA) FEP. This is because fishing is prohibited in the EEZ within 12 nm of emergent land, unless authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (78 FR 32996, June 3, 2013). To date, NMFS has not received fishery data for any such approvals. In addition, there is no suitable habitat for these stocks beyond the 12-nm no-fishing zone, except at Kingman Reef, where fishing for these resources does not occur. Therefore, the current prohibitions on fishing serve as the functional equivalent of an ACL of zero. However, NMFS will continue to monitor authorized fishing within the Monument in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and may develop additional fishing requirements, including Monument-specific catch limits for species that may require them.

NMFS is also not proposing ACLs for pelagic MUS at this time, because NMFS previously determined that pelagic species are subject to international fishery agreements or have a life cycle of approximately one year and, therefore, are statutorily excepted from the ACL requirements.

Proposed Annual Catch Limit Specifications

The following four tables list the proposed ACL specifications for 2015.

Table 1—American Samoa Fishery Management unit species Proposed ACL
  • specification
  • (lb)
  • Bottomfish Bottomfish multi-species stock complex 101,000 Crustacean Deepwater shrimp 80,000 Spiny lobster 4,845 Slipper lobster 30 Kona crab 3,200 Precious Coral Black coral 790 Precious corals in the American Samoa Exploratory Area 2,205 Coral Reef Ecosystem Selar crumenophthalmus—atule, bigeye scad 37,400 Acanthuridae—surgeonfish 129,400 Carangidae—jacks 19,900 Carcharhinidae—reef sharks 1,615 Crustaceans—crabs 4,300 Holocentridae—squirrelfish 15,100 Labridae—wrasses 16,200 Lethrinidae—emperors 19,600 Lutjanidae—snappers 63,100 Kyphosidae—rudderfishes 2,000 Mollusks—turbo snail; octopus; giant clams 18,400 Mugilidae—mullets 4,600 Mullidae—goatfishes 11,900 Scaridae—parrotfish 272,000 Serranidae—groupers 25,300 Siganidae—rabbitfishes 200 Bolbometopon muricatum—bumphead parrotfish 235 Cheilinus undulatus—Humphead (Napoleon) wrasse 1,743 All other CREMUS combined 18,400
    Table 2—Mariana Archipelago—Guam Fishery Management unit species Proposed ACL specification
  • (lb)
  • Bottomfish Bottomfish multi-species stock complex 66,800 Crustaceans Deepwater shrimp 48,488 Spiny lobster 3,135 Slipper lobster 20 Kona crab 1,900 Precious Coral Black coral 700 Precious corals in the Guam Exploratory Area 2,205 Coral Reef Ecosystem Selar crumenophthalmus—atulai, bigeye scad 50,200 Acanthuridae—surgeonfish 97,600 Carangidae—jacks 29,300 Carcharhinidae—reef sharks 1,900 Crustaceans—crabs 7,300 Holocentridae—squirrelfish 11,400 Kyphosidae—chubs/rudderfish 9,600 Labridae—wrasses 25,200 Lethrinidae—emperors 53,000 Lutjanidae—snappers 18,000 Mollusks—octopus 23,800 Mugilidae—mullets 17,900 Mullidae—goatfish 15,300 Scaridae—parrotfish 71,600 Serranidae—groupers 22,500 Siganidae—rabbitfish 18,600 Bolbometopon muricatum—bumphead parrotfish 797
  • (CNMI and Guam combined)
  • Cheilinus undulatus—humphead (Napoleon) wrasse 1,960 All other CREMUS combined 185,000
    Table 3—Mariana Archipelago—CNMI Fishery Management unit species Proposed ACL specification
  • (lb)
  • Bottomfish Bottomfish multi-species stock complex 228,000 Crustacean Deepwater shrimp 275,570 Spiny lobster 7,410 Slipper lobster 60 Kona crab 6,300 Precious Coral Black coral 2,100 Precious corals in the CNMI Exploratory Area 2,205 Coral Reef Ecosystem Selar crumenophthalmus—Atulai, bigeye scad 77,400 Acanthuridae—surgeonfish 302,600 Carangidae—jacks 44,900 Carcharhinidae—reef sharks 5,600 Crustaceans—crabs 4,400 Holocentridae—squirrelfishes 66,100 Kyphosidae—rudderfishes 22,700 Labridae—wrasses 55,100 Lethrinidae—emperors 53,700 Lutjanidae—snappers 190,400 Mollusks—turbo snail; octopus; giant clams 9,800 Mugilidae—mullets 4,500 Mullidae—goatfish 28,400 Scaridae—parrotfish 144,000 Serranidae—groupers 86,900 Siganidae—rabbitfish 10,200 Bolbometopon muricatum—Bumphead parrotfish 797
  • (CNMI and Guam combined)
  • Cheilinus undulatus—Humphead (Napoleon) wrasse 2,009 All other CREMUS combined 7,300
    Table 4—Hawaii Fishery Management unit species Proposed ACL specification
  • (lb)
  • Bottomfish Non-Deep 7 bottomfish 178,000 Crustacean Deepwater shrimp 250,773 Spiny lobster 15,000 Slipper lobster 280 Kona crab 27,600 Precious Coral Auau Channel black coral 5,512 Makapuu Bed—Pink coral 2,205 Makapuu Bed—Bamboo coral 551 180 Fathom Bank—Pink coral 489 180 Fathom Bank—Bamboo coral 123 Brooks Bank—Pink coral 979 Brooks Bank—Bamboo coral 245 Kaena Point Bed—Pink coral 148 Kaena Point Bed—Bamboo coral 37 Keahole Bed—Pink coral 148 Keahole Bed—Bamboo coral 37 Precious corals in the Hawaii Exploratory Area 2,205 Coral Reef Ecosystem Selar crumenophthalmus—akule, bigeye scad 988,000 Decapterus macarellus—opelu, mackerel scad 438,000 Acanthuridae—surgeonfishes 342,000 Carangidae—jacks 161,200 Carcharhinidae—reef sharks 9,310 Crustaceans—crabs 33,500 Holocentridae—squirrelfishes 148,000 Kyphosidae—rudderfishes 105,000 Labridae—wrasses 205,000 Lethrinidae—emperors 35,500 Lutjanidae—snappers 330,300 Mollusks—octopus 35,700 Mugilidae—mullets 19,200 Mullidae—goatfishes 165,000 Scaridae—parrotfishes 239,000 Serranidae—groupers 128,400 All other CREMUS combined 485,000
    Accountability Measures

    Each year, NMFS and local resource management agencies in American Samoa, Guam, the CNMI, and Hawaii collect information about MUS catches and apply them toward the appropriate ACLs. Pursuant to 50 CFR 665.4, when the available information indicates that a fishery is projected to reach an ACL for a stock or stock complex, NMFS must notify permit holders that fishing for that stock or stock complex will be restricted in Federal waters on a specified date. The restriction serves as the AM to prevent an ACL from being exceeded, and may include, closing the fishery, closing specific areas, changing to bag limits, or restricting effort.

    However, local resource management agencies do not have the personnel or resources to process catch data in near-real time, so fisheries statistics are generally not available to NMFS until at least six months after agencies collect and analyze the data. Although the State of Hawaii has the capability to monitor and track the catch of seven preferentially-targeted bottomfish species in near-real time, (78 FR 59626, September 27, 2013), these capabilities do not exist for other Hawaii bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, and coral reef ecosystem fisheries, or for fisheries in American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI.

    Additionally, Federal logbook and reporting from fisheries in Federal waters is not sufficient to accurately monitor and track catches towards the proposed ACL specifications. This is because most fishing for bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, and coral reef ecosystem MUS occurs in state waters, generally 0-3 nm from shore. For these reasons, NMFS proposes to specify the Council's recommended AM, which is to apply a moving three-year average catch to evaluate fishery performance against the proposed ACLs. Specifically, NMFS and the Council would use the average catch of fishing year 2013, 2014, and 2015 to evaluate fishery performance against a particular 2015 ACL. This process would be repeated in future fishing years. At the end of each fishing year, the Council would review catches relative to each ACL. If NMFS and the Council determine the three-year average catch for the fishery exceeds the specified ACL, NMFS would reduce the ACL for that fishery by the amount of the overage in the subsequent year.

    NMFS will consider public comments on the proposed ACLs and AMs and will announce the final specifications in the Federal Register. NMFS must receive any comments by the date provided in the DATES heading, not postmarked or otherwise transmitted by that date. Regardless of the final ACL specifications and AMs, all other management measures will continue to apply in the fisheries.

    Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries has determined that these proposed specifications are consistent with the applicable FEPs, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    Certification of Finding of No Significant Impact on Substantial Number of Small Entities

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that these proposed specifications, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A description of the proposed action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for it are contained in the preamble to these proposed specifications.

    The proposed action would specify annual catch limits (ACL) and accountability measures (AM) for Pacific Island bottomfish, crustacean, precious coral, and coral reef ecosystem fisheries for 2015. The 2015 ACLs and AMs for all crustaceans (except for spiny lobster), bottomfish (except Hawaii non-Deep 7 bottomfish), and precious corals are identical to those NMFS specified for the 2014 fishing year. For spiny lobster, Hawaii non-Deep 7 bottomfish, and coral reef ecosystem species, the ACL is based on new estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and would be specified at 95 percent of acceptable biological catch (ABC).

    The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) based the proposed specifications on recommendations from the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) at the Council's 160th meeting held from June 24-27, 2014, and reaffirmed again at the 161st meeting held from October 20-23, 2014. For this action, the Council recommended 112 ACLs: 26 in American Samoa, 26 in Guam, 26 in CNMI, and 34 in Hawaii. NMFS would specify the ACLs for the 2015-2018 fishing years, which begin on January 1 and end on December 31, except for precious coral fisheries, which begin July 1 and end on June 30 the following year.

    The vessels impacted by this action are federally permitted to fish under the Fishery Ecosystem Plans for American Samoa, the Marianas Archipelago (Guam and the CNMI) and Hawaii. The numbers of vessels permitted under these Fishery Ecosystem Plans affected by this action are as follows: American Samoa (0), Marianas Archipelago (3), and Hawaii (11). Based on available information, NMFS has determined that all impacted entities are small entities under the SBA definition of a small entity, i.e., they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, are independently owned or operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $20.5 million if fishing for finfish (NAICS code 114111), $5.5 million if fishing for shellfish (NAICS code: 114112), or $7.5 million if fishing for other marine life such as precious corals (NAICS code: 114119). Therefore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities. Furthermore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts among the universe of vessels based on gear, home port, or vessel length.

    Even though this proposed action would apply to a substantial number of vessels, the implementation of this action should not result in significant adverse economic impact to individual vessels. For active fisheries, the ACLs are the same as, or greater than, the current annual yields. The Council and NMFS are not considering in-season closures in any of the fisheries to which these ACLs apply because fishery management agencies are not able to track catch relative to the ACLs during the fishing year. As a result, fishermen would be able to fish throughout the entire year. In addition, the ACLs, as proposed, would not change the gear types, areas fished, effort, or participation of the fishery during the 2015 fishing year. A post-season review of the catch data would be required to determine whether any fishery exceeded its ACL by comparing the ACL to the most recent 3-year average catch for which data is available. If an ACL is exceeded, the Council and NMFS would take action in future fishing years to correct the operational issue that caused the ACL overage. NMFS and the Council would evaluate the environmental and social and economic impacts of future actions, such as changes to future ACLs or AMs, after the required data are available. Specifically, if NMFS and the Council determine that the three-year average catch for a fishery exceeds the specified ACL, NMFS would reduce the ACL for that fishery by the amount of the overage in the subsequent year.

    The proposed action does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules and is not expected to have significant impact on small entities (as discussed above), organizations, or government jurisdictions. The proposed action also will not place a substantial number of small entities, or any segment of small entities, at a significant competitive disadvantage to large entities. As such, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

    This action has been determined to be exempt from review under E.O. 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17778 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 139 Tuesday, July 21, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRIGULTURE Agricultural Research Service Availability of the Final Environmental Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact for the U.S. Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service Brooksville, Florida Land Transfer to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University AGENCY:

    Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service (ARS) made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the transfer of land and facilities from USDA-ARS Subtropical Agricultural Research Station (STARS) in Brooksville, Florida, to the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University (FAMU) for the purpose of agricultural research. The FONSI document is based on impact analysis documented in the Environmental Assessment (EA) that was available for public comment beginning February 25 through April 1, 2015, and finalized on June 30, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cal Mather, Environmental Protection Specialist, USDA-ARS-SHEMB, NCAUR, 1815 North University Street, Room 2060, Peoria, Illinois 61604, telephone: 309-681-6608, or email: [email protected] Copies of the Final EA may also be available for public viewing during normal business hours at the following locations:

    • Samuel H. Coleman Memorial Library (FAMU), 525 Orr Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32307 • Istachatta Library Station, 16246 Lingle Road, Brooksville, Florida 34601 • East Hernando Branch Library, 6457 Windmere Road, Brooksville, Florida 34602 • Spring Hill Branch Library, 9220 Spring Hill Drive, Spring Hill, Florida 34608 • West Hernando Branch Library, 6335 Blackbird Avenue, Brooksville, Florida 34613 • Main Library/Brooksville, 238 Howell Avenue, Brooksville, Florida 34601
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, an EA was prepared to evaluate the proposed transfer of approximately 3,800 acres of land and facilities at the USDA-ARS STARS in Brooksville, Florida, to FAMU. The USDA-ARS signed a FONSI on June 30, 2015, based on the Final EA.

    The Final EA evaluated the proposed approximately 3,800 acres of land and facilities located on four separate properties at the USDA-ARS STARS in Brooksville, Florida to FAMU. The Final EA also evaluated future proposed uses of land and facilities to be transferred, according to FAMU's proposed Plan of Work. In accordance with the March 1, 2014, Memorandum of Understanding executed between the United States Government, represented by the Secretary, and the University Board of Trustees, upon transfer to FAMU, the land will be used for agricultural and natural resources research for a period of no less than 25 years, supporting the 1890 land grant university mission, promoting education and community collaboration, and establishing a Beginning Farmers and Ranchers Program at the Property. FAMU would assume responsibility for management and maintenance of the constructed facilities and land to be conveyed from USDA-ARS.

    The USDA-ARS STARS was one of 10 units designated for closure in the fiscal year 2012 Presidential budget. The proposed transfer of land and facilities from USDA-ARS to FAMU would be in accordance with Section 732 of Public Law (P.L.) 112-55, as extended under P.L. 113-76, 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which authorizes the Secretary to convey, with or without consideration, certain USDA-ARS facilities to entities that are eligible to receive real property, including: Land-grant colleges and universities (as defined in Section 1404(13) of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977); 1994 Institutions (as defined in Section 532 of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994); and Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and universities (as defined in Section 1404(10) of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977). Under P.L. 113-76, the conveyance authority expires on September 30, 2015, and all conveyances must be completed by that date.

    Two alternatives are analyzed in the Final EA, the Proposed Action Alternative and the No Action Alternative. The Final EA addresses potential impacts of these alternatives on the natural and human environment.

    • Proposed Action Alternative—Under the proposed action alternative, the Secretary would transfer the USDA-ARS land and facilities to FAMU, and FAMU, its tenant(s), and/or its partner(s) would implement the Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions described in the Final EA upon transfer of the land and facilities. The land would be used for agricultural and natural resources research for a period of no less than 25 years.

    • No Action Alternative—Under the no action alternative, the USDA-ARS land and facilities would not be transferred to FAMU. It is assumed that under the no action alternative, USDA-ARS would have no resources to operate and/or maintain the properties and that the properties would fall into a state of disrepair.

    On February 25, 2015, USDA-ARS published a notice of availability (NOA) of the Draft EA and notified the public of a 30-day public review and comment period, scheduled to close on March 26, 2015. The February 25, 2015, NOA was published in the two major newspapers serving the Brooksville/Hernando County, Florida area: The Tampa Bay Times and The Tampa Tribune. The Tampa Tribune NOA was published in both English and Spanish. On March 2, 2015, USDA-ARS published a NOA of the Draft EA in the Federal Register (FR) (80 FR 11155, March 2, 2015). To make the FR NOA public comment period concurrent with the local newspapers, the comment period was extended an additional 6 days in notices published in the same newspapers and closed on April 1, 2015, instead of the originally scheduled March 26, 2015.

    The USDA-ARS used and coordinated the NEPA commenting process to satisfy the public involvement process for Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f) as provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3)). During the public comment period, USDA-ARS received two public comments regarding the transfer of lands and facilities from USDA-ARS to FAMU. None of the public comments received identified any substantial evidence regarding significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed land transfer.

    Based on its analysis of the Final EA for the property transfer, USDA-ARS has found that the transfer of properties could have adverse effects on previously identified historic properties. USDA-ARS, Florida Division of Historical Resources (FLDHR) and FAMU have signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to address the adverse effects from the proposed transfer and to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse effects to any previously identified historic properties. The MOA also stipulates a Programmatic Agreement (PA) between FAMU and FLDHR for the long-term management of historic properties on the conveyed parcels; the PA will establish a consultation process that mirrors Section 106 and continue consultations with the FLDHR and the Seminole Tribe of Florida on Native American sites located on the properties. With the implementation of the MOA to address adverse effects on historic properties, there would be no significant impact to the environment from transferring approximately 3,800 acres of land and facilities at the USDA-ARS STARS in Brooksville, Florida, to the Board of Trustees of the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, for use by FAMU. Therefore, USDA-ARS will not prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for this proposed action.

    Dated: July 13, 2015. Chavonda Jacobs-Young, Administrator, Agricultural Research Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17912 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 15, 2015.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding (a) whether the 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 burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (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 should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if they are received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Food and Nutrition Service

    Title: Request for Administrative Review.

    OMB Control Number: 0584-0520.

    Summary of Collection: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is the Federal agency responsible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011-2036), as codified under 7 CFR parts 278 and 279, requires that the FNS determine the eligibility of retail food stores and certain food service organizations to participate in the SNAP. If a retail or wholesale firm is found to be ineligible by FNS, or is otherwise aggrieved by certain FNS actions(s), that firm has the right to file a written request for review of the administrative action with FNS.

    Need and Use of the Information: The request for administrative review is a formal letter, provided by the requester, with an original signature. FNS receives the letter requesting an administrative review and maintains it as part of the official review record. The designated reviewer will adjudicate the appeals process and make a final determination regarding the aggrieved action.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for profit; Farms.

    Number of Respondents: 1,459.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 298.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17796 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2013-0009] Notice of Affirmation; New and Revised Treatments for Various Plant Commodities AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We are affirming our earlier determination that it was necessary to immediately add to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual treatment schedules for various plant commodities. In a previous notice, we made available to the public for review and comment treatment evaluation documents that described the new treatment and revised schedules and explained why we have determined that they are effective at neutralizing certain target pests.

    DATES:

    Effective [Insert date of publication in the Federal Register], we are affirming the addition to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual of the treatments described in the notice published at 79 FR 17496-17497 on March 28, 2014.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Inder P.S. Gadh, Senior Risk Manager—Treatments, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The regulations in 7 CFR chapter III are intended, among other things, to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests and noxious weeds into or within the United States. Under the regulations, certain plants, fruits, vegetables, and other articles must be treated before they may be moved into the United States or interstate. The phytosanitary treatments regulations contained in 7 CFR part 305 (referred to below as the regulations) set out standards for treatments required in parts 301, 318, and 319 of 7 CFR chapter III for fruits, vegetables, and other articles.

    In § 305.2, paragraph (b) states that approved treatment schedules are set out in the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Treatment Manual.1 Section 305.3 sets out the processes for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules in the PPQ Treatment Manual. In that section, paragraph (b) sets out the process for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules when there is an immediate need to make a change. The circumstances in which an immediate need exists are described in § 305.3(b)(1). They are:

    1 The PPQ Treatment Manual is available athttp://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/index.shtml or by contacting the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Manuals Unit, 92 Thomas Johnson Drive, Suite 200, Frederick, MD 21702.

    • PPQ has determined that an approved treatment schedule is ineffective at neutralizing the targeted plant pest(s).

    • PPQ has determined that, in order to neutralize the targeted plant pest(s), the treatment schedule must be administered using a different process than was previously used.

    • PPQ has determined that a new treatment schedule is effective, based on efficacy data, and that ongoing trade in a commodity or commodities may be adversely impacted unless the new treatment schedule is approved for use.

    • The use of a treatment schedule is no longer authorized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or by any other Federal entity.

    In accordance with § 305.3(a)(1), we published a notice 2 in the Federal Register on March 28, 2014 (79 FR 17496-17497, Docket No. APHIS-2013-0009), announcing our determination that several additions to the PPQ Treatment Manual were necessary to mitigate the risk from various plant pests, based on evidence presented in treatment evaluation documents (TEDs) we made available with the notice. We also determined that the ongoing trade of commodities would be adversely impacted unless the new and revised treatment schedules were approved for use. The treatments were added to the PPQ Treatment Manual, but subject to change or removal based on public comment.

    2 To view the notice, TEDs, and comment we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2013-0009.

    We solicited comments on the notice for 60 days ending on May 27, 2014. We received one comment by that date, from an importers association representative who raised concerns about the revised treatment schedule for asparagus.

    Specifically, the commenter stated that there have been no pests detected during post-fumigation inspections to justify the revision of the fumigation process from 2 hours to 2.5 hours. Furthermore, the commenter stated that the additional 30 minutes of fumigation would have a negative impact on the quality of the asparagus. The commenter suggested that Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and Peru collaborate to develop a systems approach to mitigate the plant pest risks, rather than use the prescribed fumigation treatment.

    As noted in the TED, in 2007, live Copitarsia spp. larvae were detected on Peruvian asparagus during a post-fumigation inspection. As an interim measure to ensure trade would continue uninterrupted, PPQ increased the treatment duration by 30 minutes for all temperature ranges and monitored its effectiveness against all stages of the pest. Since the revision was made there have been no interceptions of Copitarsia spp. larvae on asparagus imported into the United States from Peru.

    We understand the commenters' concern regarding the negative effects the fumigation process has on the quality of the vegetables. We acknowledge that there is a potential risk of negative impacts on the quality or shelf life of commodities treated with fumigation and seek to minimize those efforts to the extent possible, but note that our primary concern must be to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States. We will, however, add a statement to the treatment T101-b-1 regarding the potential reduction in the shelf life of the treated asparagus.

    We welcome and encourage opportunities to collaborate with our stakeholders and trading partners to further mitigate the risks associated with the importation of commodities. If we receive scientific information that supports the development of a systems approach, we would consider the information and make appropriate recommendations based on that information.

    Therefore, in accordance with our regulations in § 305.3(b)(3), we are affirming our addition of the new and revised treatment schedules for use for the various plant commodities to the PPQ Treatment Manual.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of July 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17840 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2014-0097] Monsanto Co.; Availability of Preliminary Plant Pest Risk Assessment and Draft Environmental Assessment of Maize Genetically Engineered for Increased Ear Biomass AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is making available for public comment a preliminary plant pest risk assessment and draft environmental assessment for maize designated as event MON 87403, which has been genetically engineered for increased ear biomass.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0097.

    • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2014-0097, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents for this petition and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0097 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    Supporting documents for this petition are also available on the APHIS Web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/petitions_table_pending.shtml under APHIS Petition Number 14-213-01p.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. John Turner, Director, Environmental Risk Analysis Programs, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 851-3954, email: [email protected] To obtain copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy Eck at (301) 851-3892, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the authority of the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the regulations in 7 CFR part 340, “Introduction of Organisms and Products Altered or Produced Through Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Pests or Which There Is Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests,” regulate, among other things, the introduction (importation, interstate movement, or release into the environment) of organisms and products altered or produced through genetic engineering that are plant pests or that there is reason to believe are plant pests. Such genetically engineered (GE) organisms and products are considered “regulated articles.”

    The regulations in § 340.6(a) provide that any person may submit a petition to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) seeking a determination that an article should not be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. APHIS received a petition (APHIS Petition Number 14-213-01p) from the Monsanto Company (Monsanto) of St. Louis, MO, seeking a determination of nonregulated status of maize (Zea mays) designated as event MON 87403, which has been genetically engineered for increased ear biomass. The Monsanto petition states that information collected during field trials and laboratory analyses indicates that MON 87403 maize is not likely to be a plant pest and therefore should not be a regulated article under APHIS' regulations in 7 CFR part 340.

    According to our process 1 for soliciting public comment when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status of GE organisms, APHIS accepts written comments regarding a petition once APHIS deems it complete. In a notice 2 published in the Federal Register on January 20, 2015 (80 FR 2674-2675, Docket No. APHIS-2014-0097), APHIS announced the availability of the Monsanto petition for public comment. APHIS solicited comments on the petition for 60 days ending on March 23, 2015, in order to help identify potential environmental and interrelated economic issues and impacts that APHIS may determine should be considered in our evaluation of the petition. APHIS received 20 comments on the petition. Issues raised during the comment period include the contamination of conventional crop production, the potential for disruption of trade due to the presence of unwanted genetically engineered commodities in exports, the potential for negative impacts on plant fitness and the environment, and health concerns. APHIS has evaluated the issues raised during the comment period and, where appropriate, has provided a discussion of these issues in our draft environmental assessment (EA).

    1 On March 6, 2012, APHIS published in the Federal Register (77 FR 13258-13260, Docket No. APHIS-2011-0129) a notice describing our public review process for soliciting public comments and information when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status for GE organisms. To view the notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0129.

    2 To view the notice, the petition, and the comments we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0097.

    After public comments are received on a completed petition, APHIS evaluates those comments and then provides a second opportunity for public involvement in our decisionmaking process. According to our public review process (see footnote 1), the second opportunity for public involvement follows one of two approaches, as described below.

    If APHIS decides, based on its review of the petition and its evaluation and analysis of comments received during the 60-day public comment period on the petition, that the petition involves a GE organism that raises no substantive new issues, APHIS will follow Approach 1 for public involvement. Under Approach 1, APHIS announces in the Federal Register the availability of APHIS' preliminary regulatory determination along with its EA, preliminary finding of no significant impact (FONSI), and its plant pest risk assessment (PPRA) for a 30-day public review period. APHIS will evaluate any information received related to the petition and its supporting documents during the 30-day public review period.

    If APHIS decides, based on its review of the petition and its evaluation and analysis of comments received during the 60-day public comment period on the petition, that the petition involves a GE organism that raises substantive new issues, APHIS will follow Approach 2. Under Approach 2, APHIS first solicits written comments from the public on a draft EA and preliminary PPRA for a 30-day comment period through the publication of a Federal Registernotice. Then, after reviewing and evaluating the comments on the draft EA and preliminary PPRA and other information, APHIS will revise the PPRA as necessary and prepare a final EA and, based on the final EA, a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision document (either a FONSI or a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement). For this petition, we are using Approach 2.

    As part of our decisionmaking process regarding a GE organism's regulatory status, APHIS prepares a PPRA to assess the plant pest risk of the article. APHIS also prepares the appropriate environmental documentation—either an EA or an environmental impact statement—in accordance with NEPA, to provide the Agency and the public with a review and analysis of any potential environmental impacts that may result if the petition request is approved.

    APHIS has prepared a preliminary PPRA and has concluded that maize designated as event MON 87403, which has been genetically engineered for increased ear biomass, is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. In section 403 of the Plant Protection Act, “plant pest” is defined as any living stage of any of the following that can directly or indirectly injure, cause damage to, or cause disease in any plant or plant product: A protozoan, a nonhuman animal, a parasitic plant, a bacterium, a fungus, a virus or viroid, an infectious agent or other pathogen, or any article similar to or allied with any of the foregoing.

    APHIS has also prepared a draft EA in which we present two alternatives based on our analysis of data submitted by Monsanto, a review of other scientific data, field tests conducted under APHIS oversight, and comments received on the petition. APHIS is considering the following alternatives: (1) Take no action, i.e., APHIS would not change the regulatory status of maize designated as event MON 87403, or (2) make a determination of nonregulated status of maize designated as event MON 87403.

    The EA was prepared in accordance with (1) NEPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).

    In accordance with our process for soliciting public input when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status for GE organisms, we are publishing this notice to inform the public that APHIS will accept written comments on our draft EA and our preliminary PPRA regarding the petition for a determination of nonregulated status from interested or affected persons for a period of 30 days from the date of this notice. Copies of the draft EA and the preliminary PPRA, as well as the previously published petition, are available as indicated under ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above.

    After the comment period closes, APHIS will review all written comments received during the comment period and any other relevant information. After reviewing and evaluating the comments on the draft EA and the preliminary PPRA and other information, APHIS will revise the PPRA as necessary and prepare a final EA. Based on the final EA, APHIS will prepare a NEPA decision document (either a FONSI or a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement). If a FONSI is reached, APHIS will furnish a response to the petitioner, either approving or denying the petition. APHIS will also publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the regulatory status of the GE organism and the availability of APHIS' final EA, PPRA, FONSI, and our regulatory determination.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of July 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17845 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2015-0007] Notice of Affirmation of Addition of a Treatment Schedule for Methyl Bromide Fumigation of Figs AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We are affirming our earlier determination that it was necessary to immediately add to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual a treatment schedule for methyl bromide fumigation of figs for certain pests, including Chilean false red mite. In a previous notice, we made available to the public for review and comment a treatment evaluation document that described the new treatment schedule and explained why we have determined that it is effective at neutralizing these pests.

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2015, we are affirming the addition to the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual of the treatment described in the notice published at 80 FR 10661-10662 on February 27, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Inder P.S. Gadh, Senior Risk Manager—Treatments, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-2018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The regulations in 7 CFR chapter III are intended, among other things, to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests and noxious weeds into or within the United States. Under the regulations, certain plants, fruits, vegetables, and other articles must be treated before they may be moved into the United States or interstate. The phytosanitary treatments regulations contained in 7 CFR part 305 (referred to below as the regulations) set out standards for treatments required in 7 CFR parts 301, 318, and 319 for fruits, vegetables, and other articles.

    In § 305.2, paragraph (b) states that approved treatment schedules are set out in the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Treatment Manual.1 Section 305.3 sets out a process for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules in the PPQ Treatment Manual. In that section, paragraph (b) sets out the process for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules when there is an immediate need to make a change. The circumstances in which an immediate need exists are described in § 305.3(b)(1). They are:

    1 The Treatment Manual is available on the Internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/treatment.pdf or by contacting the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Manuals Unit, 92 Thomas Johnson Drive, Suite 200, Frederick, MD 21702.

    • PPQ has determined that an approved treatment schedule is ineffective at neutralizing the targeted plant pest(s).

    • PPQ has determined that, in order to neutralize the targeted plant pest(s), the treatment schedule must be administered using a different process than was previously used.

    • PPQ has determined that a new treatment schedule is effective, based on efficacy data, and that ongoing trade in a commodity or commodities may be adversely impacted unless the new treatment schedule is approved for use.

    • The use of a treatment schedule is no longer authorized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or by any other Federal entity.

    In accordance with § 305.3(b), we published a notice 2 in the Federal Register on February 27, 2015 (80 FR 10661-10662, Docket No. APHIS-2015-0007), announcing our determination that a new methyl bromide fumigation treatment schedule to control certain pests, including Chilean false red mite (Brevipalpus chilensis), on figs (Ficus carica) is effective, based on evidence presented in a treatment evaluation document (TED) we made available with the notice. We also determined that ongoing trade in figs would be adversely impacted unless the new treatment is approved for use. The treatment was added to the PPQ Treatment Manual, but was subject to change based on public comment.

    2 To view the notice, the TED, and the comment we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0007.

    We solicited comments on the notice for 60 days ending on April 28, 2015. We received one comment by that date, from a private citizen. The commenter stated that methyl bromide is known to deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, and that authorizing its use for treating figs violates the Montreal Protocol, in which the United States agreed to gradually reduce and ultimately eliminate use of methyl bromide.

    The United States Government encourages methods that do not use methyl bromide to meet phytosanitary standards where alternatives are deemed to be technically and economically feasible, practical, and effective. At present, methyl bromide fumigation is the only authorized treatment that meets the above criteria for the treatment of external pests on figs. In addition, in accordance with Montreal Protocol Decision XI/13 (paragraph 7), APHIS is committed to promoting and employing gas recapture technology and other methods whenever possible to minimize harm to the environment caused by methyl bromide emissions.

    Paragraph 5 of Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol does allow for quarantine and preshipment uses of methyl bromide, and does not specify a maximum number of such applications. Therefore, the application of this treatment is not in conflict with the protocol. Treatment of figs with methyl bromide fumigation is also consistent with the International Plant Protection Convention's standard of requiring the least restrictive phytosanitary measures to mitigate pests of concern.

    Therefore, in accordance with the regulations in § 305.3(b)(3), we are affirming our addition of a methyl bromide treatment schedule for figs to control certain pests, as described in the TED made available with the previous notice. The treatment schedule is numbered T101-i-2-2. The treatment schedule will be listed in the PPQ Treatment Manual, which is available as described in footnote 1 of this document.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of July 2015. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17841 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Kootenai National Forest; Lincoln and Sanders Counties; Montana; Kootenai National Forest Young Growth Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of commercial and non-commercial vegetation management activities and prescribed burning of activity fuels. Access management changes and other design features are included to protect resources and facilitate management activities. The project is located across the Kootenai National Forest Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln and Sanders Counties, Montana.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received within 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Chris Savage; Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest, 31374 US Hwy 2, Libby, MT 59923. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected]; or via facsimile to (406) 283-7709.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Janis Bouma, Project Team Leader, Kootenai National Forest, 31374 US Hwy 2, Libby, MT 59923. Phone: (406) 283-7774.

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On May 20, 2014, Department of Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced the designation of approximately 45.6 million acres of National Forest System lands across 94 national forests in 35 states to address insect and disease threats that weaken forests and increase the risk of forest fire. The Kootenai National Forest is the only forest in Montana that lies completely within these priority landscapes. The Governor of Montana has asked that priority be given to project development within these designated insect and disease areas, and created his Forest in Focus Initiative to accelerate the pace and scale of forest restoration in the state of Montana. The Kootenai National Forest Young-Growth Project area is approximately 400,000 acres in size and is located only in second-growth; previously harvested timber stands about across the Kootenai National Forest.

    Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose and need for this project is: (1) Improve the resiliency of the timber stands to insects and disease; (2); improve wildlife habitat especially for grizzly bear and lynx; (3) address impacts from climate change and, 4) and to decrease risk of stand-replacing wildfire.

    Overall project benefits and the purpose associated with young-growth vegetation management will be to improve stand conditions and increase resistance to insects, disease, and stand-replacement wildfire while also providing for abundance of forage and improved habitat conditions for a variety of wildlife species. Managing these stands is important in order to reach a healthier stocking rate and to increase overall growth and vigor of the stand by reducing competition and stress on remaining conifers. Management of these stands would also increase quantities of grasses, forbs, and shrubs that many wildlife species utilize in the early stage of forest development, thereby improving foraging habitat for grizzly bear, lynx, and other wildlife species. The project would allow for adaptive management over the next 10 to 15 years as stand conditions would allow and to respond to local environmental conditions and stocking rates. All of these benefits fall within the Governor's criteria.

    Proposed Action

    The proposed action includes non-commercial and commercial vegetation management activities that accomplish the following:

    Habitat improvement for grizzly bear and lynx; (2) Reduce fuel loading and ladder fuels; (3) Break up the continuity of fuels; (4) Reduce tree densities and tree species susceptible to fire mortality; (5) Increase fire resilient species; (6) Reduce susceptibility to insects and potential disease; (7) Increase tree vigor and resilience to disturbance.

    Project NEPA analysis would employ various adaptive management screens across the initial proposed acreage. These “screens” would be used to avoid impacts to Threatened and Endangered wildlife and plant species, and sensitive areas. Treatment boundaries could also be further narrowed depending on localized site conditions including soils conditions, standard wildlife effects mitigations, and Best Management Practices (BMPs). Therefore, the actual, on-the ground vegetation management would be considerably smaller than the initial 400,000 acres proposed for evaluation. The project would rely on the existing road system to reach the stands with a need for treatment, with no new specified road construction proposed for this analysis. Prior logging systems such as previous skid trails may be used if evidence of them still exists. If site-specific Forest Plan amendments may be needed, then the proposed treatments would be dropped or deferred to another future project analysis.

    The acres included in this anticipated decision would provide forest products for an array of markets. A portion of the acreage, predominately the older second growth, would provide a saw log product. Many of the acres would provide non-saw products such as post and pole. These offerings of forest products would be assessed for economic feasibility and may be mixed and matched with other offerings or decisions in order to ensure economic viability. Additionally, in order to anticipate and respond to future timber market opportunities or newly developed markets, the analysis would consider biomass removal in addition to traditional commercial timber harvest activities.

    Various silvicultural treatments would be proposed to meet the vegetative objectives for the previously harvested areas and move the landscape towards the desired ranges. Often two or more treatments, for example commercial harvest followed by non-commercial thinning may be prescribed for the same unit. Pre-commercial thinning would occur either following a commercial entry or as the only treatment. Trees cut during this activity may be removed as biomass (if future market opportunities develop) or left on site and the slash treated by a variety of fuels treatments.

    Possible Alternatives

    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of these will be the “no action” alternative in which none of the proposed action would be implemented. Additional alternatives may be included in response to issues raised by the public during the scoping process or due to additional concerns for resource values identified by the Interdisciplinary Team.

    Responsible Official

    The Forest Supervisor of the Kootenai National Forest, 31374 US Highway 2, Libby, MT 59923-3022, is the Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official, I will decide if the proposed action will be implemented. I will document the decision and rationale for the decision in the Record of Decision.

    Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Based on the purpose and need, the Responsible Official reviews the proposed action, the other alternatives, the environmental consequences, and public comments on the analysis in order to make the following decision:

    (1) Whether the proposed action will proceed as proposed, as modified by an alternative, or not at all?

    (2) Whether to implement timber harvest and associated fuels treatments, and prescribed burning, including the design features and potential mitigation measures to protect resources; and if so, how much and at what specific locations;

    (3) What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements are needed to assure design features and potential mitigation measures are implemented and effective, and to evaluate the success of the project objectives. A project specific monitoring plan will be developed.

    Preliminary Issues

    Initial analysis by the Interdisciplinary Team has brought forward seven issues that may affect the design of the project: (1) Susceptibility to severe wildfire; (2) Effect on wildlife habitat, especially lynx, grizzly bear, and bull trout; (3) Effect on big game winter range; (4) Economic viability of commercial treatments; (5) Cost of non-commercial treatments; (6) Effects on water quality and aquatic habitats; and (7) Effects on weed introduction and spread.

    Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The Interdisciplinary Team will continue to seek information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, Tribal governments, and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. The overall development of the project would also be done through a collaborative process with interested parties, including the Kootenai Forest Stakeholders Coalition, Lincoln County, Sanders County, and timber industry.

    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.

    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will become part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered.

    Dated: July 10, 2015. Chris S. Savage, Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest .
    [FR Doc. 2015-17770 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Natural Resources Conservation Service [Docket No. NRCS-2015-0010] Notice of Proposed Changes to the National Handbook of Conservation Practices for the Natural Resources Conservation Service AGENCY:

    Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of proposed changes in the NRCS National Handbook of Conservation Practices for public review and comment.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given of the intention of NRCS to issue a series of revised conservation practice standards in the National Handbook of Conservation Practices. These standards include: Channel Bed Stabilization (Code 584), Karst Sinkhole Treatment (Code 527), Open Channel (Code 582), Pond (Code 378), Surface Drain, Field Ditch (Code 607), Surface Drain, Main or Lateral (Code 608), Vertical Drain (Code 630) and Waste Hauling (Code 321). NRCS State Conservationists who choose to adopt these practices for use within their States will incorporate them into section IV of their respective electronic Field Office Technical Guide. Section 343 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 requires NRCS to make available for public review and comment all proposed revisions to conservation practice standards used to carry out HEL and wetland provisions of the law.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: This is effective July 21, 2015.

    Comment Date: Submit comments on or before August 20, 2015. Final versions of these new or revised conservation practice standards will be adopted after the close of the 30-day period and after consideration of all comments.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be submitted, identified by Docket Number NRCS-2015-0010, using any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail or hand delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attention: Regulatory and Agency Policy Team, Strategic Planning and Accountability, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Building 1-1112D, Beltsville, Maryland 20705.

    NRCS will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. In general, personal information provided with comments will be posted. If your comment includes your address, phone number, email, or other personal identifying information (PII), your comments, including personal information, may be available to the public. You may ask in your comment that your PII be withheld from public view, but this cannot be guaranteed.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wayne Bogovich, National Agricultural Engineer, Conservation Engineering Division, Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 6136 South Building, Washington, DC 20250.

    Electronic copies of the proposed revised standards are available through http://www.regulations.gov by accessing Docket No. NRCS-2015-0010. Alternatively, copies can be downloaded or printed from the following Web site: http://go.usa.gov/TXye. Requests for paper versions or inquiries may be directed to Emil Horvath, National Practice Standards Review Coordinator, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Central National Technology Support Center, 501 West Felix Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76115.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The amount of the proposed changes varies considerably for each of the conservation practice standards addressed in this notice. To fully understand the proposed changes, individuals are encouraged to compare these changes with each standard's current version as shown at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/technical/cp/ncps/?cid=nrcs143026849.

    To aid in this comparison, following are highlights of some of the proposed revisions to each standard:

    Channel Bed Stabilization (Code 584)—The proposed changes provide additional clarification regarding the conditions where the practice applies, general criteria, considerations, and technical references.

    Karst Sinkhole Treatment (Code 527)—The proposed changes provide additional clarification regarding the conditions where the practice applies, general criteria, sinkhole treatment/closing and considerations.

    Open Channel (Code 582)—The agency refined the definition, modified criteria, added considerations, updated requirements for plans and specifications, and updated requirements for operation and maintenance.

    Pond (Code 378)—The agency refined the definition, modified criteria, updated considerations, updated requirements for plans and specifications, and updated requirements for operation and maintenance.

    Surface Drain, Field Ditch (Code 607)—The agency changed the definition for clarity, along with a purpose and criteria added to allow use of this practice to collect irrigation tailwater for reuse.

    Surface Drain, Main or Lateral (Code 608)—The agency removed the reference to the ambiguous phrase `water management system' in the purpose to improve clarity. Criteria was added allowing the use of this practice as a component to collect irrigation tailwater, for use in a Tailwater Recovery System, (Code 447) along with a reference to the two-stage channel design process in NRCS National Engineering Handbook, Part 654.1005 in areas where increased channel stability is required.

    Vertical Drain (Code 630)—The agency incorporated plain language into this practice standard by adding verbiage to address potential negative effects on underground habitat, in conditions where practice applies. NRCS also added a statement in plans and specifications, focusing on documenting specific site characteristics, in relation to potential contamination sources. Finally, the agency added a references section with National Engineering Handbook 633, Chapter 26, gradation Design of Sand and Gravel Filters.

    Waste Hauling (Code 321)—This is a new national conservation practice standard with a 1-year lifespan. This practice removes manure hauling from the Waste Transfer (Code 634) standard that has been utilized extensively by a number of States for several years. The Waste Transfer standard is structural and long-term in character which does not fit the hauling of manure and other agricultural waste very well. The Waste Hauling standard is short term and non-structural. Waste Hauling is the practice of moving manure or other agricultural waste products by vehicle from a region where concentration of waste production makes it very difficult to find cropland for application that does not already exhibit very high nutrient levels due to previous application. Additionally, the practice will be used to move agricultural waste in watersheds with water quality problems to markets outside the impacted watershed. The Waste Hauling contract will be with the end user of the product, and must be used in conjunction with a CPS Nutrient Management (Code 590) plan.

    Signed this 13th day of July, 2015, in Washington, DC. Jason A. Weller, Chief, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17797 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Missouri Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Hear Testimony Regarding Police and Community Interaction in Missouri AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Missouri Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Thursday, August 20, 2015, for the purpose of hearing presenters testify about the civil rights issues regarding police and community interactions in Missouri.

    Members of the public are invited and welcomed to make statements into the record during two open forum periods. The first open forum will be held from 12:00 p.m. until 12:30 p.m. The second open forum will be held from 6:15 p.m. until 6:45 p.m. Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by September 20, 2015. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 55 W. Monroe St., Suite 410, Chicago, IL 60615. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8311, or emailed to Melissa Wojnaroski, Civil Rights Analyst, at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Closed-captioning of the meeting will be provided. If other persons who will attend the meeting require other accommodations, please contact Carolyn Allen at [email protected] at the Midwestern Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=258 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda 10:30-10:45 a.m. Introduction and Opening Remarks
    S. David Mitchell, Missouri Advisory Committee Chairman 10:45-12:00 p.m. Panel 1: Academic/Government Panel • Dr. Claiborn • Pat Hinkel • Representative, UMKC Criminology • Local and State Government representatives 12:00-12:30 p.m. Open Forum 12:30-2:00 p.m. LUNCH 2:00-3:15 p.m. Panel 2: Community Representatives I • Damon Daniel, The Ad Hoc Group Against Crime • Herston Fails, 100 Black Men of Kansas City • Sarah Rossi, ACLU of Missouri • Montague Simmons, Organization for Black Struggle 3:20-4:35 p.m. Panel 3: Law Enforcement • Chief Williams, Springfield, MO Police Dept. • Chief Forte, Kansas City Police Dept • Representative, Jackson County Police Dept • Representative, International Association of Chiefs of Police 4:35-4:55 p.m. Break 4:55-6:10 p.m. Panel 4: Community Representatives II • Pastor Floyd Wiggins, Raytown MO Living Word Testament Church • Gloria Ortiz Fisher, West Side Housing • Representative, Urban League of Greater Kansas City • Families and Individuals Directly Impacted 6:15-6:45 p.m. Open Forum II 6:45-7:00 p.m. Closing Remarks S. David Mitchell, Missouri Advisory Committee Chair 7:00 p.m. Adjournment DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, August 22, 2015, at 10:30 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Bruce R. Watkins Cultural Center, 3700 Blue Pkwy, Kansas City, MO 64130

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at 312-353-8311 or [email protected].

    Dated: July 15, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17760 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the Vermont Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 11:00 a.m. (EDT) on Friday, July 31, 2015 by conference call. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss and vote on a project proposal regarding housing in Vermont. The committee selected the topic and its last open meeting.

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-556-4997, conference ID: 7001560. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Persons interested in the issue are also invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by Monday, August 31, 2015. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=278 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda Update on Headquarters and Commission Activities
    Barbara de La Viez, Designated Federal Official Update on SAC Activities Diane B. Snelling, Chair Review, Discussion, and Vote on Project Proposal Vermont State Advisory Committee Targets and Milestones Diane B. Snelling, Chair Open Comment DATES:

    Friday, July 31, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. (EDT).

    Public Call Information:

    Dial: 888-556-4997.

    Conference ID: 7001560.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis at [email protected], or 202-376-7533.

    Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, the notice for this meeting may be published less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting because of the exceptional circumstance of a procedural miscommunication which is now corrected.

    Dated: Wednesday, July 15, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17745 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Washington Advisory Committee for the Purpose of Hearing Testimony on School Integration AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Washington State Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held on Thursday, August 13, 2015, for the purpose of holding a public meeting on school integration. The meeting will be held at the Douglass-Truth Library, 2300 E. Yesler Way, Seattle, WA 98122. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 1:30 p.m., and adjourn at approximately 5:00 p.m. PDT.

    Members of the public are entitled to make comments in the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments. The comments must be received in the Western Regional Office of the Commission by September 13, 2015. The address is Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 N. Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Persons wishing to email their comments may do so by sending them to Angelica Trevino, Civil Rights Analyst, Western Regional Office, at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information should contact the Western Regional Office, at (213) 894-3437, (or for hearing impaired TDD 913-551-1414), or by email to [email protected] Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=280 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Western Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Western Regional Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda: 1:30 p.m.—Public meeting on school integration of equity in school expenditures Public comment—4:30 p.m. Adjournment—5:00 p.m. DATES:

    Thursday, August 13, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Douglass-Truth Library, 2300 E. Yesler Way, Seattle, WA 98122.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Peter Minarik, DFO, at (213) 894-3437 or [email protected]

    Dated: July 15, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17747 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Vermont Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a briefing meeting of the Vermont Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 10:00 a.m. (EDT) on Monday, August 10, 2015 in Room 11 at the Vermont State House located at 115 State St., Montpelier, VT 05633. The purpose of the briefing meeting is to hear from government officials, advocates, and other experts as well as the public on the topic of housing in Vermont. The agenda is being finalized.

    Closed-captioning of the meeting will be provided. If other persons who plan to attend the meeting require other accommodations, please contact Evelyn Bohor at ero@usccr.gov at the Eastern Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    Time will be set aside at the end of the briefing so that members of the public may address the Committee after the formal presentations have been completed. Persons interested in the issue are also invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by Thursday, September 10, 2015. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=278 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Introductions
    Diane B. Snelling, Chair Briefing Vermont State Advisory Committee Government Officials, Advocates, Experts Administrative Matters Barbara J. de La Viez, Designated Federal Official Open Comment DATES:

    Monday, August 10, 2015 (EDT).

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be in Room 11 at the Vermont State House located at 115 State St., Montpelier, VT 05633.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis at [email protected], or 202-376-7533

    Dated: Tuesday, July 14, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17746 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Mississippi Advisory Committee to Vote on Its Advisory Memorandum on the Civil Rights Concerns Relating to Distribution of Federal Child Care Subsidies in Mississippi AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Mississippi Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. CST for the purpose of discussing and voting on an advisory memorandum on the civil rights concerns relating to potential disparities in the distribution of federal child care subsidies in Mississippi on the basis of race or color. The committee previously gathered testimony on the topic April 29, 2015, and May 13, 2015. The Committee will also discuss and vote on whether to pursue a project on race and prosecutorial discretion in Mississippi.

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-510-1765, conference ID: 8100238. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Member of the public are also invited and welcomed to make statements at the end of the conference call. In addition, members of the public may submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by October 8, 2015. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 55 W. Monroe St., Suite 410, Chicago, IL 60615. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Administrative Assistant, Carolyn Allen at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353-8311.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=257 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda:
    Welcome and Introductions Susan Glisson, Chair Discussion and Vote on Childcare Subsidy Advisory Memorandum Mississippi Advisory Committee Discussion and Vote on Race and Prosecutorial Discretion Concept Paper Open Comment Adjournment DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 8, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. CST.

    Public Call Information: Dial: 888-510-1765; Conference ID: 8100238

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Mojnaroski, DFO, at 312-353-8311 or [email protected].

    Dated: July 15, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17785 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-17-2015] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 127—West Columbia, South Carolina; Authorization of Production Activity; Isola USA Corporation; (Dielectric Prepreg and Copper-Clad Laminate); Ridgeway, South Carolina

    On March 17, 2015, the Richland-Lexington Airport District, Columbia Metropolitan Airport, grantee of FTZ 127, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board on behalf of Isola USA Corporation, located within Site 4 of FTZ 127, in Ridgeway, South Carolina.

    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (80 FR 18196, 04-03-2015). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17855 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC) will meet on August 25, 2015, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to sensors and instrumentation equipment and technology.

    Agenda Public Session

    1. Welcome and Introductions.

    2. Remarks from the Bureau of Industry and Security Management.

    3. Industry Presentations.

    4. New Business.

    Closed Session

    5. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at [email protected] no later than August 18, 2015.

    A limited number of seats will be available during the public session of the meeting. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that the materials be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. Springer.

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 25, 2015 pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(d), that the portion of this meeting dealing with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.

    For more information contact Yvette Springer on (202) 482-2813.

    Dated: July 16, 2015. Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17814 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (MPETAC) will meet on August 4, 2015, 9:00 a.m., Room 3884, in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to materials processing equipment and related technology.

    Agenda Open Session

    1. Opening remarks and introductions.

    2. Presentation of papers and comments by the Public.

    3. Discussions on results from last, and proposals from last Wassenaar meeting.

    4. Report on proposed and recently issued changes to the Export Administration Regulations.

    5. Other business.

    Closed Session

    6. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10 (a) (1) and 10 (a) (3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at [email protected], no later than July 28, 2015.

    A limited number of seats will be available for the public session. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email.

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 20, 2015, pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with matters the premature disclosure of which would be likely to frustrate significantly implementation of a proposed agency action as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a) (1) and 10(a) (3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public. For more information, call Yvette Springer at (202) 482-2813.

    Dated: July 16, 2015. Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17817 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-JT-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-831] Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On May 11, 2015, the Department received a timely request for a new shipper review (NSR) from Jinxiang Huameng Imp & Exp Co. (Huameng), in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.214(c). On May 22, 2015 Department issued a letter to Huameng requesting that it correct certain deficiencies in its initial request.1 On July 6, 2015, Huameng submitted a timely response to the Department's request.2 The Department of Commerce (Department) has determined that the request for a NSR of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China (PRC) meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for initiation. The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2014, through April 30, 2015.

    1See Letter from Mark Hoadley, “Opportunity to Correct Deficiencies,” dated May 22, 2015.

    2See Letter from Huameng, “Deficiency Corrections for Antidumping New Shipper Review Request filed on behalf of Jinxiang Huameng Imp & Exp Co., Ltd.,”(Deficiency Corrections) dated July 6, 2015.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Huston, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4261.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department published the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the PRC in the Federal Register on November 16, 1994.3 On May 11, 2015, the Department received a timely request for a NSR from Huameng. Huameng certified that it is the exporter and producer of the fresh garlic upon which the request for a NSR is based. Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), Huameng certified that it did not export fresh garlic for sale to the United States during the period of investigation (POI).4 Moreover, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Huameng certified that, since the investigation was initiated, it never has been affiliated with any exporter or producer who exported the subject merchandise to the United States during the POI, including those not individually examined during the investigation.5 Further, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), it certified that its export activities are not controlled by the central government of the PRC.6 Huameng also certified it had no subsequent shipments of subject merchandise.7

    3See Antidumping Duty Order: Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 59209 (November16, 1994).

    4See Huameng's request for a NSR dated May 11, 2015, at Exhibit 2.

    5Id.

    6Id.

    7See Deficiency Corrections at page 4.

    In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Huameng submitted documentation establishing the following: (1) the date of its first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States; (2) the date on which the fresh garlic was first entered; (3) the volume of that shipment.8

    8Id. at Exhibit 1.

    The Department queried the database of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in an attempt to confirm that the shipment reported by Huameng had entered the United States for consumption and that liquidation had been properly suspended for antidumping duties. The information which the Department examined was consistent with that provided by Huameng in its request.9

    9See Memorandum to the File from Andrew Huston, “New Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Customs Entries from November 1, 2014, to April 30, 2015,” dated July 9, 2015.

    Period of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(c), an exporter or producer may request a NSR within one year of the date on which its subject merchandise was first entered. Moreover, 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1) states that if the request for the review is made during the six-month period ending with the end of the semiannual anniversary month, the Secretary will initiate a NSR in the calendar month immediately following the semiannual anniversary month. Further, 19 CFR 315.214(g)(1)(i)(B) states that if the NSR was initiated in the month immediately following the semiannual anniversary month, the POR will be the six-month period immediately preceding the semiannual anniversary month. Within one year of the date on which its fresh garlic was first entered, Huameng made the request for a NSR that included all documents and information required by the statute and regulations. Its request was filed in May, which is the semiannual anniversary month of the order. Therefore, the POR is November 1, 2014, through April 30, 2015.10

    10See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(B).

    Initiation of New Shipper Review

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b), and the information on the record, the Department finds that Huameng's request meets the threshold requirements for initiation of a NSR and, therefore, is initiating a NSR of Huameng. The Department intends to issue the preliminary results within 180 days after the date on which this review is initiated and the final results within 90 days after the date on which we issue the preliminary results.11

    11See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act.

    It is the Department's usual practice in cases involving non-market economies to require that a company seeking to establish eligibility for an antidumping duty rate separate from the country-wide rate (i.e., a separate rate) provide evidence of de jure and de facto absence of government control over the company's export activities.12 Accordingly, the Department will issue questionnaires to Huameng that include a separate rate section. The review will proceed if the responses provide sufficient indication that Huameng is not subject to either de jure or de facto government control with respect to its exports of fresh garlic.

    12See Import Administration Policy Bulletin, Number: 05.1. (http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf).

    The Department will instruct CBP to allow, at the option of the importer, the posting, until the completion of the review, of a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for certain entries of the subject merchandise from Huameng in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e). Specifically, the bonding privilege will only apply to entries of subject merchandise exported and produced by Huameng, the sales of which are the basis for this NSR request.

    Interested parties requiring access to proprietary information in this proceeding should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306.

    This initiation and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17834 Filed 7-20-15; 08:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-945] Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On May 1, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) initiated the first five-year (“sunset”) review of the antidumping duty order on prestressed concrete steel wire strand (“PC strand”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”).1 As a result of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order on PC strand from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels indicated in the “Final Results of Review” section of this notice.

    1See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 80 FR 24900 (May 1, 2015).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bob Palmer, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-9068.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On May 1, 2015, the Department published the notice of initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on PC strand from the PRC. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i), the Department received notices of intent to participate in these sunset reviews from Insteel Wire Products Company, Sumiden Wire Products Corporation, and WMC Steel, LLC (collectively, “Petitioners”) within 15 days after the date of publication of the Initiation Notice and the effective date of the initiation of this sunset review.2 Petitioners claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act.

    2See Letter to the Secretary from Petitioners, “Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand From the People's Republic of China—Notice of Intent to Participate” (May 15, 2015).

    On June 1, 2015, the Department received an adequate substantive response from Petitioners within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).3 We received no responses from respondent interested parties. As a result, the Department conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2).

    3See Letter to the Secretary from Petitioners, “Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review of Antidumping Duty Order on Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand from the People's Republic of China—Domestic Industry's Substantive Response” (June 1, 2015).

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand from the People's Republic of China” from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (“Decision Memorandum”). The issues discussed in the Decision Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the order were to be revoked. Parties may find a complete discussion of all issues raised in the review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Services System (“ACCESS”). Access to ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum is available directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order is PC strand, produced from wire of non-stainless, non-galvanized steel, which is suitable for use in prestressed concrete (both pretensioned and post-tensioned) applications. The product definition encompasses covered and uncovered strand and all types, grades, and diameters of PC strand. PC strand is normally sold in the United States in sizes ranging from 0.25 inches to 0.70 inches in diameter. PC strand made from galvanized wire is only excluded from the scope if the zinc and/or zinc oxide coating meets or exceeds the 0.40 oz./ft2 standard set forth in ASTM-A-475. Imports of the subject merchandise are currently classifiable under subheadings 7312.10.3010 and 7312.10.3012 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Final Results of Review

    Pursuant to section 752(c) of the Act, we determine that revocation of the antidumping duty order on PC strand from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at weighted-average margins up to 193.55 percent.

    Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return of destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    This sunset review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17836 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-580-869] Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce is rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on large residential washers (washers) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014.

    DATES:

    Effective: July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD Operations Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-5255.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On April 3, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on washers from Korea covering the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014.1 The review covers two companies: Daewoo Electronics Corporation (Daewoo) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd (Samsung). On May 29, 2015, Whirlpool Corporation (Petitioner) withdrew its request for a review of both Daewoo and Samsung.

    1See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 80 FR 18202 (April 3, 2015) (Initiation). Samsung's name was misspelled in that notice and subsequently corrected in Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 24233 (April 30, 2015).

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The Department published the initiation on April 3, 2015.2 Petitioner's withdrawal of its review request for both Daewoo and Samsung was submitted within the 90-day period following the publication of the Initiation and, thus, is timely.3 No other party requested an administrative review of this countervailing duty order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this review of the countervailing duty order on washers from Korea.

    2See Initiation.

    3See Petitioner's May 29, 2015 letter.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries. Because the Department is rescinding this review in its entirety, the entries to which this administrative review pertained shall be assessed countervailing duties at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice.

    Notifications

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

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(l) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: July 10, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17846 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-813] Certain Preserved Mushrooms from India: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is partially rescinding its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms (mushrooms) from India for the period February 1, 2014, through January 31, 2015 (POR).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kate Johnson or Terre Keaton Stefanova, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4929 or (202) 482-1280, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 2, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of “Opportunity to Request Administrative Review” of the antidumping duty order on mushrooms from India for the POR.1

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 5509 (February 2, 2015).

    On March 2, 2015, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Department received timely requests from Monterey Mushrooms Inc. (the petitioner), and Sunny Dell Foods Inc. (Sunny Dell), a domestic interested party, to conduct an administrative review of the sales of Agro Dutch Industries Limited (Agro Dutch), Himalya International Ltd. (Himalya), Hindustan Lever Ltd. (formerly Ponds India, Ltd.) (Hindustan), Transchem Ltd. (Transchem), and Weikfield Foods Pvt. Ltd (Weikfield).2

    2See March 2, 2015, letters from the petitioner and Sunny Dell regarding request for administrative review.

    On April 3, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on mushrooms from India with respect to the above-named companies.3

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 18202 (April 3, 2015).

    On May 1, 2015, we received a no shipment claim for the POR from Weikfield.4

    4See Letter from Weikfield to the Department, dated April 30, 2015.

    On July 2, 2015, the petitioner and Sunny Dell timely withdrew their request for a review of Agro Dutch, Hindustan, Transchem, and Weikfield.5

    5See July 2, 2015, letters from the petitioner and Sunny Dell regarding withdrawal of request for review.

    Partial Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. The petitioner's and Sunny Dell's withdrawal requests were filed before the 90-day deadline. Therefore, in response to the withdrawals of request for review of Agro Dutch, Hindustan, Transchem and Weikfield, and pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this review with regard to these companies. However, because the petitioner and Sunny Dell did not withdraw their requests for review of Himalya, the instant review will continue with respect to this company.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only 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 may result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of 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.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751 of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17839 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Alaska Recreational Charter Vessel Guide and Owner Data Collection AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Amber Himes-Cornell, (206) 526-4221; or [email protected] or Dan Lew, (530) 554-1842, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for reinstatement, with changes of a previously approved information collection.

    Numerous management measures have recently been proposed or implemented that affect recreational charter boat fishing for Pacific halibut off Alaska. On January 5, 2010, NMFS issued a final rule establishing a limited entry permit system for charter vessels in the guided halibut sport fishery in International Pacific Halibut Commission Areas 2C (Southeast Alaska) and 3A (Central Gulf of Alaska) (75FR554). This permit system is intended to address concerns about the growth of fishing capacity in this fishery sector, which accounts for a substantial portion of the overall recreational halibut catch in Alaska. On March 16, 2011, a size limit on Pacific halibut caught while charter boat fishing in Area 2C for the 2011 fishing season was established (76FR14300). In addition, a Halibut Catch Sharing Plan (76FR44156) was implemented in 2014 that altered the way Pacific halibut is allocated between the guided sport (i.e., the charter sector) and the commercial halibut fishery.

    To assess the effect of regulatory restrictions (currently in place or potential) on charter operator and owner behavior and welfare, it is necessary to obtain a better general understanding of the Alaska recreational charter boat industry. Some information useful for this purpose is already collected from existing sources, such as charter vessel logbooks administered by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). In addition, a voluntary survey under this OMB Control Number administered to collect economic information for three fishing seasons (2011-2013) from business owners in the charter fleet was administered between 2012 and 2014. It collected information on vessel and crew characteristics, services offered to clients, spatial and temporal aspects of their operations and fishing behavior, and costs and earnings information for the three fishing seasons prior to implementation of the Halibut Catch Sharing Plan. These data were collected directly from the industry since they are not available from other existing data sources. A description of the previously-fielded survey and a summary of the results are available in a NOAA Technical Memorandum that can be accessed at http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/Publications/AFSC-TM/NOAA-TM-AFSC-299.pdf.

    To evaluate changes in the charter sector associated with the Halibut Catch Sharing Plan, the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) Alaska Fisheries Science Center proposes to continue the implementation of the survey of charter vessel owners to collect annual cost, earnings, and employment data that will supplement logbook data collected by ADF&G. The proposed data collection will provide another three years of basic economic information about the charter sector beyond the 2011 to 2013 data that was collected previously, including revenues produced from different products and services provided to clients, fixed and variable operating costs, and locations of purchases. These data will support improved analysis and of the effects of fisheries regulations on the charter fishing industry, information that is increasingly needed by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council and NMFS to more completely understand ongoing halibut allocation issues and other fishery management issues involving the charter industry. The survey will have minor changes, including, possibly, a small set of questions about how charter vessels have been impacted by a new management program)

    II. Method of Collection

    The method of data collection will be a survey of charter vessel owners implemented through a voluntary mail questionnaire.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0647.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (reinstatement, with changes, of a previously approved information collection).

    Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,200.

    Estimated Time per Response: 60 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,200.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for 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 shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) 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 respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17768 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a public meeting of the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee (Committee). The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on spectrum management policy matters.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on August 26, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Boeing Regional Headquarters, 929 Long Bridge Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. Public comments may be mailed to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4099, Washington, DC 20230 or emailed to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bruce M. Washington, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 482-6415 or [email protected]; and/or visit NTIA's Web site at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information on needed reforms to domestic spectrum policies and management in order to: license radio frequencies in a way that maximizes their public benefits; keep wireless networks as open to innovation as possible; and make wireless services available to all Americans. See Charter at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/other-publication/2013/csmac-2013-charter. This Committee is subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and is consistent with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Act, 47 U.S.C. 904(b). The Committee functions solely as an advisory body in compliance with the FACA. For more information about the Committee visit: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Matters to Be Considered: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary to assist in developing and maintaining spectrum management policies that enable the United States to maintain or strengthen its global leadership role in the introduction of communications technology and services and innovation, thus expanding the economy, adding jobs, and increasing international trade, while at the same time providing for the expansion of existing technologies and supporting the country's homeland security, national defense, and other critical needs of government missions. The Committee will hear reports of the following Subcommittees:

    1. General Occupancy Measurements and Quantification of Federal Spectrum Use

    2. Spectrum Sharing Cost Recovery Alternatives

    3. Industry and Government Collaboration

    NTIA will post a detailed agenda on its Web site, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac, prior to the meeting. To the extent that the meeting time and agenda permit, any member of the public may speak to or otherwise address the Committee regarding the agenda items. See Open Meeting and Public Participation Policy, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Time and Date: The meeting will be held on August 26, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time. The times and the agenda topics are subject to change. The meeting will be available via two-way audio link and may be webcast. Please refer to NTIA's Web site, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac, for the most up-to-date meeting agenda and access information.

    Place: The meeting will be held on the Ground Floor of the Boeing Regional Headquarters, 929 Long Bridge Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. Public comments may be mailed to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4099, Washington, DC 20230, or emailed to [email protected] The meeting will be open to the public and press on a first-come, first-served basis. Space is limited. In conformance with the access controls at the site, all visitors, including Foreign National Visitors, must send a written request to attend the meeting in person to Mr. Washington at [email protected] no later than August 19, 2015. The public meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify Mr. Washington at (202) 482-6415 or [email protected] at least ten (10) business days prior to the meeting.

    Status: Interested parties are invited to attend and to submit written comments to the Committee at any time before or after the meeting. Parties wishing to submit written comments for consideration by the Committee in advance of a meeting must send them to NTIA's Washington, DC office at the above-listed address and comments must be received five (5) business days before the scheduled meeting date, to provide sufficient time for review. Comments received after this date will be distributed to the Committee, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting. It would be helpful if paper submissions also include a compact disc (CD) containing copies of the submissions in Microsoft Word or PDF formats. CDs should be labeled with the name and organizational affiliation of the filer. Alternatively, comments may be submitted electronically to [email protected] Comments provided via electronic mail also may be submitted in one or more of the formats specified above.

    Records: NTIA maintains records of all Committee proceedings. Committee records are available for public inspection at NTIA's Washington, DC office at the address above. Documents including the Committee's charter, member list, agendas, minutes, and any reports are available on NTIA's Committee Web page at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17748 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Intent To Grant an Exclusive License of U.S. Government-Owned Patents AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 (e) and 37 CFR 404.7 (a)(1)(i), announcement is made of the intent to grant an exclusive, royalty-bearing, revocable license to US Patent Application 14/500,084, filed September 29, 2014, entitled, “A mechanical tourniquet apparatus and method of use” and US Patent Application 14/500,191, filed September 29, 2014, entitled, “A pneumatic tourniquet apparatus and method of use” and PCT Patent Application PCT/US2014/058079, filed September 29, 2014, entitled, “A mechanical tourniquet apparatus and method of use” and PCT Patent Application PCT/US2014/058098, filed September 29, 2014, entitled, “A pneumatic tourniquet apparatus and method of use” to Alphapointe, a non-profit corporation, having a principal place of business at 7501 Prospect, Kansas City, MO 64132.

    ADDRESSES:

    Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, ATTN: Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, MD 21702-5012.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For licensing issues, Mr. Barry Datlof, Office of Research & Technology Assessment, (301) 619-0033. For patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808, both at telefax (301) 619-5034.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Anyone wishing to object to the grant of this license can file written objections along with supporting evidence, if any, within 15 days from the date of this publication. Written objections are to be filed with the Command Judge Advocate (see ADDRESSES).

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17761 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army [Docket ID: USA-2015-0026] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works Directorate, Department of Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works Directorate, Department of Army announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. 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 shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory and Audit Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-9010.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    Any associated form(s) for this collection may be located within this same electronic docket and downloaded for review/testing. Follow the instructions at http://www.regulations.gov for submitting comments. Please submit comments on any given form identified by docket number, form number, and title.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Directorate of Civil Works, Office of Planning and Policy, ATTN: Douglas Gorecki, 441 G Street, Washington, DC 20314, or call 202-761-5450.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Instrument(s) for Navigation Improvement Survey(s), Generic Collection OMB Control Number 0710-XXXX.

    Needs and Uses: The primary purpose of the collections to be conducted under this clearance is to provide data which will be used in conjunction with other information to derive numerical values of shipper's, waterway carrier's and commercial fisher's behavior and estimates of transportation cost savings resulting from changes to the navigation infrastructure. In general, all collections under this generic clearance will be designed based upon accepted statistical practices and sampling methodologies, will gather consistent and valid data that are representative of the target population(s), address non-response bias issues, and achieve response rates needed to obtain statistically useful results.

    Affected Public: Commodity shippers who use coastal harbors and/or inland waterways; carriers who transit inland waterways; and commercial fishers.

    Annual Burden Hours: 500 hours.

    Number of Respondents: 1500.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Average Burden per Response: 0.33 hours.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondents are users of the nation's inland waterways, harbors and ports including commercial shippers and commercial fishermen. The sample population is typically identified using available data on vessel ownership, commodities shipped; port residents (firms) and commercial fishing fleet owners and licensed fishers. The surveys are often coordinated with local governments and trade associations to encourage cooperation for a high response rate.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17776 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Transmittal No. 15-33] 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification AGENCY:

    Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah A. Ragan or Heather N. Harwell, DSCA/LMO, (703) 604-1546/(703) 607-5339.

    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 15-33 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. EN21JY15.000 Transmittal No. 15-33 Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as amended

    (i) Prospective Purchaser: Republic of Korea (ROK)

    (ii) Total Estimated Value:

    Major Defense Equipment* $ .862 billion Other $1.638 billion TOTAL $2.500 billion

    (iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or Services under Consideration for Purchase: Upgrade of 134 KF-16C/D Block 52 aircraft, to include: 150 Modular Mission Computers (MMC 7000AH), 150 Active Electronically Scanned Array Radars (AESA), 150 AN/APX-125 or equivalent Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) Systems, 150 LN-260 Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation Systems, 150 Upgraded Radar Warning Receivers (RWR), 150 AN/ALQ-213 EW Management Units, 3 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) II Group C Helmets, 150 JHMCS II Group A and B Helmets, 31 Joint Mission Planning Systems (JMPS), 5 GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), 5 KMU-57C/B Bomb Tail Kits, 2 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb Guided Test Vehicles, 8 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb Tactical Training Rounds, 2 BRU-61 Small Diameter Bomb Common Carriage Assemblies, 5 MK-82 General Purpose Practice Bombs, 2 Joint Programmable Fuzes, 2 CBU-105 Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) Sensor Fuzed Weapons (SFW), 1 CNU-411C/E, WCMD Container, 2 ATM-65 Maverick Training Missiles, 2 ATM-84 Harpoon Block II Training Missiles, 2 AGM-84 Harpoon Block II Guidance Units, 2 CATM-9X-2 Captive Air Training Missiles, and 1 AIM-9X-2 Guidance Unit. Also included are containers, missile support and test equipment, provisioning, spare and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor technical support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support.

    (iv) Military Department: Air Force (QEO, Amd #2)

    (v) Prior Related Cases, if any:

    FMS case QEO, $185M-3Jan14

    FMS case QEO, Amd #1-$5M-11Mar14

    (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None

    (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense Article or Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: See Attached Annex.

    (viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: 14 JULY 2015

    *As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.

    POLICY JUSTIFICATION Republic of Korea (ROK)—KF-16 Upgrade Program

    The Government of the ROK requested a possible sale for the upgrade of 134 KF-16C/D Block 52 aircraft, to include: 150 Modular Mission Computers (MMC 7000AH), 150 Active Electronically Scanned Array Radars (AESA), 150 AN/APX-125 or equivalent Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) Systems, 150 LN-260 Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation Systems, 150 Upgraded Radar Warning Receivers (RWR), 150 AN/ALQ-213 EW Management Units, 3 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) II Group C Helmets, 150 JHMCS II Group A and B, 31 Joint Mission Planning Systems (JMPS), 5 GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), 5 KMU-57C/B Bomb Tail Kits, 2 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb Guided Test Vehicles, 8 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb Tactical Training Rounds, 2 BRU-61 Small Diameter Bomb Common Carriage Assemblies, 5 MK-82 General Purpose Practice Bombs, 2 Joint Programmable Fuzes, 2 CBU-105 Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) Sensor Fuzed Weapons (SFW), 1 CNU-411C/E, WCMD Container, 2 ATM-65 Maverick Training Missiles, 2 ATM-84 Harpoon Block II Training Missiles, 2 AGM-84 Harpoon Block II Guidance Units, 2 CATM-9X-2 Captive Air Training Missiles, and 1 AIM-9X-2 Guidance Unit. Also included are containers, missile support and test equipment, provisioning, spare and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor technical support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The total estimated cost is $2.5 billion.

    This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by meeting the legitimate security and defense needs of an ally and partner nation. The ROK is one of the major political and economic powers in East Asia and the Western Pacific and a key partner of the United States in ensuring peace and stability in that region. It is vital to the U.S. national interest to assist our Korean ally in developing and maintaining a strong and ready self-defense capability. The KF-16 Upgrade Program ensures interoperability and continued relations between the ROK and the U.S. Government for the foreseeable future.

    The ROK Air Force is modernizing its KF-16 fleet to better support its air defense needs. This upgrade allows the ROK to protect and maintain critical airspace and provide a powerful defensive and offensive capability to preserve the security of the Korean peninsula and its vital national assets.The ROK will have no difficulty absorbing this additional equipment and support into its armed forces.

    The proposed sale of this support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

    The principal contractors will be Lockheed Martin Corporation in Fort Worth, Texas and Northrop Grumman Corporation in Falls Church, Virginia. The purchaser requested offsets. At this time, agreements are undetermined and will be defined in negotiations between the purchaser and contractor.

    Implementation of this proposed sale requires travel of approximately 2 U.S. Government personnel on a permanent basis (potentially until contract completion) for program technical support and management oversight. This program also requires contractor personnel to travel to the ROK to meet similar requirements. The exact number of personnel will be defined during the contract negotiation.

    There is no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

    Transmittal No. 15-33 Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act Annex Item No. vii

    (vii) Sensitivity of Technology:

    1. This sale involves the release of sensitive technology to Korea. The ROK has operated the KF-16 aircraft since 1994. This upgrade provides an updated platform of that same basic capability.

    2. Sensitive and/or classified up to Secret elements of the proposed KF-16 upgrade include hardware, accessories, components, and associated software: Northrup Grumman AESA Radar, AN/APX-125 Advanced IFF (or equivalent), Modular Mission Computer (MMC), LN-260 Embedded Global Position System/Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS), Digital AN/ALR-69A Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System II (JHMCS II), Joint Mission Planning System (JMPS), Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) series weapons, GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB), MK-82/84 general purpose bombs, Joint Programmable Fuze (JPF), Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD) Sensor Fuzed Weapon (SFW), Harpoon Block II, and AIM-9X-2.

    3. Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars represent the latest in fire control radar technology. AESA radars contain digital technology, including high processor and transmitter power, sensitive receiver electronics, and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) technology, which creates high resolution radar ground maps. This radar also incorporates Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR), which is a technology that utilizes measurements taken of an aircraft engine and compares those measurements with a database to aid in combat identification of that aircraft. Complete hardware is classified Secret; major components and subsystems are classified Secret; software is classified Secret; and technical data and documentation are classified up to Secret.

    4. The AN/APX-125 Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) is a dual Mode 4 and 5 capable system. It is Unclassified unless/until Mode IV and/or Mode V operational evaluator parameters are loaded into the equipment. Classified elements of the IFF system include software object code, operating characteristics, parameters, and technical data. Mode IV and Mode V anti-jam performance specifications/data, software source code, algorithms, and tempest plans or reports will not be offered, released, discussed or demonstrated.

    5. The Modular Mission Computer (MMC) is the central aircraft computer of the F-16. It serves as the hub for all aircraft subsystems and avionics data transfer. The hardware and software are classified Secret.

    6. The LN-260 Embedded GPS-INS is a sensor that combines GPS and inertial sensor inputs to provide accurate location information for navigation and targeting. The EGI LN-260 is Unclassified. The GPS cryptovariable keys needed for highest GPS accuracy are classified up to Secret.

    7. The AN/ALR-69A Digital Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) is the latest in RWR technology, designed to detect incoming radar signals, identify and characterize those signals to a specific threat, and alert the aircrew through the RWR System display. The system consists of external antennae mounted on the fuselage and wingtips. The ALR-69A is based on a digitally-controlled, 16 channel broadband receiver that scans within a specific frequency spectrum and is capable of adjusting to threat changes by modifications to the software. In Country Reprogramming RWR capability will not be provided as part of this export. Hardware is Unclassified. Software is Secret. Technical data and documentation to be provided is Secret.

    8. The Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) II is a modified HGU-55/P helmet that incorporates a visor-projected Heads-Up Display (HUD) to cue weapons and aircraft sensors to air and ground targets. This system projects visual targeting and aircraft performance information on the back of the helmet's visor, enabling the pilot to monitor this information without interrupting his field of view through the cockpit canopy. This provides improvement for close combat targeting and engagement. Hardware is Unclassified.

    9. The Joint Mission Planning System (JMPS) is a multi-platform PC based mission planning system. JMPS hardware is Unclassified and the software is classified up to Secret.

    10. The GBU-31(v)1/31(v)3/38 are 2000lbs and 500lbs Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) weapons respectively, with a guidance tail kit that converts unguided free-fall bombs into accurate, adverse weather “smart” munitions. The GBU-31(v)1 utilizes a MK-84 bomb body and the (v)3 utilizes a BLU-109 bomb body. With the addition of a new tail section that contains an inertial navigational system and a global positioning system guidance control unit, JDAM improves the accuracy of unguided, general-purpose bombs in any weather condition. JDAM can be launched from very low to very high altitudes in a dive, toss and loft, or in straight and level flight with an on-axis or off-axis delivery. The JDAM enables multiple weapons to be directed against single or multiple targets on a single pass. The JDAM AUR (All Up Round) and all of its components are Unclassified, technical data for JDAM is classified up to Secret.

    11. The GBU-54/56 are 500lbs/2000lbs dual mode laser and GPS guided JDAMs respectively. The GBU-54/56 contains a DSU-40 Laser Sensor that uses both Global Position System aided inertial navigations and/or Laser guidance to execute threat targets. The Laser sensor enhances the standard JDAM's reactive target capability by allowing rapid prosecution of fixed targets with large initial target location errors (TLE). The DSU-40 Laser sensor also provides the additional capability to engage mobile targets moving up to 70 mph. The DSU-40 Laser sensor is a strap down (non-gimbaled) sensor that attaches to the Mk-84 or Blu-117 bomb body in the forward fuze well. Information revealing target designation tactics and associated aircraft maneuvers, the probability of destroying specific/peculiar targets, vulnerabilities regarding countermeasures and the electromagnetic environment is classified Secret. Information revealing the probability of destroying common/unspecified targets, the number of simultaneous lasers the laser seeker head can discriminate, and data on the radar/infra-red frequency is classified Confidential.

    12. The GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) is a 250lb class weapon designed as a small autonomous, conventional, air-to-ground, precision glide weapon able to strike fixed and stationary re-locatable targets from standoff range. The SDB weapon system consists of the GBU-39 weapon and the BRU-61/A carriage system. The SDB uses tightly coupled Anti-Jam GPS aided INS for guidance to the coordinates of a stationary target. The warhead is a very effective multipurpose penetrating and blast fragmentation warhead. A proximity sensor provides a height of burst capability. The hardware and software are classified Secret.

    13. The BRU-61/A carriage system consists of a four-place rack with a self-contained pneumatic charging and accumulator section designed to carry the GBU-39 SDB. Four ejector assemblies hold the individual weapons. Internal avionics and wire harnesses connect the carriage system to the aircraft and to the individual weapons. The carriage avionics assembly provides the interface between the individual stores and the aircraft for targeting, GPS keys, alignment, fuze settings, and weapon release sequence information. The hardware is Unclassified.

    14. The MK-82/84 are 500lbs/2000lbs general purpose bombs respectively designed to attack soft and intermediately protected targets. The destruction mechanism is blast and fragmentation. The weapons are Unclassified.

    15. The Joint Programmable Fuze (JPF) FMU-152 is a multi-delay, multi-arm and proximity sensor compatible with general purpose blast, frag and hardened-target penetrator weapons. The JPF settings are cockpit selectable in flight when used with JDAM weapons. The JPF hardware is Unclassified.

    16. CBU-105D/B Sensor Fused Weapon (SFW) is an advanced 1,000 lb class cluster bomb munition containing sensor fused sub-munitions that are designed to attack and defeat a wide range of moving or stationary land and maritime threats with minimal collateral damage. The SFW is currently the only combat proven, clean battle weapon that meets U.S. policy regarding cluster munition safety standards. The CBU-105 major components include the SUU-66 Tactical Munitions Dispenser (TMD), ten (10) BLU-108 sub-munitions, each with four (4) “hockey puck” shaped skeet infrared sensing projectiles for a total of forty (40) warheads. The munition is delivered in its All-Up-Round (AUR) configuration. This configuration is Unclassified. No access to the CBU-105 in other than its AUR configuration is anticipated. Although very difficult to open, access to the sub-munitions, and technical data are classified up to Secret.

    17. The TGM-65G Maverick is the inert/training version of an air-to-ground missile. The hardware is Unclassified, but has an overall classification of Secret. The Secret aspects of the Maverick system are tactics, information revealing its vulnerability to countermeasures, and counter-countermeasures. Manuals and technical documents that are necessary for operational use and organizational maintenance have portions that are classified Confidential. Performance and operating logic of the countermeasures circuits are Secret.

    18. The AGM-84 Harpoon missile is an air-launched, anti-ship, 75nm range, sea skimming, “fire and forget” missile with auto-pilot navigation and multiple waypoint capability. Harpoon Block I terminal guidance is provided by a radar seeker with a selectable attack profile. The Harpoon Block II upgrade incorporates software and hardware changes that will add an improved Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW) capability against ships in the open ocean and in the littoral. Harpoon Block II hardware improvements include a new Guidance Control Unit (GCU) that uses GPS aided inertial navigation. This improves the missile's overall navigation accuracy. GPS accuracy also gives Harpoon Block II an inherent secondary role against land-based targets, making Block II useful in coastal target suppression roles. Harpoon Block II software improvements includes changes to the launching system that provides the operator with the ability to superimpose a geographic coastline on the mission planning screen. This allows the user to shape the search pattern of the Harpoon seeker in ASUW mode, enhancing its performance in littoral areas. The information on the Harpoon is classified Secret.

    19. The AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder missile is a 5th generation air-to-air guided missile that employs a passive infrared (IR) target acquisition system that features digital technology and micro-miniature solid-state electronics. The AIM-9X-2 AUR is Confidential, major components and subsystems range from Unclassified to Confidential, and technical data and other documentation are classified up to Secret.

    20. If a technologically advanced adversary obtained knowledge of the specific hardware or software in the proposed sale, the information could be used to develop countermeasures which might reduce weapons system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.

    21. A determination has been made that the recipient country can provide the same degree of protection for the sensitive technology being released as the U.S. Government. This sale is necessary in furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives outlined in the Policy Justification. Moreover, the benefits to be derived from this sale, as outlined in the Policy Justification, outweigh the potential damage that could result if the sensitive technology were revealed to unauthorized persons.

    22. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal have been authorized for release and export to the Government of Korea.

    [FR Doc. 2015-17774 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2014-HA-0162] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by August 20, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Surveys on Viability of TRICARE Standard and TRICARE Extra; OMB Control Number 0720-0031.

    Type of Request: Reinstatement.

    Number of Respondents: 50000.

    Responses Per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 50000.

    Average Burden Per Response: 5 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 4167.

    Needs and Uses: The survey will gather data on providers (physicians and mental health providers) to assess the extent to which they are aware of the overall TRICARE program, accept new TRICARE Standard patients specifically, and the extent to which these physicians accept Medicare patients. The information gathered through this project will be used to generate reports to address the legislative requirements specified in section 711 of the FY08 NDAA and section 721 of the FY 2012 NDAA. Information resulting from the collection efforts of this project will assist DoD in developing policies and initiatives to improve TRICARE beneficiaries' access to civilian providers. The results of the previous survey efforts have been briefed to, or provided in written communication to the Defense Health Agency and senior DoD personnel, TRICARE Regional Office Directors and their staff, members of Congress, selected state leaders and selected medical societies, staff members of the Government Accountability Office, TRICARE Beneficiary Groups, at the Military Health Service (MHS) Conferences. The results have also been referenced in public media such as the Military Officers Association of America. None of these audiences have ever been provided information that would permit them to identify individual providers, but instead were briefed using aggregate measures of provider knowledge or behavior within specific analysis groups such as health care markets or provider areas of specialization.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Frequency: Annually.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

    Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, DoD Desk Officer, at [email protected] Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer and the Docket ID number and title of the information collection.

    You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    Dated: July 16, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17844 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2015-ICCD-0062] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note AGENCY:

    Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://wwww.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2015-ICCD-0062. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, LBJ, Room 2E103, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Beth Grebeldinger, 202-377-4018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    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: Federal Perkins Loan Program Master Promissory Note.

    OMB Control Number: 1845-0074.

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

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 276, 934.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 138, 467.

    Abstract: The Federal Perkins Loan Master Promissory Note (MPN) provides the terms and conditions of the Perkins Loan program and is prepared by the participating eligible institution and signed by the borrower. The borrower may receive loans for a single academic year or multiple academic years. The adoption of the MPN in the Perkins Loan Program has simplified the loan process by eliminating the need for institutions to prepare and students to sign, a promissory note each award year.

    Dated: July 16, 2015. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17829 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2149-000] Century Marketer LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Century Marketer LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is August 3, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17786 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14675-000] Siting Renewables, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On April 9, 2015, Siting Renewables, LLC, filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a hydropower project to be located at the existing Chain Dam on the Lehigh River, near the City of Easton, Northampton County, Pennsylvania. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

    The proposed Chain Dam Hydroelectric Project would consist of the following: (1) An existing 20-foot-high concrete gravity dam with a 690-foot-long spillway; (2) an existing impoundment having a surface area of approximately 300 acres and a storage capacity of 1,200 acre-feet at an elevation of 190 feet mean sea level (msl); (2) three channels, each with a very low head (VLH) 500-kilowatt (kW) turbine-generator unit, with a maximum generating capacity of 1,500 kW, with a maximum hydraulic capacity of 2,300 cubic feet per second under a net head of 13.5 feet, (3) three new, heavy flotsam racks; (4) a crest-mounted walkway carrying hydraulic and electrical conduits from the VLH turbines to a new powerhouse; and (5) a 280-foot-long 12.42/7.2 kilovolt primary transmission line. The estimated annual generation of the proposed project would be 7,880,000 kilowatt-hours.

    Applicant Contact: Mr. Ralph J. Jones, Siting Renewables, LLC, 1800 Rt. 34, Suite 101, Wall, NJ 07719; phone: (855) 946-7652.

    FERC Contact: Monir Chowdhury; phone: (202) 502-6736.

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-14675-000.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14675) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17790 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-505-000] Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Chicago Market Expansion Project, and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Chicago Market Expansion Project (Project) involving construction and operation of facilities by Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC (Natural) in Livingston County, Illinois. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.

    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested agencies on the Project. You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the Project. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before August 9, 2015.

    If you sent comments on this Project to the Commission before the opening of this docket on June 1, 2015, you will need to file those comments in Docket No. CP15-505-000 to ensure they are considered as part of this proceeding.

    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this Project. State and local government representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed Project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.

    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a Natural representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the Commission approves the Project, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with state law.

    Natural provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

    Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected] Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing” as the filing type; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the Project docket number (CP15-505-000) with your submission:

    Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Summary of the Proposed Project

    Natural proposes to construct and operate a new compressor station and associated facilities in Livingston County, Illinois. Specifically, Natural proposes to construct and operate one new 30,000 horsepower compressor station with suction and discharge station interconnect piping; and ancillary facilities. The Project would provide about 238,000 dekatherms of incremental northbound firm transportation capacity to the city of Chicago, Illinois and neighboring areas.

    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix 1.1

    1 The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov using the link called “eLibrary” or from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call (202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.

    Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 21 acres of land of which 19.2 acres would remain as the permanent facility following construction. The remaining 1.8 acres consists of temporary workspace necessary to accommodate construction of the Project. The temporary workspace would be restored to its previous land use and maintained in its pre-construction condition.

    The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. The NEPA also requires us 2 to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.

    2 “We,” “us,” and “our” refer to the environmental staff of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed Project under these general headings:

    • Geology and soils; • land use; • water resources, fisheries, and wetlands; • cultural resources; • vegetation and wildlife; • air quality and noise; • endangered and threatened species; • public safety; and • cumulative impacts.

    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project or portions of the Project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.

    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA will be available in the public record through eLibrary (for directions on the use of eLibrary, please see the additional Information Section on page 6). Depending on the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public Participation section, beginning on page 2.

    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of this Project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA.3 Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

    3 The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, part 1501.6.

    Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultations with the Illinois State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to solicit its views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the Project's potential effects on historic properties.4 We will define the Project-specific Area of Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the Project develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor stations, and access roads). Our EA for this Project will document our findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106.

    4 The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 800. Those regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

    Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Indian tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for Project purposes, or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed Project.

    Copies of the EA will be sent to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

    Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want to become an “intervenor” which is an official party to the Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the User's Guide under the “e-filing” link on the Commission's Web site.

    Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the “Document's & Filings” link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on General Search and enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-505). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17806 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-18-000] Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Supplemental Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed White Oak Mainline Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    On January 22, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued in Docket No. CP15-18-000 a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed White Oak Mainline Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). Since its application in the above-referenced docket, FERC staff has requested information regarding the proposed facilities, as well as alternative routes to the proposed Kemblesville Loop 1 in Chester County, Pennsylvania. On June 2, 2015, FERC staff also conducted an onsite environmental review of the proposed pipeline and several alternative routes. In response to data requested by FERC staff, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company (Eastern Shore) provided information on four alternative pipeline routes. FERC staff is further evaluating Alternative Route 2 as described in Eastern Shore's April 21, 2015 response. This Supplemental Notice is being issued to seek comments on Alternative Route 2 and opens a new scoping period for interested parties to file comments on environmental issues specific to this alternative route.

    1 A pipeline loop is constructed parallel to an existing pipeline to increase capacity.

    The January 22, 2015 NOI announced that the FERC staff will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) to address the environmental impacts of the White Oak Mainline Expansion Project (Project). Please refer to the NOI for more information about the overall facilities proposed by Eastern Shore in Pennsylvania and Delaware, and FERC staff's EA process. The Commission will use the EA in its decision-making process to determine whether the Project is in the public convenience and necessity.

    The Commission previously solicited public input on the Project in the beginning of 2015. We 2 are now specifically seeking comments on the Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2 to help the Commission staff evaluate the environmental impact associated with the alternative and how that compares to the currently proposed route. Please note that this special scoping period will close on August 8, 2015.

    2 “We,” “us,” and “our” refer to the environmental staff of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.

    This Supplemental Notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this Project, including new landowners that would be affected by the alternative pipeline route.

    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the Commission approves the Project, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if the easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with state law.

    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” is available for viewing on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

    Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission will provide equal consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form or provided verbally. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected] Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” You must select the type of filing you are making. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing;” or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Summary of Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2

    The Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2 would be collocated entirely with the existing right-of-way for Eastern Shore's White Oak mainline pipeline and existing loop. This alternative route would involve construction in residential areas as the surrounding area has been developed into several residential subdivisions since installation of the original mainline pipeline. The Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2 would be about 2.1 miles in length and would use previously disturbed land and two existing crossing locations of the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River, administered by the U.S. Department of Interior's National Park Service, using a flume and/or dam and pump crossing method. In comparison, the currently proposed 3.9-mile-long route would follow existing rights-of-way for 41.9 percent of the route and would include two horizontal directional drill crossings of tributaries of the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River.

    An overview map of the Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2 that follows the existing Eastern Shore pipeline right-of-way and the currently proposed route is included in Appendix 1.3

    3 The appendices referenced in this notice are not being printed in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov using the link called “eLibrary” or from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call (202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.

    Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have identified several issues that we think deserve attention for our comparison of the proposed route and the Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2 based on a review of the proposed facilities and the environmental information provided by Eastern Shore. This preliminary list of issues may be changed based on your comments and our analysis.

    • crossings of the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River;

    • old growth forested areas along the pipeline routes; and

    • noxious weeds.

    Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested parties; commenters; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes landowners affected by the pipelines as currently proposed, as well as landowners that may be affected by the Kemblesville Loop Alternative Route 2. We will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed Project.

    Copies of the completed EA will be sent to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of a CD version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please return the attached Information Request (Appendix 2).

    Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want to become an “intervenor” which is an official party to the Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the User's Guide under the “e-filing” link on the Commission's Web site.

    Additional Information

    Additional information about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search” and enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-18). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17805 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2134-000] Sky River Asset Holdings, LLC; Supplemental Notice that Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Sky River Asset Holdings, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is July 29, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17804 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2130-000] Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is July 29, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected]. or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17813 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL15-51-000] City Water and Light Plant of the City of Jonesboro; Notice of Filing July 9, 2015.

    Take notice that on July 8, 2015, the City Water and Light Plant of the City of Jonesboro submitted a Supplement to its March 6, 2015 application of cost-based revenue requirements schedule for reactive power production capability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 20, 2015.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17808 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-8-000] Northwest Pipeline, LLC: Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kalama Lateral Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Kalama Lateral Project, proposed by Northwest Pipeline, LLC (Northwest) in the above-referenced docket. Northwest requests authorization to construct and operate about 3.1 miles of natural gas transmission pipeline and associated facilities in Cowlitz County, Washington. The Project would provide about 320 million cubic feet per day of natural gas to the NW Innovation Works' (NWIW) proposed Kalama Manufacturing & Marine Export Facility Methanol Plant, a methanol production facility that would be located at the Port of Kalama, also in Cowlitz County.

    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the Kalama Lateral Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    There were not any agencies that participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA.

    The proposed Kalama Lateral Project includes the following facilities:

    • About 3.1 miles of 24-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline;

    • one meter station, the Kalama Delivery Lateral Meter Station, within the boundaries of the Methanol Plant;

    • one pig launcher at the proposed interconnect/tie-in location with the existing Ignacio to Sumas 30-inch-diameter mainline and one pig receiver at the proposed meter station site; and

    • new appurtenances at the proposed tie-in location, including a new tap, valve, and isolated flange.

    The FERC staff mailed copies of the EA to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and groups; newspapers and libraries in the project area; and parties to this proceeding.

    In addition, the Kalama Lateral Project EA is available for public viewing on the FERC's Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited number of copies of the EA are available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426 (202) 502-8371.

    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your comments prior to making its decision on this project, it is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or before August 12, 2015.

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the project docket number (CP15-8-000) with your submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected]

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” You must select the type of filing you are making. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing”; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).1 Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

    1 See the previous discussion on the methods for filing comments.

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-8). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: July 13, 2015.. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17789 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP15-101-000] Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Informal Settlement Conference

    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened in this proceeding commencing at 10:00 a.m. (EDT) on Wednesday, July 22, 2015 and continuing on Thursday, July 23, 2015, at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, for the purpose of exploring the possible settlement of the above-referenced docket.

    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).

    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an email to [email protected] or call toll free 1-866-208-3372 (voice) or 202-208-1659 (TTY), or send a FAX to 202-208-2106 with the required accommodations.

    For additional information, please contact Ken Ende at (202) 502-6762, [email protected], or Andrew Schulte at (202) 502-8136, [email protected] or Cheryl Feik Ryan at (202) 502-6506, [email protected]

    Dated: July 13, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17788 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL13-88-000] Northern Indiana Public Service Company v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Request for Comments

    On September 11, 2013, Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) filed a complaint against Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM).1 NIPSCO requested that the Commission order MISO and PJM (the RTOs) to reform the interregional planning process of the Joint Operating Agreement between MISO and PJM (MISO-PJM JOA). On June 15, 2015, the Commission held a technical conference to explore issues raised in the Complaint related to the MISO-PJM JOA and the MISO-PJM seam.

    1 NIPSCO Complaint, Docket No. EL13-88-000 (filed Sept. 11, 2013).

    Shown below are post-technical conference questions for which the Commission seeks further comment. To the extent that any response calls for specific revisions to the MISO-PJM JOA, the Commission requests that parties also provide redline revisions to the MISO-PJM JOA where possible.

    1. According to comments made at the technical conference, it appears that several MISO and/or PJM stakeholder groups are currently working on potential revisions to the MISO-PJM JOA, MISO tariff and/or PJM tariff (e.g., models and assumptions, Market Efficiency Project and Cross Border Market Efficiency Project criteria, etc.). Please comment on the status of that effort, the potential revisions being considered, and the timing of any proposed revisions to be filed with the Commission for consideration.

    2. Provide specific examples of types of facilities that could have a significant benefit (e.g., relieving congestion across the seam) but may not pass MISO's regional Market Efficiency Project and/or Cross-Border Market Efficiency Project criteria. To the extent such facilities would have significant benefit, what steps do the RTOs need to take to address the matter?

    3. What specific revisions would need to be made to the MISO-PJM JOA in order to better align the existing regional transmission planning cycles with the interregional transmission planning process?

    4. Would revisions to the MISO-PJM JOA to require the RTOs to, annually, or at some other regular interval, conduct a joint interregional transmission planning study help to address the issues created by the configuration of the PJM and MISO planning regions? If so, what specific revisions to the MISO-PJM JOA would be required?

    5. Based on comments at the technical conference, it appears that projects that successfully navigate the Interregional Planning Stakeholder Advisory Committee process must be studied and approved two more times—once through the MISO regional planning process and once through the PJM regional planning process. Please give specific examples of reforms that could be made to address this “triple hurdle” 2 (e.g., creation of a new project category for interregional transmission projects to be eligible for selection in the two RTOs' respective regional transmission plans).

    2 Various panelists referred to this process as the “triple hurdle” problem.

    6. Please explain whether the avoidance of market-to-market payments should be included in the assessment of the benefits of Cross-Border Market Efficiency Projects.

    7. Should the MISO-PJM JOA be revised to include the process and study scope of the “Quick Hit” 3 study process? Please explain why or why not.

    3 MISO and PJM state that under the newly initiated PJM and MISO “Quick Hit” study, the RTOs are considering near-term upgrades to remedy recent historical interregional congestion issues. MISO and PJM explain that this study allows projects to be identified more quickly and alleviate the underlying issues promptly. MISO and PJM Joint Comments at 3, n.10 (filed Mar. 31, 2015). See also PJM/MISO Interregional Planning Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting Presentation at 4 (The “Quick Hit” study goal is to identify valuable projects on the MISO-PJM seam. Valuable projects are those that will relieve known Market-to-Market issues, are completed in a relatively short time frame, have a quick payback on investment, and are not greenfield projects.)

    8. Explain ways in which the RTOs can better coordinate planning of new generator interconnection and generator retirement. Would using models with the same assumptions and criteria be one way to better coordinate? What specific revisions would need to be made to the MISO-PJM JOA?

    Interested parties should submit comments in response to the questions above on or before August 14, 2015. Reply comments must be filed on or before August 31, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Parties may submit comments by one of the following methods: Agency Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments via the eFiling link found under the “Documents and Filing” tab.

    Mail: Those unable to file comments electronically may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    All comments submitted should be identified by Docket No. EL13-88-000.

    For further information contact:

    Jason Strong (Technical Information) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Market Regulation 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 (202) 502-6124 [email protected] Ben Foster (Technical Information) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Policy and Innovation 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 (202) 502-6149 [email protected] Lina Naik (Legal Information) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the General Counsel 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 (202) 502-8882 [email protected] Dated: July 15, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17811 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-525-000; PF15-9-000] UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on July 1, 2015, UGI Sunbury, LLC (Sunbury), 460 N. Gulph Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406, filed an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's Regulations requesting: (i) A certificate authorizing Sunbury to construct, own, and operate new interstate natural gas pipeline facilities (Sunbury Pipeline Project); (ii) a blanket certificate authorizing Sunbury to construct and/or abandon certain eligible facilities, and (iii) a blanket certificate authorizing Sunbury authority to provide open-access transportation services with pre-granted abandonment authority. The Sunbury Pipeline Project is designed to add an additional 200,000 Dth/d of new pipeline capacity to industrial and residential users and would require the construction of approximately 34.4 miles of 20-inch-diameter pipeline in Snyder, Union, Northumberland, Montour, and Lycoming Counties, Pennsylvania.

    The Sunbury Pipeline Project would run generally north to south, interconnecting with the pipeline facilities of Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company and the MARC I Pipeline at its northern end and also interconnecting with the distribution facilities of UGI Penn Natural Gas and UGI Central Penn Gas. At its southern terminus the Sunbury Pipeline would connect to the proposed Hummel Station Generating Facility at the existing site of the coal-fired Sunbury Generating Facility in Snyder County, Pennsylvania. The estimated cost of the Project is $178,243,345. The filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions concerning this application should be directed to Anthony C. Cox, Director, UGI Sunbury, LLC, One Meridian Blvd., Suite 2C01, Wyomissing, PA 19610, phone: (610) 373-7999, facsimile: (610) 374-4288, email: [email protected], or Janna R. Chesno, Hogan Lovells US LLP, 555 Thirteen Street NW., Washington, DC 20004, phone: (202) 637-5600, facsimile: (202) 637-5910, email: [email protected]

    On December 30, 2014 the Commission granted Sunbury's request to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF15-9-000 to staff activities involved in the Sunbury Pipeline Project. Now, as of the filing of the July 1 application, the Pre-Filing Process for this Project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP15-525-000 as noted in the caption of this Notice.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 5 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

    Comment Date: August 5, 2015.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17810 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG15-105-000.

    Applicants: Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5103.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2881-014; ER14-787-002; ER13-1541-008; ER13-1101-009; ER10-2886-014; ER10-2885-014; ER10-2884-014; ER10-2883-014; ER10-2882-014; ER10-2663-014; ER10-2641-014; EL15-39-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Southern Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Oleander Power Project, Limited Partnership, Southern Company—Florida LLC, Southern Turner Cimarron I, LLC, Spectrum Nevada Solar, LLC, Campo Verde Solar, LLC, Macho Springs Solar, LLC.

    Description: Answer of Alabama Power Company, et al., to the April 27, 2015 Order.

    Filed Date: 6/26/15.

    Accession Number: 20150701-0178.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1485-004.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: PJM Request to Release Stay in Docket No. ER14-1485-000 to be effective 6/11/2014.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5088.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-279-001.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing—Central Nebraska Public Power & Irrig. District Stated Rate to be effective 1/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5093.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-529-001.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: OATT Modifications Pursuant to Order 676-H to be effective 5/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5084.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-547-001.

    Applicants: Avista Corporation.

    Description: Compliance filing: Avista Corp OATT Order 676-H Compliance Filing to be effective 7/16/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1419-002.

    Applicants: Emera Maine.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order No. 676-H compliance filing to be effective 5/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5054.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2207-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: First Revised Service Agreement No. 3915; Queue Y2-042/Z2-104 (WMPA) to be effective 6/19/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5081.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2208-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool Participants Committee.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Winter Reliability Solution to be effective 9/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5083.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2209-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Certificates of Concurrence—Multiple ANPP Agreements to be effective 5/24/2012.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5116.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2210-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of Filed Version to be effective 2/27/2013.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5117.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2211-000.

    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rates—Initial Filing to be effective 9/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5125.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17799 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12711-005] Ocean Renewable Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: Extension of License Term.

    b. Project No.: 12711-005.

    c. Date Filed: June 5, 2015.

    d. Applicant: Ocean Renewable Power Company.

    e. Name of Project: Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project.

    f. Location: Cobscook Bay, Washington County, Maine.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.

    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Nathan E. Johnson, Ocean Renewable Power Company, 66 Pearl Street, Suite 301, Portland, ME 04101.

    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Andrea Claros, (202) 502-8171, [email protected].

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments.

    Please include the project number (P-12711-005) on any comments, motions, or recommendations filed.

    k. Description of Request: Ocean Renewable Power Company (ORPC) requests the Commission to extend the term of the Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project pilot project license for two years from February 1, 2020 to February 1, 2022. ORPC received an eight-year pilot project license on February 27, 2012. ORPC states that precedence exists for longer-term (10 year) pilot project licenses. ORPC is currently in a technology optimization phase and the extension would provide opportunity to test alternative turbine designs.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208- 3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which are the subject of the application. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17787 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 Take Notice That the Commission Received the Following Electric Corporate Filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC15-168-000.

    Applicants: Blue Cube Operations LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of Blue Cube Operations LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150714-5176.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: EC15-169-000.

    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc., Thunder Spirit Wind, LLC, Ace Wind LLC.

    Description: Application of MDU Resources Group, Inc., et al. for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for Disposition of Jurisdiction Facilities and Request for Expedited Consideration and Confidential Treatment.

    Filed Date: 7/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150714-5180.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG15-102-000.

    Applicants: Grant Wind, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Grant Wind, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150714-5137.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: EG15-103-000.

    Applicants: McCoy Solar, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of McCoy Solar, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150714-5138.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: EG15-104-000.

    Applicants: Javelina Wind Energy, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Javelina Wind Energy, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150714-5139.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/4/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2138-002.

    Applicants: Limon Wind III, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to January 8, 2015 Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Limon Wind III, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/10/15.

    Accession Number: 20150710-5256.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-511-001.

    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing—NAESB v003 WEQ Business Practice Standards to be effective 5/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5049.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-533-001.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing to Order No. 676-H Compliance Filing to be effective 5/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5031.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1400-001.

    Applicants: Erie Power, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Erie Power Market Based Rate Tariff Supplement to be effective 6/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 6/22/15.

    Accession Number: 20150622-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/29/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1706-001.

    Applicants: Newark Energy Center, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Deficiency Letter to be effective 7/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5022.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1831-001.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Central Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: TCC-TNC-Brazos Electric Power Cooperative Amend & Restated TSA Amd to be effective 5/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5024.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1832-001.

    Applicants: AEP Texas North Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: TCC-TNC-Brazos Electric Cooperative Amend & Restated TSA Concurrence Amd to be effective 5/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5025.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2205-000.

    Applicants: Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 9/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5027.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2205-001.

    Applicants: Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 9/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5039.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2206-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 3336; Queue No. X2-059 to be effective 7/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150715-5047.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/5/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17798 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2131-000] Milo Wind Project, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Milo Wind Project, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is July 29, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17803 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2205-001] Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Prairie Breeze Wind Energy III LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is August 4, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17807 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL15-79-000] TransSource, LLC v. The PJM Interconnection, LLC; Notice of Supplemented Complaint

    Take notice that on July 7, 2015, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, TransSource, LLC filed a request for immediate waiver of the tariff deadlines for executing a Facilities Study Agreement and posting any deposits, and a second supplement to its formal complaint filed on June 23, 2015, against the PJM Interconnection, LLC, as supplemented on June 29, 2015, as more fully explained in the supplemented complaint.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 17, 2015 for responses to this filing. This comment date does not affect the July 10, 2015 date for comments on the Complaint filing in this docket.

    Dated: July 9, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17812 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9930-90-OA] Notification of a Public Teleconference of the Chartered Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary NAAQS Review Panel AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public teleconference of the Chartered Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Review Panel to discuss CASAC draft reviews of EPA's Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) for Oxides of Nitrogen—Health Criteria (Second External Review Draft—January 2015) and Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide: Risk and Exposure Assessment Planning Document.

    DATES:

    The teleconference will be held on Thursday, August 13, 2015 from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).

    ADDRESSES:

    The public teleconference will be held by telephone only.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Any member of the public wishing to obtain information concerning the public teleconference may contact Mr. Aaron Yeow, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office (1400R), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; by telephone/voice mail at (202) 564-2050 or at [email protected] General information about the CASAC, as well as any updates concerning the meeting announced in this notice, may be found on the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/casac.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The CASAC was established pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1977, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7409(d)(2), to review air quality criteria and NAAQS and recommend any new NAAQS and revisions of existing criteria and NAAQS as may be appropriate. The CASAC shall also provide advice, information, and recommendations to the Administrator on the scientific and technical aspects of issues related to the criteria for air quality standards, research related to air quality, sources of air pollution, and of adverse effects which may result from various strategies to attain and maintain air quality standards. The CASAC is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. Section 109(d)(1) of the CAA requires that the Agency periodically review and revise, as appropriate, the air quality criteria and the NAAQS for the six “criteria” air pollutants, including oxides of nitrogen. EPA is currently reviewing the primary (health-based) NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), as an indicator for health effects caused by the presence of oxides of nitrogen in the ambient air.

    Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the Chartered CASAC and the CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary NAAQS Review Panel will hold a public teleconference to discuss CASAC draft reviews of these two EPA documents. The CASAC Oxides of Nitrogen Primary NAAQS Review Panel and the CASAC will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies.

    Technical Contacts: Any technical questions concerning the Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen—Health Criteria (Second External Review Draft—January 2015) should be directed to Dr. Molini Patel ([email protected]), EPA Office of Research and Development, and technical questions concerning the Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide: Risk and Exposure Assessment Planning Document should be directed to Dr. Scott Jenkins (jenkins.s[email protected]), EPA Office of Air and Radiation.

    Availability of Meeting Materials: Prior to the meeting, the review documents, agenda and other materials will be accessible through the calendar link on the blue navigation bar athttp://www.epa.gov/casac/.

    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office.

    Federal advisory committees and panels, including scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to EPA. Members of the public can submit comments for a federal advisory committee to consider as it develops advice for EPA. Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information on the topic of this advisory activity, and/or the group conducting the activity, for the CASAC to consider during the advisory process. Input from the public to the CASAC will have the most impact if it provides specific scientific or technical information or analysis for CASAC panels to consider or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information. Members of the public wishing to provide comment should contact the DFO directly. Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation on a public teleconference will be limited to three minutes. Each person making an oral statement should consider providing written comments as well as their oral statement so that the points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Interested parties should contact Mr. Aaron Yeow, DFO, in writing (preferably via email) at the contact information noted above by August 6, 2015 to be placed on the list of public speakers. Written Statements: Written statements should be supplied to the DFO via email at the contact information noted above by August 6, 2015 so that the information may be made available to the Panel members for their consideration. It is the SAB Staff Office general policy to post written comments on the Web page for the advisory meeting or teleconference. Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web sites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the CASAC Web site. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit permission of the copyright holder.

    Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Mr. Aaron Yeow at (202) 564-2050 or [email protected] To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Mr. Yeow preferably at least ten days prior to each meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Thomas H. Brennan, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Staff Office.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17849 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0424; FRL-9929-50] FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    There will be a 4-day meeting of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP) to consider and review Development of a Spatial Aquatic Model (SAM) for Pesticide Risk Assessment.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on September 15-18, 2015, from approximately 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Comments. The Agency encourages written comments be submitted on or before September 1, 2015, and requests for oral comments be submitted on or before September 8, 2015. However, written comments and requests to make oral comments may be submitted until the date of the meeting, but anyone submitting written comments after September 1, 2015, should contact the Designated Federal Official (DFO) listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. For additional instructions, see Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    Nominations. Nominations of candidates to serve as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP for this meeting should be provided on or before August 5, 2015.

    Webcast. This meeting may be webcast. Please refer to the FIFRA SAP Web site at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap for information on how to access the webcast. Please note that the webcast is a supplementary public process provided only for convenience. If difficulties arise resulting in webcasting outages, the meeting will continue as planned.

    Special accommodations. For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, and to request accommodation of a disability, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting: The meeting will be held at the Environmental Protection Agency, Conference Center, Lobby Level, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202.

    Comments. Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0424, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Nominations, requests to present oral comments, and requests for special accommodations: Submit nominations to serve as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP, requests for special accommodations, or requests to present oral comments to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Jenkins, DFO, Office of Science Coordination and Policy (7201M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-3327; email address: j[email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and FIFRA. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. If your comments contain any information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to obtain special instructions before submitting your comments.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    C. How may I participate in this meeting?

    You may participate in this meeting by following the instructions in this unit. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0424 in the subject line on the first page of your request.

    1. Written comments. The Agency encourages written comments be submitted, using the instructions in ADDRESSES and Unit I.B., on or before September 1, 2015, to provide FIFRA SAP the time necessary to consider and review the written comments. Written comments are accepted until the date of the meeting; however, anyone submitting written comments after September 1, 2015, should contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Anyone submitting written comments at the meeting should bring 20 copies for distribution to FIFRA SAP.

    2. Oral comments. The Agency encourages each individual or group wishing to make brief oral comments to FIFRA SAP submit their request to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before September 8, 2015, to be included on the meeting agenda. Requests to present oral comments will be accepted until the date of the meeting and, to the extent that time permits, the Chair of FIFRA SAP may permit the presentation of oral comments at the meeting by interested persons who have not previously requested time. The request should identify the name of the individual making the presentation, the organization (if any) the individual will represent, and any requirements for audiovisual equipment. Oral comments before FIFRA SAP are limited to approximately 5 minutes unless prior arrangements have been made. In addition, each speaker should bring 20 copies of his or her comments and presentation for distribution to FIFRA SAP at the meeting.

    3. Seating at the meeting. Seating at the meeting will be open and on a first-come basis.

    4. Request for nominations to serve as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP for this meeting. As part of a broader process for developing a pool of candidates for each meeting, FIFRA SAP staff routinely solicits the stakeholder community for nominations of prospective candidates for service as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP. Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified individuals to be considered as prospective candidates for a specific meeting. Individuals nominated for this meeting should have expertise in one or more of the following areas: Aquatic Exposure Modeling, Pesticide Fate and Transport Modeling, Surface Water Hydrology, Watershed Modeling, Water Quality Modeling, Stream Transport Modeling, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Agronomic Practices, Crop Growth Modeling, Climate Modeling. Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of providing expert comments on the scientific issues for this meeting. Nominees should be identified by name, occupation, position, address, email address, and telephone number. Nominations should be provided to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before August 5, 2015. The Agency will consider all nominations of prospective candidates for this meeting that are received on or before that date. However, final selection of ad hoc members for this meeting is a discretionary function of the Agency.

    The selection of scientists to serve on the FIFRA SAP is based on the function of the Panel and the expertise needed to address the Agency's charge to the Panel. No interested scientists shall be ineligible to serve by reason of their membership on any other advisory committee to a Federal department or agency or their employment by a Federal department or agency, except EPA. Other factors considered during the selection process include availability of the potential Panel member to fully participate in the Panel's reviews, absence of any conflicts of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality, independence with respect to the matters under review, and lack of bias. Although financial conflicts of interest, the appearance of lack of impartiality, lack of independence, and bias may result in disqualification, the absence of such concerns does not assure that a candidate will be selected to serve on the FIFRA SAP. Numerous qualified candidates are identified for each Panel. Therefore, selection decisions involve carefully weighing a number of factors including the candidates' areas of expertise and professional qualifications and achieving an overall balance of different scientific perspectives on the Panel. The Agency anticipates selecting approximately eight ad hoc scientists to have the collective breadth of experience needed to address the Agency's charge for this meeting,

    FIFRA SAP members are subject to the provisions of 5 CFR part 2634—Executive Branch Financial Disclosure, Qualified Trusts, and Certificates of Divestiture, as supplemented by EPA in 5 CFR part 6401. In anticipation of this requirement, prospective candidates for service on FIFRA SAP will be asked to submit confidential financial information which shall fully disclose, among other financial interests, the candidate's employment, stocks, and bonds, and where applicable, sources of research support. EPA will evaluate the candidates financial disclosure form to assess whether there are financial conflicts of interest, appearance of a lack of impartiality, or any prior involvement with the development of the documents under consideration (including previous scientific peer review) before the candidate is considered further for service on FIFRA SAP. Those who are selected from the pool of prospective candidates will be asked to attend the public meetings and to participate in the discussion of key issues and assumptions at these meetings. In addition, they will be asked to review and to help finalize the meeting minutes. The list of FIFRA SAP members participating at this meeting will be posted on the FIFRA SAP Web site at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap or may be obtained from the OPP Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    II. Background A. Purpose of FIFRA SAP

    FIFRA SAP serves as the primary scientific peer review mechanism of EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) and is structured to provide scientific advice, information and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on pesticides and pesticide-related issues as to the impact of regulatory actions on health and the environment. FIFRA SAP is a Federal advisory committee established in 1975 under FIFRA that operates in accordance with requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix). FIFRA SAP is composed of a permanent panel consisting of seven members who are appointed by the EPA Administrator from nominees provided by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. FIFRA established a Science Review Board (SRB) consisting of at least 60 scientists who are available to FIFRA SAP on an ad hoc basis to assist in reviews conducted by FIFRA SAP. As a scientific peer review mechanism, FIFRA SAP provides comments, evaluations, and recommendations to improve the effectiveness and quality of analyses made by Agency scientists. Members of FIFRA SAP are scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications, including training and experience, to provide expert advice and recommendation to the Agency.

    B. Public Meeting

    The USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) conducts aquatic exposure assessments to determine whether pesticides that are applied according to label directions can result in water concentrations that may adversely impact human health or aquatic organisms. If estimated aquatic exposures indicate a potential for adverse effects, the assessment needs to characterize the likelihood of occurrence, including the range in magnitude of exposure, the frequency of exceeding toxicity thresholds, the location of likely exposures, and the potential for exposure to populations at risk.

    The goal of SAM is to improve on OPP's existing aquatic exposure assessments by providing more systematic spatial- and temporal contexts for aquatic exposure assessments for both human health (drinking water) and aquatic organisms. Such context is needed to address common risk management questions regarding the likelihood of the exposure that may exceed toxicity thresholds of concern and, should such exposures occur, how often, how long, and where adverse impacts from pesticides in water overlap with populations at risk. Though much of SAM is based upon OPP's traditional water models (i.e., Surface Water Concentration Calculator [SWCC] comprised of the Pesticide Root Zone Model version 5 [PRZM5] and Variable Volume Water Model [VVWM]), the model is new in its spatial approach to modeling the fate and transport of pesticides and has been optimized for speed and efficiency.

    C. FIFRA SAP Documents and Meeting Minutes

    EPA's background paper, related supporting materials, charge/questions to FIFRA SAP, FIFRA SAP composition (i.e., members and ad hoc members for this meeting), and the meeting agenda will be available by approximately mid-August. In addition, the Agency may provide additional background documents as the materials become available. You may obtain electronic copies of these documents, and certain other related documents that might be available at http://www.regulations.gov and the FIFRA SAP Web site at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap.

    FIFRA SAP will prepare meeting minutes summarizing its recommendations to the Agency approximately 90 days after the meeting. The meeting minutes will be posted on the FIFRA SAP Web site or may be obtained from the OPP Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et. seq.; 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.

    Dated: July 7, 2015. David J. Dix, Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17854 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9930-97-Region 3] Delegation of Authority To Implement and Enforce Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations to the Maryland Department of the Environment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of delegation of authority.

    SUMMARY:

    On April 4, 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) a letter acknowledging MDE has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce sections of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Air Regulations. To inform regulated facilities and the public of MDE's delegation of authority to implement and enforce OCS regulations, EPA is making available a copy of EPA's letter to MDE through this notice.

    DATES:

    On April 4, 2014, EPA sent MDE a letter acknowledging MDE has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce OCS Regulations.

    ADDRESSES:

    Copies of documents pertaining to this action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cathleen Kennedy Van Osten, (215) 814-2746, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 8, 2014, MDE requested delegation of authority to implement, administer, and enforce Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55 (Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations). On April 4, 2014, EPA sent MDE a letter acknowledging that MDE has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce OCS regulations. A copy of EPA's letter to MDE follows:

    “The Honorable Robert M. Summers, Secretary Maryland Department of the Environment 1800 Washington Boulevard Baltimore, Maryland 21230 Dear Secretary Summers:

    Thank you for your January 8, 2014 letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting formal delegation of authority for the implementation, administration, and enforcement of the requirements of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) regulations within 25 miles of Maryland's seaward boundary. In response, EPA intends to grant the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) formal delegation of authority to implement and enforce OCS Regulations, pursuant to section 328(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act. As established in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 55 (40 CFR part 55), EPA will delegate implementation and enforcement authority to a state if the state has an adjacent OCS source, and EPA determines that the state's regulations are adequate. EPA has determined that delegation to a state shall be immediately effective upon EPA's receipt of a notice of intent (NOI) to construct an OCS source to be adjacent to that state.

    The delegation will include the authority for the following sections of 40 CFR part 55, as exists on July 1, 2013:

    • 55.1 Statutory authority and scope.

    • 55.2 Definitions.

    • 55.3 Applicability.

    • 55.4 Requirements to submit a notice of intent.

    • 55.6 Permit requirements.

    • 55.7 Exemptions.

    • 55.8 Monitoring, reporting, inspections, and compliance.

    • 55.9 Enforcement.

    • 55.10 Fees.

    • 55.13 Federal requirements that apply to OCS sources.

    • 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries, by State.

    • 55.15 Specific designation of corresponding onshore areas.

    • Appendix A to Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State.

    EPA is not delegating the authority to implement and enforce 40 CFR part 55.5 (Corresponding onshore area designation), 55.11 (Delegation), and 55.12 (Consistency updates), as authority for these sections is reserved for the Administrator. As stated in 40 CFR Part 55.11 (b), EPA shall delegate implementation and enforcement authority if it is determined that the State's regulations are adequate, including a demonstration by the state that the state has:

    (1) Adopted the appropriate portions of 40 CFR part 55 into state law;

    (2) Submitted a letter from the State Attorney General confirming that Maryland has adequate authority under the state law to implement and enforce the relevant portions of 40 CFR part 55;

    (3) Adequate resources to implement and enforce the requirements of 40 CFR part 55; and

    (4) Adequate administrative procedures to implement and enforce the requirements of this part, including public notice and comment procedures.

    EPA has reviewed MDE's delegation request and concludes that it meets the requirements for delegation. Therefore, delegation will be effective on the date EPA receives a NOI of constructing an OCS source adjacent to Maryland. On this date, MDE will automatically be authorized to implement, administer, and enforce the sections of 40 CFR part 55 listed above for the OCS sources in which Maryland will be the corresponding onshore area.

    I appreciate MDE's efforts to implement the OCS regulations and look forward to working with you to foster the growth of alternative energy projects in Maryland. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or have your staff contact Ms. Linda Miller, Maryland Liaison, at 215-814-2068.

    Sincerely,

    Shawn M. Garvin

    Regional Administrator”

    This notice acknowledges that MDE has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce OSC Air Regulations.

    Dated: July 10, 2015. William C. Early, Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17850 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    DATE AND TIME:

    Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    999 E Street NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be open to the public.

    Federal Register Notice of Previous Announcement—80 FR 40065 THIS ITEM WAS ALSO DISCUSSED:

    Motion to Set Priorities and Scheduling on Pending Enforcement Matters Awaiting Reason-to-Believe Consideration.

    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17957 Filed 7-17-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE Labor-Management Relations Information Collection Requests AGENCY:

    Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB Review: Request for Comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), hereby announces the submission of the following public information collection requests (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). The information collection requests are FMCS forms: Arbitrator's Report and Fee Statement (Agency Form R-19; OMB control number 3076-0003), Arbitrator's Personal Data Questionnaire (Agency Form R-22; OMB control number 3076-0001), and Request for Arbitration Panel (Agency Form R-43; OMB control number 3076-0002). No comments were received pursuant to FMCS's prior 60-day notice in the Federal Register on April 28, 2015.

    These information collection requests were previously approved by OMB and we are requesting their reinstatement without change to the collections. These information collections will be used to collect information to determine applicant suitability for the arbitration roster, to monitor the work of arbitrators, and to collect information that facilitates the processing of arbitration requests.

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

    (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) Evaluates the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection information;

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

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic collection technologies or other forms of information technology.

    Burden: FMCS receives approximately 100 responses per year to the Arbitrator's Personal Data Questionnaire (OMB No. 3076-001); 1,984 responses per year to the Arbitrator's Report and Fee Statement (OMB No. 3076-0003); and 13,179 responses per year to the Request for Arbitration Panel form (OMB No. 3076-0002).

    Affected Entities: Individuals who apply for admission to the FMCS Roster of Arbitrators; arbitrators who render decision under FMCS arbitration policies and procedures; and employers, labor unions and their representative who request arbitration services.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit written comments to: Email: [email protected] Please include the FMCS form numbers, the information collection title and the OMB control number in the subject line of your message. Comments may also be sent to fax number 202.395.5806 to the attention of Desk Officer for FMCS.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For additional information, see the related 60-day notice published in the Federal Register on April 28, 2015, at 80 FR 23550, 23551.

    Dated: July 16, 2015. Jeannette Walters-Marquez, Attorney Advisor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17837 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6732-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than August 5, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309:

    1. Trident IV, L.P.; Trident IV Professionals Fund, L.P.; Trident Capital IV, L.P.; Stone Point Capital LLC; Stone Point GP Ltd.; CD Trident III, LLC; JC Trident GP, LLC; DW Trident GP, LLC; NZ Trident GP, LLC; Charles A. Davis, all of Greenwich, Connecticut; James D. Carey, Riverside, Connecticut; David J. Wermuth, New York, New York; and Nicolas D. Zerbib, Larchmont, New York; to acquire voting shares of Atlantic Capital Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Atlantic Capital Bank, both in Atlanta, Georgia.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 16, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17833 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-15-15AOX; Docket No. CDC-2015-0052] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    This notice invites comment on a proposed Harmful Algal Bloom Illness-related Surveillance System (HABISS) information collection.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2015-0052 by any of the following methods:

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    • Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    Please note:

    All public comment should be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking portal (Regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (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. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    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 shall 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; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    Harmful Algal Bloom-related Illness Surveillance System (HABISS)—NEW—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Due to defunding and as part of a revision in 2014 of the information collection entitled National Disease Surveillance Program II: Disease Summaries (OMB Control Number 0920-0004), CDC discontinued its data collection of harmful algal bloom-related illnesses through its Harmful Algal Bloom-related Illness Surveillance System (HABISS). However, in part to the Great Lakes Restorative Initiative, the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID) now considers harmful algal bloom-related illness surveillance as a priority and will seek a three-year OMB approval for HABISS.

    The goal of harmful algal bloom-related illness surveillance is to collect data on harmful algal blooms (HABs), human illnesses, and animal illnesses related to HAB exposures and use the data to better define and prevent HAB-related illnesses. HABs are the fast growth of aquatic organisms including algae, cyanobacteria, phytoplankton, and similar organisms. HABs can produce potent natural toxins that can contaminate surface water used for recreation, drinking water, or food sources. Contaminated water and food can cause illness when people or animals have exposures to them. HABs are an emerging public health concern with several outbreaks related to HAB exposures through contact, inhalation, and ingestion of contaminated fish, shellfish, and water. In humans and animals, illnesses related to HAB exposures have ranged from dermatologic, respiratory, gastrointestinal, neurological illness, and even death. HABs might be identified through the reporting of single cases of human or animal illness as indicators.

    HABISS data will be reported by states and territories in a web-based electronic reporting system. The National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS) (OMB Control Number 0920-0004) is an existing password-protected web-based surveillance platform for national reporting of foodborne, waterborne, and other enteric outbreaks. HAB-related outbreaks can already be reported by state and territorial health departments in NORS; however, there is currently no national surveillance for single cases of human or animal illnesses. State and territorial staff with access to NORS will be able to use a hyperlink on the NORS main user page to report individual human and animal case information related to HAB exposures. State agencies will voluntarily report single human and animal illnesses related to HAB exposures, as well as environmental data about HABs.

    HABISS data will include the date of the HAB, the type of exposure that the person or animal had, the length of the exposure, signs and symptoms, and laboratory testing. No Personally Identifiable Information (PII) will be reported or collected. CDC will use the data to better characterize human and animal illnesses related to HAB exposures and to inform future prevention efforts, health departments, federal partners and other stakeholders.

    There are no costs to respondents other than their time.

    CDC will analyze and present the collected data through summaries and reports.

    It is estimated that epidemiologists will report illnesses and HAB events three times during the year with a burden of 20 minutes. An estimated total burden for HABISS data reporting is 57 hours per year.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • (in hours)
  • State Epidemiologists Harmful Algal Bloom Illness Surveillance System (HABISS) data elements (electronic, year-round) 57 3 20/60 57 Total 57
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17792 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10387, CMS-10110 and CMS-10393] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number ___, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-10387 Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Prospective Payment System and Consolidated Billing CMS-10110 Manufacturer Submission of Average Sales Price (ASP) Data for Medicare Part B Drugs and Biologicals CMS-10393 Medicare Beneficiary and Family-Centered Satisfaction Survey

    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. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests 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 requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Prospective Payment System and Consolidated Billing; Use: We are requesting approval of a reinstatement of a Change of Therapy OMRA for Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs). As described in CMS-1351-F, we finalized the assessment effective October 1, 2011. SNFs are required to submit this assessment. The COT OMRA is comprised of a subset of resident assessment information developed for use by SNFs to satisfy a Medicare payment requirement. The burden associated with this is the SNF staff time required to complete the COT OMRA, SNF staff time to encode the data, and SNF staff time spent in transmitting the data. SNFs are required to complete a COT OMRA when a SNF resident was receiving a sufficient level of rehabilitation therapy to qualify for an Ultra High, Very High, High, Medium, or Low Rehabilitation category and when the intensity of therapy (as indicated by the total reimbursable therapy minutes (RTM) delivered, and other therapy qualifiers such as number of therapy days and disciplines providing therapy) changes to such a degree that it would no longer reflect the RUG-IV classification and payment assigned for a given SNF resident based on the most recent assessment used for Medicare payment. The COT OMRA is a type of required PPS assessment which uses the same item set as the End of Therapy (EOT) OMRA. Form Number: CMS-10387 (OMB Control Number: 0938-1140); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other For-profits and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 15,421; Total Annual Responses: 678,524; Total Annual Hours: 701,119. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Penny Gershman at 410-786-6643).

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Manufacturer Submission of Average Sales Price (ASP) Data for Medicare Part B Drugs and Biologicals; Use: In accordance with section 1847A of the Social Security Act (the Act), Medicare Part B covered drugs and biologicals not paid on a cost or prospective payment basis are paid based on the average sales price (ASP) of the drug or biological, beginning in Calendar Year (CY) 2005. The ASP data reporting requirements are specified in section 1927 of the Act. The reported ASP data are used to establish the Medicare payment amounts. The reporting template was revised in CY 2011 in order to facilitate accurate collection of ASP data. An accompanying user guide with instructions on the template's use was also created and included an explanation of the data elements in the template. Form Number: CMS-10110 (OMB Control Number: 0938-0921); Frequency: Quarterly; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other For-profits); Number of Respondents: 180; Total Annual Responses: 720; Total Annual Hours: 34,560. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Amy Gruber at 410-786-1542).

    3. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Medicare Beneficiary and Family-Centered Satisfaction Survey; Use: The data collection methodology used to determine Beneficiary Satisfaction flows from the proposed sampling approach. Based on recent literature on survey methodology and response rates by mode, we recommend using a data collection that is done primarily by mail. A mail-based methodology will achieve the goals of being efficient, effective, and minimally burdensome for beneficiary respondents. We anticipate that a mail-based methodology could yield a response rate of approximately 60 percent. In order to achieve this response rate, we would recommend a 3 staged approach to data collection:

    (1) Mailout of a covering letter, the paper survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope.

    (2) Mailout of a post card that thanks respondents and reminds the non-respondents to please return their survey.

    (3) Mailout of a follow-up covering letter, the paper survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope.

    Through the pilot test, we will determine the response rate that can be achieved using this approach. If it is deemed necessary, a prenotification letter, additional mailout reminders and a telephone non-response step can be added to the protocol to achieve desired response rate. Form Number: CMS-10393 (OMB Control number: 0938-1177); Frequency: Once; Affected Public: Individuals or households; Number of Respondents: 16,010; Number of Responses: 16,010; Total Annual Hours: 4,002. (For policy questions regarding this collection, contact Coles Mercier at 410-786-2112.)

    Dated: July 16, 2015. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17824 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Form CB-496, “Title IV-E Programs Quarterly Financial Report”

    OMB No.: 0970-0205

    Description: This is a financial report submitted following the end of each fiscal quarter by each State or Tribe with an approved title IV-E plan administering any of three title IV-E entitlement grant programs—Foster Care, Adoption Assistance or Guardianship Assistance.

    The purpose of this form is to enable each State or Tribe to meet its statutory and regulatory requirement to report program expenditures made in the preceding fiscal quarter and to estimate program expenditures to be made in the upcoming fiscal quarter. This form also allows States and Tribes to report the actual and estimated average monthly number of children assisted in each of the three IV-E entitlement grant programs in the preceding and upcoming fiscal quarters, respectively.

    The Administration for Children and Families provides Federal funding at the rate of 50 percent for nearly all allowable and legitimate administrative costs of these programs and at other funding rates for other specific categories of costs as detailed in Federal statute and regulations. The information collected in this report is used by this agency to calculate quarterly Federal grant awards and to enable oversight of the financial management of the programs. Legislation enacted in 2014 through Public Law 113-183, the “Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act” added a requirement that title IV-E grantees annually report on the methodology used to calculate adoption savings due to the application of differing title IV-E Adoption Assistance eligibility criteria for children designated as an “applicable child” along with an accounting of the amount of and the expenditure of any such savings.

    To accommodate this change in the law, we have added additional data entry lines in part 4 of Form CB-496, “Annual Adoption Savings Calculation and Accounting Report” which will be submitted annually by grantees.

    In addition, the same law adds additional requirements that title IV-E grantees develop and implement policies and procedures to identify, document, and determine appropriate services for any child or youth in the placement, care or supervision of the title IV-E agency who is at-risk of becoming a sex trafficking victim or who is determined as a sex trafficking victim.

    To accommodate this change in the law we have added additional reporting lines and prior quarter reporting odes for expenditure reporting and child counts and in parts 1 and 2 of Form CB-496.

    Respondents: States (including Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia) and Tribes* with approved title IV-E plans. (*An estimated 15 Tribes have or will have approved title IV-E plans within the next 3-year period.)

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    Form CB-496: Title IV-E Programs Quarterly Financial Report 67 4 21 5,628

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,628.

    Additional Information:

    Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment:

    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17793 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2000-D-0067] Medical Device Patient Labeling; Request for Comments; Public Workshop AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public workshop; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration is announcing the following public workshop entitled “Medical Device Patient Labeling”. The purpose of the public workshop is to discuss issues associated with the development and use of medical device patient labeling including content, testing, use, access, human factors, emerging media formats, and promotion and advertising. The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is seeking input into these topics from patients and advocacy groups, academic and professional organizations, industry, standards organizations, and governmental Agencies. Ideas generated during this workshop will help facilitate development or revision of guidances and/or standards for medical device patient labeling.

    Date and Time: The workshop will be held on September 29, 2015, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and September 30, 2015, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    Location: The public workshop will be held at FDA's White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503A), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Entrance for the public workshop participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please visit the following Web site: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm

    Contact Person: Antoinette (Tosia) Hazlett, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5424, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-6119, [email protected] gov.

    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in attending the “Medical Device Patient Labeling” public workshop must register online by 4 p.m. on September 21, 2015. Early registration is recommended because facilities are limited and, therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization. If time and space permit, onsite registration on the days of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 7 a.m. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Susan Monahan at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    To register for the public workshop, please visit CDRH's Workshops and Conferences calendar at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm. (Select this public workshop from the posted events list.) Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, email, and telephone number. Those without Internet access should contact Susan Monahan to register (see Contact Person). Registrants will receive confirmation after they have been accepted. You will be notified if you are on a waiting list.

    Streaming Webcast of the Public Workshop: This public workshop will also be Webcast. Persons interested in viewing the Webcast must register online by 4 p.m. on September 21, 2015. Early registration is recommended because Webcast connections are limited. Organizations are requested to register all participants, but to view using one connection per location. Webcast participants will be sent technical system requirements after registration and will be sent connection access information after September 25, 2015. If you have never attended a Connect Pro event before, test your connections at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. (FDA has verified the Web site addresses in this document, but FDA is not responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in the Federal Register.)

    Comments: FDA is holding this public workshop to obtain stakeholder input on medical device patient labeling. In order to permit the widest possible opportunity to obtain public comment, FDA is soliciting either electronic or written comments on all aspects of the public workshop. The deadline for submitting comments regarding this public workshop is October 30, 2015.

    Regardless of attendance at the public workshop, interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding this document 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. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. In addition, when responding to specific topics as outlined in “Topics for Discussion”, please identify the topic you are addressing. 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.

    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at: http://www.regulations.gov. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857. A link to the transcripts will also be available approximately 45 days after the public workshop on the Internet at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The CDRH Guidance on Medical Device Patient Labeling (available at http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm070782.htm) serves to assist manufacturers in their development of patient labeling and to assist Center reviewers in their review and evaluation of the manufacturers' labeling. Medical device patient labeling includes any medical device information that is intended for a lay audience. It is intended to help assure that the device is used safely and effectively. This labeling may pertain to therapeutic, restorative, diagnostic, or cosmetic devices. Medical device patient labeling is supplied in many formats, for example: As patient brochures, patient leaflets, user manuals, videos or audio recording, and through physical or online media. This labeling is intended to be supplied to or available to patients or their lay caregivers for their use with or without accompanying professional counseling. While some patients receive labeling from their healthcare practitioners or device suppliers, others receive it in the packaging of over-the-counter devices. CDRH is collecting public comment to use in updating the Medical Device Patient Labeling Guidance.

    FDA is committed to supporting the development and availability of patient labeling which supports the safe and effective use of medical devices by patients. To inform FDA in their efforts, they are seeking input on the topics identified in section II.

    II. Topics for Discussion

    FDA seeks to address and receive comments on the following topics:

    A. Current Medical Device Patient Labeling

    (1) The current use and practice trends of medical device patient labeling development and use. For example: When is medical device patient labeling used? How much medical device patient labeling exists? How much modification and revision of existing medical device patient labeling occurs, and under what circumstances? What is the role of voluntary consensus standards in developing medical device patient labeling?

    (2) What risks or adverse outcomes have been reported in association with the use of medical device patient labeling? What communication barriers have been encountered, and how can they be mitigated?

    (3) Is there any part of the medical device patient labeling development process that presents a barrier to receiving approval or clearance from CDRH? If so, please provide examples of the specific issues, how frequently this occurs, and suggestions which constructively address these barriers.

    (4) What are the best ways to foster efficient networking with patients and advocacy groups, academic and professional organizations, industry, standards organizations, and government Agencies to address medical device patient labeling needs?

    B. Medical Device Patient Labeling Needs Assessment

    (1) Describe the parameters that should be used in determining priority areas of development of medical device patient labeling, including both therapeutic and diagnostic devices.

    (2) What are best practices for conducting a needs assessment of medical device patient labeling?

    C. Advancing Development

    (1) What could advance the development and use of medical device patient labeling?

    (2) How should patient labeling be considered in the development stages of all medical device labeling?

    (3) What resources (e.g., registries, industry, or patient advocacy groups,) could be tapped to advance the development of medical device patient labeling?

    (4) What are potential changes to guidances and regulations, or advances in current science that may help develop and enhance medical device patient labeling to address the needs of medical device manufacturers, device suppliers, and device users?

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17800 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0411] Cooperative Agreement for Research, Education, and Outreach in Support of the Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of grant funds for a cooperative agreement to support the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) implementation efforts by the Illinois Institute of Technology's (IIT) National Center for Food Safety and Technology (NCFST). The estimated amount of support in fiscal year (FY) 2015 will be for up to $5 million (direct plus indirect costs), with the possibility of 2 additional years of support for up to $7 million each year, subject to the availability of funds. This award will improve public health by continued support of an applied research, education, and outreach program related to the science behind and implementation of preventive controls, and on training and technical assistance.

    DATES:

    Important dates are as follows:

    1. The application due date is August 14, 2015.

    2. The anticipated start date is September 1, 2015.

    3. The opening date is August 1, 2015.

    4. The expiration date is August 31, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit the electronic application to: http://www.grants.gov. For more information, see section III of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wanda Honeyblue, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy. (HFS-002), Rm. 4D-034, College Park, MD 20740, 301-796-3500, email: [email protected]; or Martin Bernard, Division of State Acquisitions, Agreements and Grants (DSAAG) (HFA-500), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 240-402-7564, email: [email protected]

    For more information on this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) and to obtain detailed requirements, please refer to the full FOA located at http://www.grants.gov/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Funding Opportunity Number: RFA-FD-15-035

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 93.103

    A. Background

    FDA has supported the NCFST under seven previously awarded cooperative agreements (53 FR 15736, 56 FR 46189, 59 FR 24703, 64 FR 39512, 69 FR 25405, 74 FR 26408, and 79 FR 23360). NCFST was established by IIT to bring together the food safety and technology expertise of academia, industry, and FDA for the purpose of supporting research and outreach efforts related to the safety of foods based on a common goal of enhancing the safety of the food supply for U.S. consumers. NCFST has been successful in developing research programs such as those related to low-moisture foods, and outreach programs such as those related to sprout safety; these successes were achieved as a result of NCFST partnering with industry, academia, and FDA.

    NCFST is structured so that representatives of participating organizations play a role in establishing policy and administrative procedures, as well as identifying long- and short-term research, outreach, and training needs. With this organizational structure, NCFST is able to build cooperative food safety programs on a foundation of knowledge about current industrial trends in food processing and packaging technologies, regulatory perspectives from public health organizations, and fundamental scientific expertise from academia. This award will improve public health by continued support of an applied research, education, and outreach program related to the science behind and implementation of preventive controls associated with manufacturing, processing, packing, and holding of human and animal food, and on training and technical assistance.

    B. Program Objectives

    With an increasingly diverse domestic and global food supply, FDA continues to face complex food safety issues associated with the foods that it regulates. Some of these complex issues can be effectively addressed by further strengthening the available science-based programs established through NCFST/Institute for Food Safety and Health (IFSH). FDA also believes that innovative research and outreach programs such as those established at NCFST/IFSH can further support the development of proactive approaches to the prevention of food safety problems before they occur. With the enactment of FSMA in 2011, the collaboration with NCFST/IFSH has become increasingly important as FDA works to fulfill its mandate to develop a modern, prevention-based food safety system. FDA regards the development and strengthening of public-private partnerships for research and outreach on preventive controls to be a key element of its FSMA implementation strategy.

    This cooperative agreement will provide continued support so that NCFST/IFSH can meet the objective to support the implementation of FSMA through research, education, and outreach, with particular emphasis on identifying the science to support implementation of preventive controls associated with manufacturing, processing, packing, and holding of human and animal food, and on training and technical assistance.

    C. Eligibility Information

    Competition is limited to IIT as FDA believes IIT's continued support of the Food Safety Preventive Controls Alliance (FSPCA) already established at NCFST/IFSH uniquely qualifies IIT to fulfill the objectives of the proposed cooperative agreement. IIT's Moffett Center, where NCFST is located, is a unique facility that includes offices, classrooms, a distance-learning center, and support facilities, which permit appropriate research, development, and training activities. The physical layout of the facility provides maximum versatility in the use and capability to simultaneously operate several different activities related to research, development, and training to support FSMA rules. The distance learning facility located in room 216 in building 91 of the IIT Moffett Campus is equipped with state-of-the-art audio-visual equipment for conducting and broadcasting interactive training programs and workshops to the food industry, as well as for Webinar communications with IFSH stakeholders, including government, academia, and industry.

    Since 1988, IIT has provided an environment in which scientists from diverse backgrounds such as academia, government, and industry have brought their unique perspectives to focus on contemporary issues of food safety. NCFST/IFSH functions as a neutral ground where scientific exchange about generic food safety issues occurs freely and is channeled into the design of cooperative food safety programs. Activities at NCFST are focused on multiple areas associated with food safety and FSMA, including but not limited to, preventive controls for human and animal foods, supplier verification, and national training.

    Since 2011, IIT has served as the coordinator of the FSPCA and, since 2012, the Sprout Safety Alliance (SSA), leveraging the expertise of academia, industry, and FDA for the purpose of developing and delivering standardized curricula related to food safety and FSMA requirements. In addition to alliance training, NCFST/IFSH plans to develop the National Training and Technical Assistance Network to provide outreach and technical assistance to industry in the future. The new distance-learning training center developed at the IIT's Moffett Center can be used to partially address training and outreach needs related to FSMA. Through this facility, training can be provided on curricula currently being developed by the FSPCA for human and animal food and by the SSA for sprouts, and for training activities related to other appropriate FSMA activities such as the Foreign Supplier Verification Program.

    The proposed cooperative activities will fill existing gaps in knowledge, food safety training, and expertise for outreach associated with improving the safety of foods via FSMA implementation, and will provide fundamental food safety information in the public domain for use by all segments of the food science community for industry and regulatory training activities.

    II. Award Information/Funds Available A. Award Amount

    The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) at FDA intends to commit up to $5 million in FY 2015 (direct plus indirect costs) with the possibility of 2 additional years of up to $ 7 million each year. Future year amounts will depend on annual appropriations and successful performance.

    B. Length of Support

    The award will provide 1 year of support and include future recommended support for 2 additional years, contingent upon satisfactory performance in the achievement of project and program objectives during the preceding year and the availability of Federal fiscal year appropriations.

    III. Electronic Application, Registration, and Submission

    Only one electronic application will be accepted. To submit an electronic application in response to this FOA, the applicant should first review the full announcement located at http://www.grants.gov/. (FDA has verified the Web site addresses throughout this document, but FDA is not responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in the Federal Register.) For the electronically submitted application, the following steps are required:

    • Step 1: Obtain a Dun and Bradstreet (DUNS) Number

    • Step 2: Register With System for Award Management (SAM)

    • Step 3: Obtain Username & Password

    • Step 4: Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) Authorization

    • Step 5: Track AOR Status

    • Step 6: Register With Electronic Research Administration (eRA) Commons

    Steps 1 through 5, in detail, can be found at http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/organization_registration.jsp. Step 6, in detail, can be found at https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/registration/registrationInstructions.jsp. After you have followed these steps, submit the electronic application to: http://www.grants.gov.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17795 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-2076] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Restaurant Facility Types AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0744. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Survey on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Restaurant Facility Types (2013-2022)

    OMB Control Number 0910-0744

    I. Background

    In 2013-2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiated a study in two foodservice facility types: Full service and fast food restaurants. The study will span 10 years in its entirety and aims to:

    • Assist FDA with developing retail food safety initiatives and policies focused on the control of foodborne illness risk factors—preparation practices and employee behaviors most commonly reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as contributing factors to foodborne illness outbreaks at the retail level. (i.e. food from unsafe sources, poor personal hygiene, inadequate cooking, improper holding time and temperature, and contaminated equipment/cross-contamination);

    • Identify retail food safety work plan priorities and allocate resources to enhance retail food safety nationwide;

    • Track changes in the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors in retail and foodservice establishments over time; and

    • Inform recommendations to the retail and foodservice industry and state, local, tribal, and territorial regulatory professionals on reducing the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors.

    Table 1—Description of the Facility Types Included in the Survey Facility type Description Full Service Restaurants A restaurant where customers place their order at their table, are served their meal at the table, receive the service of the wait staff, and pay at the end of the meal. Fast Food Restaurants A restaurant that is not a full service restaurant. This includes restaurants commonly referred to as quick service restaurants and fast casual restaurants.

    The statutory basis for FDA conducting this study is derived from the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 243, section 311(a)). Responsibility for carrying out the provisions of the Act relative to food protection was transferred to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs in 1968 (21 CFR 5.10(a)(2) and (4)). Additionally, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq) and the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535) require FDA to provide assistance to other Federal, state, and local government bodies.

    The objectives of the study are to:

    • Identify the foodborne illness risk factors that are in most need of priority attention during each data collection period;

    • Track trends in the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors over time;

    • Examine potential correlations between operational characteristics of food establishments and the control of foodborne illness risk factors;

    • Examine potential correlations between elements within regulatory retail food protection programs and the control of foodborne illness risk factors; and

    • Evaluate the impact of industry food safety management systems in controlling the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors.

    The data from the 2013-2014 information collection in restaurants is currently being analyzed by FDA. A report summarizing the findings is expected to be released in 2015. In order to analyze trends, FDA is proposing to conduct two additional data collections in 2017-2018 and 2021-2022 using the same methodology employed in the 2013-2014 data collection. This methodology is described as follows.

    In order to obtain a sufficient number of observations to conduct statistically significant analysis, FDA will conduct approximately 400 data collections in each restaurant facility type during each data collection period. This sample size has been calculated to provide for sufficient observations to be 95 percent confident that the compliance percentage is within 5 percent of the true compliance percentage.

    A geographical information system database containing a listing of businesses throughout the United States will be used as the establishment inventory for the data collections. FDA will sample establishments from the inventory based on the descriptions in table 1. FDA does not intend to sample operations that handle only prepackaged food items or conduct low risk food preparation activities. The FDA Food Code contains a grouping of establishments by risk, based on the type of food preparation that is normally conducted within the operation (Ref. 1). The intent is to sample establishments that fall under risk categories 2 through 4.

    FDA has approximately 25 Regional Retail Food Specialists (Specialists) who will serve as the data collectors for the 10 year study. The Specialists are geographically dispersed throughout the United States and possess technical expertise in retail food safety and a solid understanding of the operations within each of the facility types to be surveyed. The Specialists are also standardized by FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition personnel in the application and interpretation of the FDA Food Code (Ref. 1).

    Sampling zones will be established which are equal to the 150 mile radius around a Specialist's home location. The sample will be selected randomly from among all eligible establishments located within these sampling zones. The Specialists are generally located in major metropolitan areas (i.e. population centers) across the contiguous United States. Population centers usually contain a large concentration of the establishments FDA intends to sample. Sampling from the 150 mile radius sampling zones around the Specialists' home locations provides three advantages to the study:

    1. It provides a cross section of urban and rural areas from which to sample the eligible establishments.

    2. It represents a mix of small, medium, and large regulatory entities having jurisdiction over the eligible establishments.

    3. It reduces overnight travel and therefore reduces travel costs incurred by the Agency to collect data.

    The sample for each data collection period will be evenly distributed among Specialists. Given that participation in the study by industry is voluntary and the status of any given randomly selected establishment is subject to change, substitute establishments will be selected for each Specialist for cases where the restaurant facility is misclassified, closed, or otherwise unavailable, unable, or unwilling to participate.

    Prior to conducting the data collection, Specialists will contact the state or local jurisdiction that has regulatory responsibility for conducting retail food inspections for the selected establishment. The Specialist will verify with the jurisdiction that the facility has been properly classified for the purposes of the study and is still in operation. The Specialist will also ascertain whether the selected facility is under legal notice from the state or local regulatory authority. If the selected facility is under legal notice, the Specialist will not conduct a data collection, and a substitute establishment will be used. An invitation will be extended to the state or local regulatory authority to accompany the Specialist on the data collection visit.

    A standard form will be used by the Specialists during each data collection. The form is divided into three sections: Section 1—“Establishment Information;” Section 2—“Regulatory Authority Information;” and Section 3—“Foodborne Illness Risk Factor and Food Safety Management System Assessment.” The information in Section 1—“Establishment Information” will be obtained during an interview with the establishment owner or person in charge by the Specialist and will include a standard set of questions.

    The information in Section 2—“Regulatory Authority Information” will be obtained during an interview with the program director of the state or local jurisdiction that has regulatory responsibility for conducting inspections for the selected establishment. Section 3 includes three parts: Part A for tabulating the Specialists' observations of the food employees' behaviors and practices in limiting contamination, proliferation, and survival of food safety hazards; Part B for assessing the food safety management being implemented by the facility; and Part C for assessing the frequency and extent of food employee hand washing. The information in Part A will be collected from the Specialists' direct observations of food employee behaviors and practices. Infrequent, nonstandard questions may be asked by the Specialists if clarification is needed on the food safety procedure or practice being observed. The information in Part B will be collected by making direct observations and asking follow up questions of facility management to obtain information on the extent to which the food establishment has developed and implemented food safety management systems. The information in Part C will be collected by making direct observations of food employee hand washing. No questions will be asked in the completion of Section 3, Part C of the form.

    FDA will collect the following information associated with the establishment's identity: Establishment name, street address, city, state, zip code, county, industry segment, and facility type. The establishment identifying information is collected to ensure the survey is not duplicative. The establishment identifying information is collected to ensure the data collections are not duplicative. Other information related to the nature of the operation, such as seating capacity and number of employees per shift, will also be collected. Data will be consolidated and reported in a manner that does not reveal the identity of any establishment included in the study.

    FDA is working with the National Center for Food Protection and Defense to develop a Web-based platform in FoodSHIELD to collect, store, and analyze data for the Retail Risk Factor Study. Once developed, this platform will be accessible to state, local, territorial, and tribal regulatory jurisdictions to collect data relevant to their own risk factor studies. FDA is currently transitioning from the manual entry of data to the use of hand-held technology. FDA will be pilot testing the use of hand-held technology during its 2015-2016 risk factor study data collection in institutional foodservice and retail food stores, with the goal to have it fully implemented for the 2017-2018 data collection in restaurants. When a data collector is assigned a specific establishment, he or she will conduct the data collection and enter the information into the Web-based data platform. The interface will support the manual entering of data, as well as the ability to upload a fillable PDF.

    In the Federal Register of December 11, 2014 (79 FR 73596), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received one comment; however, this comment did not address the information collection.

    The burden for the 2017-2018 data collection is as follows. For each data collection, the respondents will include: (1) The person in charge of the selected restaurant facility (whether it be a fast food or full service restaurant); and (2) the program director (or designated individual) of the respective regulatory authority. In order to provide the sufficient number of observations needed to conduct a statistically significant analysis of the data, FDA has determined that the same number of data collections will be required in each of the two restaurant facility types as was required in the 2013-2014 data collection (i.e. 400). Therefore, the total number of responses for restaurants will be 1,600 (400 data collections × 2 facility types × 2 respondents per data collection).

    The burden associated with the completion of Sections 1 and 3 of the form is specific to the person in charge of the selected facilities. It includes the time it will take the person in charge to accompany the data collector as he or she completes Sections 1 and 3 of the form. The burden related to the completion of Section 2 of the form is specific to the program directors (or designated individuals) of the respective regulatory authorities. It includes the time it will take to answer the data collectors' questions and is the same regardless of the facility type.

    To calculate the estimate of the hours per response, FDA will use the average data collection duration for the same facility types during the 2013-2014 data collection. FDA estimates that it will take the persons in charge of full service restaurants and fast food restaurants 104 minutes (1.73 hours) and 82 minutes (1.36 hours), respectfully, to accompany the data collectors while they complete Sections 1 and 3 of the form. In comparison, for the 2013-2014 data collection, the burden estimate was 106 minutes (1.76 hours) in full service restaurants and 73 minutes (1.21 hours) in fast food restaurants. FDA estimates that it will take the program director (or designated individual) of the respective regulatory authority 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to answer the questions related to Section 2 of the form. This burden estimate is unchanged from the last data collection. Hence, the total burden estimate for a data collection in a full service restaurant, including both the program director's and the person in charge's responses, is 134 minutes (104 + 30) (2.23 hours). The total burden estimate for a data collection in a fast food restaurant, including both the program director's and the person in charge's responses, is 112 minutes 82 + 30 (1.86 hours).

    Based on the number of entry refusals from the 2013-2014 data collection, we estimate a refusal rate of 2 percent. The estimate of the time per non-respondent is five minutes (0.08 hours) for the person in charge to listen to the purpose of the visit and provide a verbal refusal of entry.

    Table 2—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Activity Number of respondents Number of responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Number of non-
  • respondents
  • Number of responses per non-
  • respondent
  • Total annual non-
  • responses
  • Average burden per response Total hours
    2017-2018 Data Collection (Fast Food Restaurants)—Completion of Sections 1 and 3 400 1 400 1.36 544 2017-2018 Data Collection (Full Service Restaurants)—Completion of Sections 1 and 3 400 1 400 1.73 692 2017-2018 Data Collection-Completion of Section 2—All Facility Types 800 1 800 0.5
  • (30 minutes)
  • 400
    2017-2018 Data Collection-Entry Refusals—All Facility Types 16 1 16 0.08
  • (5 minutes)
  • 1.28
    Total Hours 1,637.28 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    II. Reference

    The following reference has been placed on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov.

    1. FDA Food Code available at http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/RetailFoodProtection/FoodCode/default.htm. Dated: July 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17809 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary [Document Identifier: HHS-OS-0990-0424-30D] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, announces plans to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR), described below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to OMB, OS seeks comments from the public regarding the burden estimate, below, or any other aspect of the ICR.

    DATES:

    Comments on the ICR must be received on or before August 20, 2015

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or by calling (202) 690-6162.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information Collection Clearance staff, [email protected] or (202) 690-6162.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier HHS-OS-0990-0424-30D for reference.

    Information Collection Request Title: Pregnancy Assistance Fund (PAF) Study Abstract: The Office of Adolescent Health (OAH), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is requesting approval by OMB on a revised data collection. The Pregnancy Assistance Fund (PAF) Study will provide information about program design, implementation, and impacts through a rigorous assessment of program impacts and implementation of two programs designed to support expectant and parenting teens. These programs are located in Houston, Texas and throughout the state of California. This revision to this information collection request includes the 12-month follow-up survey instrument related to the impact study. The data collected from this instrument in the two study sites will provide a detailed understanding of program impacts about one year after youth are enrolled in the study, at which time they first have access to the programming offered by each site. Clearance is requested for three years.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: The data will serve two main purposes. First, the data will be used to determine program effectiveness by comparing outcomes on repeat pregnancies, sexual risk behaviors, health and well-being, and parenting behaviors between treatment (program) and control youth. Second, the data will be used to understand whether the programs are more effective for some youth than others. The findings from these analyses of program impacts will be of interest to the general public, to policymakers, and to organizations interested in supporting expectant and parenting teens.

    Likely Respondents: 1,913 study participants

    Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    12-month follow-up survey of impact study participants 638 1 35/60 372.2 Total 372.2
    Terry S. Clark, Asst Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17777 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4168-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Indian Health Service Request for Public Comment; 60-Day Proposed Information Collection; Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions (OMB NO. 0917-0028) AGENCY:

    Indian Health Service, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments. Request for extension of approval.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which requires 60 days for public comment on proposed information collection projects, the Indian Health Service (IHS) invites the general public to take this opportunity to comment on the information collection titled, “Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions,” Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number 0917-0028.

    This previously approved information collection project was last published in the Federal Register (77 FR 52749) on August 30, 2012, and allowed 30 days for public comment. No public comment was received in response to the notice. This notice announces our intent to submit this collection, which expires November 30, 2015, to OMB for approval of an extension, and to solicit comments on specific aspects for the proposed information collection.

    A copy of the supporting statement is available at www.regulations.gov (see Docket ID IHS-2015-0004).

    Proposed Collection: Title: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions (OMB No. 0917-0028). Type of Information Collection Request: Extension, without revision, of currently approved information collection, 0917-0028, Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions. There are no program changes or adjustments in burden hours. Form(s): Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions. Need and Use of Information Collection: This is a request for approval of the collection of information as required by section 408 of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act, Public Law (Pub. L.) 101-630, 104 Stat. 4544, and 25 United States Code (U.S.C.) 3201-3211.

    The IHS is required to compile a list of all authorized positions within the IHS where the duties and responsibilities involve regular contact with, or control over, Indian children; and to conduct an investigation of the character of each individual who is employed, or is being considered for employment in a position having regular contact with, or control over, Indian children [25 U.S.C. 3207(a)(1) and (2)]. Title 25 U.S.C. 3207(b) requires regulations prescribing the minimum standards of character to ensure that none of the individuals appointed to positions involving regular contact with, or control over, Indian children have been found guilty of, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to any felonious offense, or any of two or more misdemeanor offenses under Federal, State, or Tribal law involving crimes of violence; sexual assault, molestation, exploitation, contact or prostitution; crimes against persons; or offenses committed against children.

    In addition, 42 U.S.C. 13041 requires each agency of the Federal Government, and every facility operated by the Federal Government (or operated under contract with the Federal Government), that hires (or contracts for hire) individuals involved with the provision of child care services to children under the age of 18 to assure that all existing and newly hired employees undergo a criminal history background check. The background investigation is to be initiated through the personnel program of the applicable Federal agency. This section requires employment applications for individuals who are seeking work for an agency of the Federal Government, or for a facility or program operated by (or through contract with) the Federal Government, in positions involved with the provision of child care services to children under the age of 18, to contain a question asking whether the individual has ever been arrested for or charged with a crime involving a child. Affected Public: Individuals and households. Type of Respondents: Individuals.

    The table below provides: Types of data collection instruments, Estimated number of respondents, Number of responses per respondent, Average burden hour per response, and Total annual burden hour(s).

    Estimated Annual Burden Hours Data collection instrument(s) Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average burden per response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden responses
  • (in hours)
  • Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment (OMB 0917-0028) 3000 1 12/60 600 Total 3000 600

    There are no Capital Costs, Operating Costs, and/or Maintenance Costs to report.

    Requests for Comments: Your written comments and/or suggestions are invited on one or more of the following points:

    (a) Whether the information collection activity is necessary to carry out an agency function;

    (b) whether the agency processes the information collected in a useful and timely fashion;

    (c) the accuracy of the public burden estimate (the estimated amount of time needed for individual respondents to provide the requested information);

    (d) whether the methodology and assumptions used to determine the estimates are logical;

    (e) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and

    (f) ways to minimize the public burden through the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your written comments, requests for more information on the proposed collection, or requests to obtain a copy of the data collection instrument and instructions to Tamara Clay by one of the following methods:

    Mail: Tamara Clay, Information Collection Clearance Officer, 801 Thompson Avenue, TMP, STE 450-30, Rockville, MD 20852-1627.

    Phone: 301-443-4750.

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: 301-443-2316.

    Comment Due Date: September 21, 2015. Your comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    Dated: July 8, 2015. Robert G. McSwain, Acting Director, Indian Health Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17872 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-16-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Calorie Restriction, IGF-1 and Stress Resistance III.

    Date: August 13, 2015.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Bita Nakhai, Ph.D., Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, Gateway Bldg., 2c212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301-402-7701, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 15, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17752 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-15-154—Development of Medications to Treat Alcohol Use Disorders (U44).

    Date: August 6, 2015.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: NIAAA, NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2019, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Katrina Foster, Ph.D., Chief, Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2019, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 443-4032, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 92.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Supports Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 15, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17750 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel, ZAA1 EE01 AA-2 and AA-3 Conflict Review.

    Date: August 7, 2015.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: NIAAA, NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2019, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Katrina Foster, Ph.D., Chief, Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, NIH, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2019, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 443-4032, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 92.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Supports Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 15, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17751 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) Drug Testing Advisory Board (DTAB) will meet on August 6, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. E.D.T., and on August 7, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. E.D.T. The DTAB will convene in both open and closed sessions on these two days.

    On August 7, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., the meeting will be open to the public. The meeting will include updates on the status of the proposed revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (urine/oral fluid) and the Request for Information (hair), review of the public comments to the proposed revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (urine/oral fluid), review of the public comments to the Request for Information (hair), and DTAB's process for evaluating the scientific supportability of alternate specimens for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs.

    The public is invited to attend the open session in person or to listen via web conference. Due to the limited seating space and call-in capacity, registration is requested. Public comments are welcome. To make arrangements to attend, obtain the web conference call-in numbers and access codes, submit written or brief oral comments, or request special accommodations for persons with disabilities, please register at the SAMHSA Advisory Committees Web site at http://nac.samhsa.gov/Registration/meetingsRegistration.aspx or contact the CSAP DTAB Designated Federal Official, Dr. Janine Denis Cook (see contact information below).

    On August 6, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and August 7, 2015, from 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., the Board will meet in closed session to discuss the proposed revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. Therefore, this meeting is closed to the public as determined by the Administrator, SAMHSA, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) and 5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(d).

    Meeting information and a roster of DTAB members may be obtained by accessing the SAMHSA Advisory Committees Web site, http://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/drug-testing-advisory-board-dtab, or by contacting Dr. Cook.

    Committee Name: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Drug Testing Advisory Board.

    Dates/Time/Type: August 6, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. E.D.T.: CLOSED. August 7, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. E.D.T.: OPEN. August 7, 2015, from 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. E.D.T.: CLOSED.

    Place: Sugarloaf Conference Room; SAMHSA Building; 1 Choke Cherry Road; Rockville, Maryland 20850.

    Contact: Janine Denis Cook, Ph.D., Designated Federal Official; CSAP Drug Testing Advisory Board; 1 Choke Cherry Road, Room 7-1043; Rockville, Maryland 20857; Telephone: 240-276-2600; Fax: 240-276-2610; Email: [email protected].

    Janine Denis Cook, Designated Federal Official, DTAB, Division of Workplace Programs, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17818 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used in Calculating Interest on Overdue Accounts and Refunds on Customs Duties AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    General notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice advises the public of the quarterly Internal Revenue Service interest rates used to calculate interest on overdue accounts (underpayments) and refunds (overpayments) of customs duties. For the calendar quarter beginning July 1, 2015, the interest rates for overpayments will be 2 percent for corporations and 3 percent for non-corporations, and the interest rate for underpayments will be 3 percent for both corporations and non-corporations. This notice is published for the convenience of the importing public and U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 1, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael P. Dean, Revenue Division, Collection and Refunds Branch, 6650 Telecom Drive, Suite #100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46278; telephone (317) 614-4882.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1505 and Treasury Decision 85-93, published in the Federal Register on May 29, 1985 (50 FR 21832), the interest rate paid on applicable overpayments or underpayments of customs duties must be in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code rate established under 26 U.S.C. 6621 and 6622. Section 6621 provides different interest rates applicable to overpayments: One for corporations and one for non-corporations.

    The interest rates are based on the Federal short-term rate and determined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on behalf of the Secretary of the Treasury on a quarterly basis. The rates effective for a quarter are determined during the first-month period of the previous quarter.

    In Revenue Ruling 2015-12, the IRS determined the rates of interest for the calendar quarter beginning July 1, 2015, and ending on September 30, 2015. The interest rate paid to the Treasury for underpayments will be the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus two percentage points (2%) for a total of three percent (3%) for both corporations and non-corporations. For corporate overpayments, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus one percentage point (1%) for a total of two percent (2%). For overpayments made by non-corporations, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus two percentage points (2%) for a total of three percent (3%). These interest rates are subject to change for the calendar quarter beginning October 1, 2015, and ending December 31, 2015.

    For the convenience of the importing public and U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel the following list of IRS interest rates used, covering the period from before July of 1974 to date, to calculate interest on overdue accounts and refunds of customs duties, is published in summary format.

    Beginning date Ending date Underpayments
  • (percent)
  • Overpayments
  • (percent)
  • Corporate overpayments (Eff. 1-1-99)
  • (percent)
  • 070174 063075 6 6 070175 013176 9 9 020176 013178 7 7 020178 013180 6 6 020180 013182 12 12 020182 123182 20 20 010183 063083 16 16 070183 123184 11 11 010185 063085 13 13 070185 123185 11 11 010186 063086 10 10 070186 123186 9 9 010187 093087 9 8 100187 123187 10 9 010188 033188 11 10 040188 093088 10 9 100188 033189 11 10 040189 093089 12 11 100189 033191 11 10 040191 123191 10 9 010192 033192 9 8 040192 093092 8 7 100192 063094 7 6 070194 093094 8 7 100194 033195 9 8 040195 063095 10 9 070195 033196 9 8 040196 063096 8 7 070196 033198 9 8 040198 123198 8 7 010199 033199 7 7 6 040199 033100 8 8 7 040100 033101 9 9 8 040101 063001 8 8 7 070101 123101 7 7 6 010102 123102 6 6 5 010103 093003 5 5 4 100103 033104 4 4 3 040104 063004 5 5 4 070104 093004 4 4 3 100104 033105 5 5 4 040105 093005 6 6 5 100105 063006 7 7 6 070106 123107 8 8 7 010108 033108 7 7 6 040108 063008 6 6 5 070108 093008 5 5 4 100108 123108 6 6 5 010109 033109 5 5 4 040109 123110 4 4 3 010111 033111 3 3 2 040111 093011 4 4 3 100111 093015 3 3 2
    Dated: July 13, 2015. Kevin K. McAleenan, Deputy Commissioner.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17820 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0122] Agency Information Collection Activities: Screening Requirements for Carriers AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Screening Requirements for Carriers. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before August 20, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 25313) on May 4, 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: Screening Requirements for Carriers.

    OMB Number: 1651-0122.

    Abstract: Section 273(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1323(e) the Act) authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to establish procedures which carriers must undertake for the proper screening of their alien passengers prior to embarkation at the port from which they are to depart for the United States, in order to become eligible for an automatic reduction, refund, or waiver of a fine imposed under section 273(a)(1) of the Act. To be eligible to obtain such an automatic reduction, refund, or waiver of a fine, the carrier must provide evidence to CBP that it screened all passengers on the conveyance in accordance with the procedures listed in 8 CFR 273.3.

    Some examples of the evidence the carrier may provide to CBP include: a description of the carrier's document screening training program; the number of employees trained; information regarding the date and number of improperly documented aliens intercepted by the carrier at the port(s) of embarkation; and any other evidence to demonstrate the carrier's efforts to properly screen passengers destined for the United States.

    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: Carriers.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 65.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 100 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 6,500.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17815 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0092] Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessels and Certificate of Use AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessels and Certificate of Use (CBP Form 5125). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before August 20, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 27335) on May 13, 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: Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessels and Certificate of Use.

    OMB Number: 1651-0092.

    Form Number: CBP Form 5125.

    Abstract: CBP Form 5125, Application for Withdrawal of Bonded Stores for Fishing Vessel and Certificate of Use, is used to request the permission of the CBP port director for the withdrawal and lading of bonded merchandise (especially alcoholic beverages) for use on board fishing vessels involved in international trade. The applicant must certify on CBP Form 5125 that supplies on board were either consumed, or that all unused quantities remain on board and are adequately secured for use on the next voyage. CBP uses this form to collect information such as the name and identification number of the vessel, ports of departure and destination, and information about the crew members. The information collected on this form is authorized by section 1309 and 1317 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and is provided for by 19 CFR 10.59(e) and 10 65, and 27 CFR 290. CBP Form 5125 is accessible at: http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms?title=5125

    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: Carriers.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.

    Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 500.

    Estimated Time per Response: 20 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 165.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17816 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0015] Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary Importation AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary Importation (CBP Form 3173). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before August 20, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 24952) on May 1, 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: Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary Importation

    OMB Number: 1651-0015

    Form Number: CBP Form 3173

    Abstract: Imported merchandise which is to remain in the customs territory for a period of one year or less without the payment of duties is entered as a temporary importation, as authorized under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202). When this time period is not sufficient, it may be extended by submitting an application on CBP Form 3173, “Application for Extension of Bond for Temporary Importation.” This form is provided for by 19 CFR 10.37 and is accessible at: http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/CBP%20Form%203173.pdf.

    Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no changes to the burden hours or to Form 3173.

    Type of Review: Extension (without change).

    Affected Public: Businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,200.

    Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 14.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 16,800.

    Estimated Time per Response: 13 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,646.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17819 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0001] Agency Information Collection Activities: Petition for Alien Fiancé (e), Form I-129F; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    ACTION:

    60-Day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    DHS, USCIS invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e. the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0001 in the subject box, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2006-0028. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID number USCIS-2006-0028;

    (2) Email. Submit comments to [email protected];

    (3) Mail. Submit written comments to DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Laura Dawkins, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2006-0028 in the search box. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (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 of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (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, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Petition for Alien Fiancé (e).

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: Form I-129F; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form I-129F must be filed with USCIS by a citizen of the United States in order to petition for an alien fiancé (e), spouse, or his/her children.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-129F is approximately 43,819 and the estimated hour burden per response is 3 hours per response; and the estimated number of respondents providing biometrics is 43,819 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.17 hours.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 182,725 hours.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Laura Dawkins, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17775 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5832-N-06] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Pay for Success Demonstration Application AGENCY:

    Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Colette Pollard at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-3400. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marlisa Grogan, Special Needs Assistance Specialist, SNAPS, CPD, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Marlisa Grogan at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-4350. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Pay for Success Demonstration Application.

    OMB Approval Number: 2506-0207.

    Type of Request: Extension, without change, of a currently approved collection.

    Form Number: SF 424, HUD SF 424 SUPP (if applicable), HUD-2993 (if applicable), HUD-96011 (if applicable), HUD-2880, SF-LLL.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The information to be collected will be used to rate applications, to determine eligibility for the PFS Demonstration and to establish grant amounts. Applicants, which must be public or private nonprofit organizations, will respond to narrative prompts to demonstrate their experience and expertise in PFS financing and to describe their intended program design, both for PFS Demonstration activities, such as conducting a feasibility assessment and structuring a PFS transaction, as well as deal implementation activities, such as administering a PSH intervention, tracking outcomes, and making success payments.

    Respondents: Public or private nonprofit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 9 applicants.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 9 applicants.

    Frequency of Response: 1 response per year.

    Average Hours per Response: 22.21 hours.

    Total Estimated Burdens: 194.68 hours.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) 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) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (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 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.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Harriet Tregoning, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17861 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. 5600-FA-43] Announcement of Funding Awards Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security Grants Fiscal Year 2015 AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of funding awards.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, this announcement notifies the public of funding decisions made by the Department. The public was notified of the availability of the Emergency Safety and Security funds with PIH Notice 2014-09 (Notice), which was issued May 12, 2014. Additionally, Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) were notified of funds availability via electronic mail and a posting to the HUD Web site. PHAs were funded in accordance with the terms of the Notice. This announcement contains the consolidated names and addresses of this year's award recipients under the Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security grant program.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions concerning the Emergency Safety and Security awards, contact Ivan Pour, Director, Office of Capital Improvements, Office of Public Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 708-1640. Hearing or speech-impaired individuals may access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security program provides grants to PHAs for physical safety and security measures necessary to address crime and drug-related emergencies. More specifically, in accordance with Section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) (1937 Act), and Public Law 113-235 (Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015) (FY 2015 appropriations), Congress appropriated funding to provide assistance to “public housing agencies for emergency capital needs including safety and security measures necessary to address crime and drug-related activity as well as needs resulting from unforeseen or unpreventable emergencies and natural disasters excluding Presidentially declared disasters occurring in fiscal year [2015].”

    The FY 2015 awards in this Announcement were evaluated for funding based on the criteria in the Notice. These awards are funded from the set-aside in the FY 2015 appropriations. In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1987, 42 U.S.C. 3545), the Department is publishing the names, addresses, and amounts of the 29 awards made under the set aside in Appendix A to this document.

    Dated: July 13, 2015. Lourdes Castro Ramírez, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing. Appendix A Capital Fund Emergency Safety and Security Program FY2015 Awards Name/address of applicant Amount funded Project description Uniontown Housing Authority, P.O. Box 1160, Uniontown, AL 36786 $178,595 Security Cameras, Lighting, and Fencing. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, 2600 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90057 $250,000 Security Camera System. Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles, 700 West Main Street, Alhambra, CA 91801 $226,272 Security Cameras and Lighting. Housing Authority of the City of Oxnard, 435 South D Street, Oxnard, CA 93030 $250,000 Security Camera System. Housing Authority of the City of Norwalk, P.O. Box 508, Norwalk, CT 06856 $116,454 Exterior Lighting, Fencing, and Entry Doors. Housing Authority of the City of Cocoa, 828 Stone Street, Cocoa, FL 32922 $250,000 Security Cameras, Lighting, Doors, and Deadbolt Locks. Northwest Georgia Housing Authority, P.O. Box 1428, Rome, GA 30162 $247,788 Security Cameras, Access-Controlled Doors, Alarms, and Entry Doors. Housing Authority of City of East St. Louis, 700 N. 20th St, East St. Louis, IL 62205 $250,000 Security Camera System. Chicago Housing Authority, 60 E. Van Buren, Chicago, IL 60660 $248,845 Security Camera System. Kokomo Housing Authority, 210 E. Taylor Street, Kokomo, IN 46901 $222,810 Security Camera System and Exterior Lighting. Kansas City, KS Housing Authority, 1124 N. 9th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101 $250,000 Security Camera System and a Telephone Entry System. Louisville Metro Housing Authority, 420 South 8th Street, Louisville, KY 40203 $250,000 Locks and Lighting, Replace the Entry System, and Relocate the Security station. Housing Authority of Richmond, P.O. Box 786, Richmond, KY 40476 $250,000 Security Cameras. Holyoke Housing Authority, 475 Maple Street, Holyoke, MA 01040 $169,090 Security Cameras and Lighting. North Adams Housing Authority, 150 Ashland Street, North Adams, MA 01247 $250,000 Security Cameras and Fencing. Housing Authority of Baltimore City, 417 E. Fayette Street, Baltimore, MD 21202-3431 $250,000 Security Cameras and Lighting. Fort Fairfield Housing Authority, 18 Fields Lane, Fort Fairfield, ME 04742 $124,797 Security Camera System, Doors, Locks, Lighting, and Fencing. Detroit Housing Commission, 1301 E. Jefferson, Detroit, MI 48207 $227,990 Security Camera System, Doors, Alarm System, and Security Access System. Housing Authority of the Town of Carrollton, 107 N. Monroe Street, Carrollton, MO 64633 $51,996 Security Cameras, Locks, Lighting, and Fencing. City of Hickory Public Housing Authority, 841 S. Center Street, Hickory, NC 28602 $250,000 Security Cameras. Rocky Mount Housing Authority, P.O. Box 4717, Rocky Mount, NC 27803 $218,386 Security Cameras and Lighting. Housing Authority of the Town of Morristown, 31 Early Street, Morristown, NJ 07960 $250,000 Security Cameras. New York City Housing Authority, 250 Broadway, New York, NY 10007 $250,000 Security Camera System and Security Operations Center. Catskill Housing Authority, P.O. Box 362, Catskill, NY 12414 $45,002 Security Camera System. Housing Authority of Anthony, P.O. Box 1710, Anthony, TX 79821 $55,760 Fencing, Doors, and Lighting. Austin Housing Authority, 1124 S. IH35, Austin, TX 78704 $250,000 Security Camera System, Lighting, and Fencing. San Antonio Housing Authority, 818 Flores Street, San Antonio, TX 78204 $250,000 Lighting, and Fencing. Housing Authority of Tatum, P.O. Box 1066, Tatum, TX 75691 $248,930 Security Cameras, Gates, Fencing, Doors, Lighting, and Security Screens. Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 901 Chamberlayne Parkway, Richmond, VA 23220-2309 $154,000 Window Bars.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17863 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Geological Survey [GX15DA009DU2000] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments on the National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program AGENCY:

    U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a new information collection, National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program.

    SUMMARY:

    We (the U.S. Geological Survey) are notifying the public that we have submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the information collection request (ICR) described below. To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and as part of our continuing efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, we invite the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on this ICR.

    DATES:

    To ensure that your comments on this ICR are considered, OMB must receive them on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please submit written comments on this information collection directly to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior, via email: ([email protected]); or by fax (202) 395-5806; and identify your submission with `OMB Control Number 1028-NEW National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program'. Please also forward a copy of your comments and suggestions on this information collection to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive MS 807, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); (703) 648-7195 (fax); or [email protected] (email). Please reference `OMB Information Collection 1028-NEW: National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program' in all correspondence.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Daryll Pope,, U.S. Geological Survey, 3450 Princeton Pike, Suite 110, Lawrenceville, NJ 08648 (mail); 609-771-3933 (phone); or [email protected] (email). You may also find information about this ICR at www.reginfo.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The USGS is working with the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) and its Subcommittee on Ground Water (SOGW) to develop and administer a National Ground-Water Monitoring Network (NGWMN). This network is required as part of Public Law 111-11, Subtitle F—Secure Water: Section 9507 “Water Data Enhancement by the United States Geological Survey”. The Network will consist of an aggregation of wells from existing Federal, State, Tribal, and local groundwater monitoring networks. To support data providers for the National Ground-Water Monitoring Network, the USGS will be providing funding through cooperative agreements to water-resource agencies that collect groundwater data. The USGS will be soliciting applications for funding that will request information from the Agency collecting the data. Proposals will be submitted through the www.grants.gov Web site. Elements of the proposal will include contact information (phone number and email address), and a proposal describing their existing data collection and a plan to evaluate their data for incorporation into the NGWMN. The proposal will be evaluated by the USGS and the NGWMN Program Board to appropriate funding. The proposal will describe the groundwater networks to be included in the NGWMN, the purpose of the networks, an estimate of the number of wells they would submit for the network, an overview of the methods they would use to select and classify wells for the network a description of data collection techniques, and information on their databases. The proposal would also require estimates of one-time costs to complete the above tasks and annual costs to participate in the network.

    II. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1028-NEW.

    Title: National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Cooperative Funding Program.

    Type of Request: Approval of new information collection.

    Respondent Obligation: Required to obtain benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Annually.

    Description of Respondents: Multistate, State, Tribal, or Local water-resource agencies who operate groundwater monitoring networks.

    Estimated Total Number of Annual Responses: 100 applications, 25 reports.

    Estimated Time per Response: We estimate that it will take 30 hour(s) per person to prepare the proposal. This includes time to review the NGWMN Framework Document to understand the Network design and requirements for data providers. In prior years respondents to similar projects have spent up to 125 hours to prepare the final report.

    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 3000 for applications, 3125 for reports.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Non-Hour Cost” Burden: There are no “non-hour cost” burdens associated with this collection of information.

    Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until the OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obliged to respond.

    Comments: On 02/06/2015, we published a Federal Register notice (80 FR 6746) announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval and soliciting comments. The comment period closed on 04/07/2015. We received no comments.

    III. Request for Comments

    We again invite comments concerning this ICR as to: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the agency to perform its duties, including whether the information is useful; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) how to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) how to minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Please note that comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your personal mailing address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personally identifiable information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us and OMB in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    William L. Cunningham, Chief, Office of Groundwater.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17835 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4311-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] Pueblo of San Ildefonso—Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015 AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice publishes the Pueblo of San Ildefonso—Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015. This codification repeals and replaces the existing Pueblo of San Ildefonso Ordinance Legalizing the Introduction, Possession, and Sale of Intoxicants, enacted by the Ildefonso Pueblo Council, which was published in the Federal Register on January 22, 1976 (41 FR 3326).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: This amended code shall become effective 30 days after July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Patricia Mattingly, Tribal Government Officer, Southwest Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1011 Indian School Road NW., Suite 254, Albuquerque, NM 87104; Telephone: (505) 563-3446; Fax: (505) 563-3101, or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Indian Services, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Telephone: (202) 513-7641.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the Federal Register notice of adopted liquor ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Pueblo of San Ildefonso Tribal Council duly adopted the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015 by Resolution No. SI-R15-004 on March 29, 2015. This Federal Register notice supersedes the Pueblo of San Ildefonso Ordinance Legalizing the Introduction, Possession, and Sale of Intoxicants, enacted by the Ildefonso Pueblo Council, which was published in the Federal Register on January 22, 1976 (41 FR 3326).

    This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Tribal Council of the Pueblo of San Ildefonso duly adopted the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015 by Resolution No. SI-R15-004 on March 29, 2015.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

    The Pueblo of San Ildefonso—Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act of 2015 Liquor Control Act of 2015 shall read as follows:

    Chapter 1. Administration

    Section 1.1 Title. This act shall be known as the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act.

    Section 1.2 Purpose. The purpose of the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Liquor Control Act is to regulate and control the sale, possession and consumption of liquor within the Pueblo de San Ildefonso lands for the public health, safety and welfare.

    Section 1.3 Authority. The Pueblo has enacted this Liquor Control Act in exercise of its inherent governmental authority over its lands and activities occurring thereon and in accordance with its governing Agreement, The Government, Section 5. Authority. This Liquor Act is in conformance with the laws of New Mexico, as required by Federal law and 18 U.S.C. 1161.

    Section 1.4 Definitions. As used in this Act, the following terms shall apply:

    A. “Alcohol” or “Liquor” includes the four varieties of liquor commonly referred to as alcohol, spirits, wine, and beer, and all fermented, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquor, or combinations thereof, and mixed liquor, a part of which is fermented, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquor or otherwise intoxicating, and every liquor or solid or semisolid or other substance, patented or not, containing alcohol, spirits, wine, or beer.

    B. “Council” means the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Tribal Council.

    C. “Governor” means the Governor of the Pueblo de San Ildefonso, or his or her designee.

    D. “Licensed premises” means the location within Pueblo lands at which a licensee is permitted to sell and allow the consumption of liquor. Includes such buildings and surrounding land as designated in the liquor license.

    E. “Licensee” means a person who has been issued tribal liquor license by the Pueblo, to sell liquor on the licensed premises under the provisions of this Act.

    F. “Minor” means any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years.

    G. “Package sale” means any sale of liquor in a container or containers filled or packed by a manufacturer or wine bottler and sold by a liquor licenses in an unbroken package for consumption off the licensed liquor establishment premises, and not for resale.

    H. “Person” means any individual, business, or other legal entity, and includes the Pueblo and its wholly owned commercial entities.

    I. “Pueblo” means the Pueblo de San Ildefonso, a federally recognized Tribe of Indians.

    J. “Public place” means any location or premises on Pueblo lands to which the general public has unrestricted access.

    K. “Pueblo de San Ildefonso lands” means all lands within the exterior boundaries of the Pueblo de San Ildefonso, including rights-of-way, lands owned by or for the benefit of the Pueblo, tribally purchased lands, and lands that may be leased by the Pueblo de San Ildefonso. Also referred to as “Pueblo Lands.”

    L. “Sale” or “sales” means the exchange, barter, donation, selling, supplying, or distribution of liquor.

    M. “Server” means a person who sells, serves or dispenses liquor for consumption on or off licensed premises, and includes persons who manage, direct or control the sale or service of liquor.

    N. “Tribal Court” means the trial court of the Pueblo.

    Section 1.5 Tribal Liquor License.

    A. Every person who sells liquor on Pueblo lands must hold a tribal liquor license issued by the Pueblo for each location on Pueblo Lands where liquor is sold.

    B. A liquor license shall not be transferred, sold or assigned and is only valid for the licensed premises identified on the License.

    C. A liquor license shall designate whether the licensed premises is permitted to have package sales and/or by the drink.

    D. The Pueblo in its discretion may place terms, conditions, and/or restrictions on the sale of liquor at licensed premises, including, but not limited to, the hours and days of operation and the type of liquor sold.

    E. The term of a liquor license shall be two (2) years.

    F. All persons issued a Liquor License shall:

    (1) Prominently display the license in the business location;

    (2) be responsible for the sale of liquor on Pueblo Lands by their business, and for the conduct of his or her officers, agents, and employees in relation to the sale of liquor;

    (3) ensure that all servers have successfully completed, within the past three (3) years, an alcohol server education program and examination approved by the director of the New Mexico Alcohol and Gaming Division.

    (4) ensure all handling, stocking, and sale of liquor shall be made by persons twenty-one (21) years of age or older. Proof of age must be shown by a current and valid state driver's license, tribal identification card, or other government issued identification that contains birth date and photo of the holder of the license or identification.

    G. Any person licensed to sell liquor within the Pueblo shall obtain general public liability insurance insuring the licensee and the Pueblo against any claims, losses or liability whatsoever for any acts or omissions of the licensee or business invitee on the licensed premises resulting in injury, loss or damage to any other party, with coverage limits in the amount not less than $1,000,000 (one million dollars) per occurrence.

    H. The Pueblo has the authority to suspend, revoke or terminate a Tribal liquor license for any violations arising from this Act or other Pueblo Criminal and Civil Code violations.

    Chapter 2. Sale of Liquor; Restricted Areas

    Section 2.1 Sales Limited. Sales of liquor are allowed at the following locations only:

    A. The Pueblo's convenience stores.

    Section 2.2 Sales for Personal Use; Resale Prohibited. All sales allowed by this Act shall be for personal use of the individual purchaser. Such sales for personal non-commercial use must be in package form or by the drink. Resale of any liquor by a person not licensed under this Act is prohibited.

    Section 2.3 Right to Refuse Sale. Any person authorized to sell liquor within the Pueblo shall have the authority to refuse to sell liquor to any person unable to produce proof of age and identity, or to any person who appears intoxicated.

    Section 2.4 Acceptable Proof of Age for Purchase. If there is a question of a Person's age to purchase liquor, such person shall be required to present any one of the following identification cards which shows his or her correct age and bears his or her signature and photograph:

    A. A driver's license of any state or identification card issued by any state department of motor vehicles;

    B. United States active duty military ID;

    C. A passport;

    D. An official identification or tribal membership card issued by a federally recognized tribe.

    Section 2.5 Liquor in Undesignated Areas. The sale and possession of liquor in areas of the Pueblo Lands which are not designated or licensed for the sale and possession of liquor pursuant to this Act is prohibited.

    A. This prohibition does not pertain to the otherwise lawful transportation of liquor through Pueblo de San Ildefonso lands by persons remaining upon public highways or other areas paved for motor vehicles and where such liquor is not delivered, sold or offered for sale to anyone within Pueblo Lands.

    B. This prohibition does not pertain to liquor wholesalers selling, transporting or delivering liquor to a person licensed by the Pueblo to sell liquor, or to a location designated for the sale of liquor.

    Chapter 3. Offenses, Enforcement and Penalties

    Section 3.1 Offenses. Any person who violates this Act is subject to a civil penalty, at a minimum. Offenses include, but are not limited to, the following:

    A. No person under the age of twenty-one (21) shall consume, purchase, attempt to purchase, or have in his or her possession any liquor. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a separate violation of this Act for each container acquired, bought or possessed.

    B. Any person who sells, provides, or attempts to sell or provide any liquor to any person under the age of twenty-one (21) shall be guilty of violation of this Act for each sale or drink provided.

    C. Any person who transfers in any manner an identification of age to a minor for purposes of permitting such minor to obtain liquor shall be guilty of a violation of this Act.

    D. Any person who attempts to purchase liquor through the use of a false or altered identification shall be guilty of a violation of this Act.

    E. It shall be a violation of this Act for any person within Pueblo Lands to buy liquor from any person other than those properly authorized and licensed by the Pueblo and in compliance with this Act.

    F. It shall be a violation of this Act for any person within Pueblo Lands to sell liquor without a license.

    G. It shall be a violation of this Act for any person licensed by this Act to sell liquor off of the licensed premises.

    H. Any person who is not licensed pursuant to this Act who purchases liquor on Pueblo Lands and resells it, whether in the original container or not, shall be guilty of a violation of this Act.

    I. It shall be a violation of this Act for any person to sell liquor to a person who is visibly intoxicated or appears to be intoxicated.

    J. It shall be a violation of this Act for any person to sell or possess any liquor in any area of the Pueblo's lands which is not designated or licensed for the sale and possession of liquor pursuant to this Act.

    K. Any person who violates any other provision of this Act shall be guilty of a violation of this Act.

    Section 3.2 Enforcement Powers and Authorities. The Governor, or his or her designee, shall have the following powers and authorities for the enforcement of this Act:

    A. To adopt rules, regulations or polices necessary to carry out the intent of this Act to regulate and control the sale, possession and consumption of liquor.

    B. To inspect all licensed premises on which liquor is sold, consumed, possessed or distributed at all reasonable times for the purposes of ascertaining whether the requirements of this Act and any rules or regulations promulgated under this Act are being met and adhered to.

    C. To work with the Tribal Prosecutor or Law Enforcement Officer to bring proceedings in Tribal Court to enforce this Act, and any related rules or regulations, as necessary.

    D. To suspend, revoke or terminate a liquor license for any violations arising from this Act or other Pueblo Criminal and Civil Code violations.

    Section 3.3 Civil Penalty. Any person, purchasing, possessing, selling, delivering, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of any part of this Act, or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this Act, shall be subject to a civil assessment of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation.

    Section 3.4 Criminal Penalty. In addition to civil penalties, a person may be subject to criminal prosecution by the Pueblo for the purchasing, possessing, selling, delivering, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of any part of this Act, or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this Act.

    Section 3.5 Exclusion. For good and sufficient cause found, the Tribal Court may exclude from the Pueblo Lands any person who engages in an activity or activities prohibited by this Act to the extend such exclusion is not inconsistent with Pueblo law.

    Section 3.6 Contraband. Any liquor that is possessed contrary to the terms of this Act are declared to be contraband. Any tribal agent, employee or officer who is authorized by the Governor to enforce this Act shall have the authority to, and shall seize all contraband. Any officer seizing contraband shall preserve the contraband in accordance with the applicable law of the Pueblo or state law. Upon being found in violation of this Act by the Tribal Court, the person shall forfeit all right, title, and interest in the items seized and they shall become the property of the Pueblo.

    Chapter 4. Miscellaneous

    Section 4.1 Effective Date. This Act shall take effect thirty days after the date of publication in the Federal Register by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary's designee.

    Section 4.2 Repeal of Inconsistent Law or Provisions. The Pueblo's Ordinance Legalizing the Introduction, Possession and Sale of Intoxicants, dated January 15, 1976, and published in the January 22, 1976 Federal Register is hereby repealed in its entirety. Further, any and all Council resolutions, or provisions in the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Civil and Criminal Code, or other laws, which conflict in any way with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed to the extent that they are inconsistent with or conflict with or are contrary to the spirit and/or purpose of this Act.

    Section 4.3 Severability. If any provision of this Act is found to be unconstitutional or unlawful by the Pueblo de San Ildefonso Tribal Courts or Federal Courts, such provision(s) shall be stricken and the remainder of this Act shall continue in full force and effect.

    Section 4.4 Amendment. The Council may amend this Act upon majority vote of the Council, subject to the publication in the Federal Register by the Secretary of the Interior or his designee.

    Section 4.5 Sovereign Immunity. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity or rights of the Pueblo.

    [FR Doc. 2015-17887 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) Liquor Control Ordinance 14-01 AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice publishes the liquor ordinance of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah). This ordinance regulates and controls the possession, sale and consumption of liquor within the jurisdiction of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah). The ordinance will increase the ability of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) to control liquor distribution and possession on tribal lands and Indian country, and at the same time will provide an important source of revenue for the strengthening of the tribal government and the delivery of tribal services.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: This code shall become effective July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Sherry Lovin, Acting Regional Tribal Government Officer, Southern Plains Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, P.O. Box 368, Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005, Telephone: (405) 247-1534, Fax: (405) 247-9240; or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of Tribal Government Services, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240, Telephone: (202) 513-7641.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the Federal Register notice of adopted liquor ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Tribal (Aquinnah) Tribal Council duly adopted the Aquinnah Wampanoag Liquor Ordinance 14-01 on September 17, 2014.

    This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Tribal (Aquinnah) Tribal Council duly adopted the Aquinnah Wampanoag Liquor Ordinance 14-01 by Resolution No. 2014-34 on September 17, 2014.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

    Ordinance 14-01 Aquinnah Wampanoag Liquor Ordinance shall read as follows:

    SECTION 1.1. TITLE

    This Ordinance shall be known as the Aquinnah Wampanoag Liquor Ordinance (“Tribe”) and shall be referenced as the Liquor Ordinance.

    SECTION 1.2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE

    A. The introduction, possession, and sale of liquor in Indian Country has historically been recognized as a matter of special concern to Indian tribes and to the United States. The control of liquor on the Tribe's Tribal Lands remains exclusively subject to the legislative enactments of the Tribe in its exercise of its governmental powers over Tribal Lands, and the United States.

    B. Federal law prohibits the introduction of liquor into Indian Country (18 U.S.C. Sec. 1154), and authorized tribes to decide when and to what extent liquor transactions, sales, possession and service shall be permitted on their Tribal Lands (18 U.S.C. Sec. 1161).

    C. Pursuant to the authority in Article VII, Sec. 1 of the Tribe's Constitution, the Tribal Council has the authority “manage, control and administer the affairs of the tribe and shall determine its policies and procedures.”

    D. The enactment of this Liquor Ordinance to govern liquor sales and service on Tribal Lands, will increase the ability of the Tribe to control liquor distribution and possession on Tribal Lands, and at the same time will provide an important source of revenue for the continued operation of Tribal government and the delivery of governmental services, as well as provide an amenity to customers at tribal gaming facilities, tribal hotels, concert venues and golf courses.

    SECTION 1.3. DEFINITIONS

    A. Unless otherwise required by the context, the term “liquor” as used throughout this Liquor Ordinance shall mean “alcohol”, “alcoholic beverages”, “liqueur or cordial”, “malt beverages” and “wine” as those terms are defined by the Massachusetts State Liquor Control Act, M.G.L. Chapter 138 Section 1 as amended and incorporated by reference herein.

    B. “Tribal Lands” means all “Settlement Lands” as defined by the Massachusetts Indian Land Claim Settlement Act, 25 U.S.C. 1771 et seq., as the “private settlement lands” described in paragraph 6 of the Joint Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Settlement of the Gay Head, Massachusetts, Indian Land Claims” executed on November 22, 1983 (“Settlement Agreement”) and “public settlement lands” described in paragraph 4 of the Settlement Agreement as:

    1. Public Settlement Lands: The Common Lands consisting of 238 acres (which include the Cranberry Lands, the Face of the Cliffs, and the Herring Creek), including the Menemsha Lands legally described as:

    Parcel One: The Cranberry Lands

    These lands consist of the parcels shown on the Assessors Maps of the Town of Gay Head, as those maps configured on the date of this deed (the “Assessors Maps”) as follows: Map 3, Parcel 1 and Map 4, Parcel 63.

    Parcel Two: The Face of the Cliffs

    “The clay in the cliffs” as set forth in a set-off of the same dated December 21, 1878, in Dukes County Probate Court Proceedings Case No. D1-235, EXCEPTING AND EXCLUDING all property shown as Lot A on a “Plan of Land in Gay Head, Mass. Surveyed for Trustees of Aquinnah Realty Trust, June 8, 1989, scale 1 in. = 30 ft., Vineyard Haven Surveying, Box 1548, Beach Road, Vineyard Haven, MA 02568,” and consisting of 504 Sq. Ft., which Plan is recorded in the Dukes County Registry of Deeds as Gay Head Case File No. 85.

    Parcel Four: The Herring Creek

    Those rights reserved in a set off dated December 21, 1878, in Dukes County Probate Proceeding Case No. D1-235, in the Herring Fishery, for the purpose of fishing and clearing the creeks, a strip of land one rod wide on each side of the creek, so long as the said reservation may be needed for that purpose. The approximate location of Herring Creek is shown on Gay Head Assessor's Map 11. Said Creek runs through Lots 381, 382, 383 and 384 on said Partition Plan, above mentioned, and said Creek also runs through The Cook Lands, which is Parcel Three, above mentioned.

    2. Private Settlement Lands: The former Strock Estate consisting of three parcels of about 175 acres legally described as “The land in Gay Head, Dukes County, Massachusetts, shown as Lots 68, 71, 72, 73, 80, 86, 179, 246, 254, 294, 299, 300, 309, 316, 319, 324, and 325 on a “Plan of Gay Head Showing the Partition of the Common Lands as Made by Joseph T. Pease and Richard L. Pease, Commissioners, by John H. Millen, Civil Engineer on file with Dukes County Probate Court.”;

    3. Any lands title to which is held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Tribe or individual tribal member of the Tribe, or held by the Tribe or individual member of the Tribe subject to restriction by the United States against alienation and over which the Tribe exercises governmental power; and

    4. All lands acquired into trust for the benefit of the Tribe.

    C. “Tribe” means the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah).

    SECTION 1.4. JURISDICTION

    To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Tribe asserts jurisdiction to determine whether liquor sales and service are permitted on Tribal Lands. As provided in section 1.6 of this Ordinance, liquor sales and service are limited to tribal gaming facilities, tribal hotels, concert venues and golf courses. Nothing in this Ordinance is intended nor shall be construed to limit the jurisdiction of the Tribe over Tribal Lands.

    SECTION 1.5. RELATION TO OTHER LAWS

    All prior ordinances, resolutions and motions of the Tribe regulating, authorizing, prohibiting, or in any way dealing with the sale or service of liquor are hereby repealed and are of no further force or effect to the extent they are inconsistent or conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance. No Tribal business licensing law or other Tribal law shall be applied in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance.

    SECTION 1.6. AUTHORIZED SALE AND SERVICE OF LIQUOR

    Liquor may be offered for sale and may be served on Tribal Lands only at tribal gaming facilities, and at tribal hotels, concert venues, and golf courses. Any other liquor sales are strictly prohibited.

    SECTION 1.7. PROHIBITIONS

    A. General Prohibitions. The commercial introduction of liquor for sales and service, other than as permitted by this Ordinance, is prohibited within Tribal Lands, and is hereby declared an offense under Tribal law. Federal liquor laws applicable to Indian Country shall remain applicable to any person, act, or transaction which is not authorized by this Ordinance and violators of this Ordinance shall be subject to federal prosecution as well as to legal action in accordance with the law of the Tribe.

    B. Age Restrictions. No person shall be authorized to serve liquor unless they are at least 21 years of age. No person may be served liquor unless they are 21 years of age.

    C. Off Premises Consumption of Liquor.

    1. All liquor sales and service authorized by this Ordinance are permitted only at the authorized locations as set forth in section 1.6 of this Ordinance. No open containers of liquor, or unopened containers of liquor in bottles, cans, or otherwise may be permitted outside of those premises.

    D. No person shall sell any liquor to any person obviously under the influence of liquor.

    E. No person who is obviously under the influence of liquor may purchase or consume liquor on any authorized premises.

    SECTION 1.8. CONFORMITY WITH STATE LAW

    Authorized liquor sales and service on Tribal Lands shall comply with Massachusetts State Liquor Control Act standards to the extent required by 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1161.

    SECTION 1.9. PENALTY

    A. Any person or entity possessing, selling, serving, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of any part of this Ordinance shall be subject to a civil fine of not more than $500 for each violation involving possession, but up to $5,000 for each violation involving selling, bartering, or manufacturing liquor products in violation of this Ordinance, and violators may be subject to exclusion from Tribal Lands.

    B. In addition, persons or entities subject to the criminal jurisdiction of the Tribe who violate this Ordinance shall be subject to criminal penalties as provided in applicable tribal criminal law.

    C. All contraband liquor shall be confiscated by an authorized law enforcement agent.

    D. The Aquinnah Judiciary shall have exclusive jurisdiction to enforce this Ordinance and the civil fines, criminal punishment and exclusion authorized by this section.

    SECTION 1.10. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY PRESERVED

    Nothing in this Ordinance is intended or shall be construed as a waiver of the sovereign immunity of the Tribe. No manager or employee of the Tribe or the Aquinnah Wampanoag Gaming Corporation shall be authorized, nor shall they attempt, to waive the sovereign immunity of the Tribe pursuant to this Ordinance.

    SECTION 1.11. SEVERABILITY

    If any provision or provisions in this Ordinance are held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, this Ordinance shall continue in effect as if the invalid provision(s) were not a part hereof.

    SECTION 1.12. EFFECTIVE DATE

    This Ordinance shall be effective following approval by the Tribal Council and approval by the Secretary of the Interior or his/her designee and publication in the Federal Register as provided by federal law.

    [FR Doc. 2015-17903 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] Omaha Tribe of Nebraska—Amendment to Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice publishes the amendment to the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska's Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance, Title 8, Section 8-3-1 of the Omaha Tribal Code, to make the tribal sales tax on the purchase of alcoholic beverages consistent with the sales and use tax laws of the state. The amended Omaha Tribe of Nebraska's Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance, Title 8, Section 8-3-1 of the Omaha Tribal Code was last published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2006 (71 FR 10056).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: This code shall become effective 30 days after July 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Todd Gravelle, Tribal Government Officer, Great Plains Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 115 4th Avenue SE., Aberdeen, SD, 57401; Telephone: (605) 226-7376; Fax: (605) 226-7379, or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of Tribal Government Services, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Telephone (202) 513-7641.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the Federal Register notice of adopted liquor ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Omaha Tribe of Nebraska adopted this amendment to Title 8, Section 8-3-1 of the Omaha Tribal Code by Resolution No. 14-10 on October 24, 2013.

    This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Tribal Council of the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska duly adopted this amendment to the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska's Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance, Title 8, Section 8-3-1 of the Omaha Tribal Code on October 24, 2013.

    Dated: July 14, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

    The amendment to the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska's Alcoholic Beverage Control Ordinance, Title 8, Section 8-3-1 of the Omaha Tribal Code shall read as follows:

    SECTION 8-3-1. Sales Tax Levied.

    There is hereby imposed a Sales Tax on the purchase of alcoholic beverages from any retail licensee licensed under the provisions of this title and said Sales Tax shall be consistent with that of the prevailing Base Sales and Use Tax Rate of the State in which the facility selling alcoholic beverages is located, as that Sales and Use Tax Rate may be amended from time to time. A local Sales Tax shall be imposed in an amount consistent with those sales and use taxes, if any, imposed by local governments in addition to the State Sales and Use tax. Such sales tax shall be deposited in a specific fund for use to prevent and control substance abuse on the Reservation.

    [FR Doc. 2015-17906 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-CONC-18186]; [PPWOBSADC0, PPMVSCS1Y.Y00000] Notice of Extension of Concession Contracts AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Public notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service hereby gives public notice that it proposes to extend the following expiring concession contracts for a period of up to one (1) year, or until the effective date of a new contract, whichever occurs sooner.

    DATES:

    Effective June 1, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Borda, Chief, Commercial Services Program, National Park Service, 1201 Eye Street NW., 11th Floor, Washington, DC 20005, Telephone: 202-513-7156.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to 36 CFR 51.23, the National Park Service has determined the proposed short-term extensions are necessary to avoid interruption of visitor services and has taken all reasonable and appropriate steps to consider alternatives to avoid such interruption. The publication of this notice merely reflects the intent of the National Park Service but does not bind the National Park Service to extend any of the contracts listed below.

    CONCID Concessioner Park unit ANIA903-05 Joe Klutsch Aniakchak National Monument & Preserve. ANIA904-05 Jay M. King Aniakchak National Monument & Preserve. ANIA906-05 Cinder River Lodge Alaska, LLC Aniakchak National Monument & Preserve. DENA003-15 Eric Jayne Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA005-04 Rainier Mountaineering, Inc. Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA006-04 Mountain Trip International, Inc. Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA008-04 Alaska Mountaineering School, LLC Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA009-04 Alpine Ascents International, Inc. Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA010-04 American Alpine Institute, Ltd. Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA011-04 National Outdoor Leadership School Denali National Park & Preserve. DENA018-15 Jon M. Nierenberg Denali National Park & Preserve. GAAR001-05 Richard A. Guthrie Gates of the Artic National Park & Preserve. GLBA015-06 Paul Johnson Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA016-06 Whale Song Adventures, LLC Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA018-06 Alaska Glacier Guides, Inc. Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA019-06 Anchor Excursions, Inc. Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA022-06 Craig S. Loomis Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA023-06 Alaskan Sailing Expeditions, LLC Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA024-06 Jimmie L. Rosenbruch Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA025-06 James S. Kearns Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA026-06 Denny Paul Corbin Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA027-06 InterSea Discoveries, LLC Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA028-06 Francis & Linda Kadrlik Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA030-06 Ronn Patterson Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA031-06 Geoff Wilson and Debbie Kay Bennett Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA032-06 Sea Wolf Adventures, Inc. Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA034-06 InterSea Discoveries, LLC Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA901-05 Alsek River Guide Service, Inc. Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. GLBA902-05 Alsek River Guide Service, Inc. Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve. LACL002-05 Alaska's River Wild Lodge, LLC Lake Clark National Preserve. LACL901-05 Arno Krumm Lake Clark National Preserve. NOAT901-06 Philip E. Driver Noatak National Preserve. NOAT904-06 James P. Jacobson Noatak National Preserve. NOAT906-06 Edmond Mont Mahoney Noatak National Preserve. SEKI004-98 DNC Parks and Resorts at Sequoia, Inc. Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks.

    Summary: Under the provisions of current concession contracts and pending the completion of the public solicitation of a prospectus for a new concession contract, the National Park Service authorizes extension of visitor services for the contract listed below until the dates shown under the terms and conditions of the current contract as amended. The extension of operations does not affect any rights with respect to selection for award of a new concession contract.

    CONCID Concessioner Park unit Extend until PAIS002-05 Worldwinds Windsurfing, Inc. Padre Island National Seashore December 31, 2015. Dated: June 19, 2015. Lena McDowall, Chief Financial Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17871 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-18707;PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions

    Nominations for the following properties being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register were received by the National Park Service before June 27, 2015. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation. Comments may be forwarded by United States Postal Service, to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC 20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447. Written or faxed comments should be submitted by August 5, 2015. 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.

    Dated: July 1, 2015. Roger Reed, Acting Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program. CALIFORNIA San Diego County Kwaaymii Homeland, Address Restricted, Mount Laguna, 15000506 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia West Heating Plant, (Georgetown MRA) 1051 29th St. NW., Washington, 15000507 FLORIDA Okeechobee County First Methodist Episcopal Church, South, 200 NW. 2nd St., Okeechobee, 15000509 MASSACHUSETTS Worcester County Four Corners—Goodnow Farm Historic District, Gates, Goodnow, Old Colony, Rhodes & Thompson Rds., Princeton, 15000510 MONTANA Carbon County Camp Senia Historic District (Boundary Increase and Additional Data), Custer National Forest, Red Lodge, 15000511 NEW YORK Erie County East Hill Historic District, 98-367 E. Main St., Springville, 15000512 Sts. Peter and Paul Orthodox Church Complex, 40 Benzinger St., Buffalo, 15000513 Ontario County St. Francis de Sales Parish Complex, 94, 110, 130 & 140 Exchange St., Geneva, 15000514 Orange County Cottage in the Pines, 1200 NY 42, Deerpark, 15000515 Rockland County Main School, 45 Mountain Ave., Hilburn, 15000516 Suffolk County Babylon Library, The, 117 W. Main St., Babylon, 15000517 Tuthill, Daniel and Henry P., Farm, 1146 Main Rd., Jamesport, 15000518 Wyoming County Roup, Barna C., House, 38 Borden Ave., Perry, 15000519 WYOMING Natrona County Edness Kimball Wilkins No. 1 Site, Address Restricted, Evansville, 15000520

    In the interest of preservation, a three day comment period has been requested for the following resource:

    FLORIDA Lake County Fruitland Park Community Center, 604 W. Berckman St., Fruitland Park, 15000508
    [FR Doc. 2015-17771 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-51-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 156S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 15XS501520] Final Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo Mine Energy Project; Record of Decision. AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Department of the Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Availability; Record of Decision.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) are announcing that the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Four Corners Power Plant (FCPP) and Navajo Mine Energy Project is available for public review. The Deputy Secretary for the Department of the Interior, Director of OSMRE, Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) signed the ROD on [July 15, 2015], which constitutes the final decision of the Department.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may review the ROD online via OSMRE's Web site at: http://www.wrcc.osmre.gov/Current_Initiatives/FCNAVPRJ/FCPPEIS.shtm. Copies of the ROD are available to the public at the OSMRE's Western Region office, located at 1999 Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, Colorado 80202-5733. Paper and CD copies of the ROD are also available at the following locations:

    Navajo Nation Library—Highway 264 Loop Road, Window Rock, AZ 86515 Navajo Nation Division of Natural Resources—Executive Office Building 1-2636, Window Rock Blvd., Window Rock, AZ 86515 Hopi Public Mobile Library—1 Main Street, Kykotsmovi, AZ 86039 Albuquerque Main Library—501 Copper Ave., NW., Albuquerque, NM 87102 Cortez Public Library—202 N. Park Street, Cortez, CO 81321 Durango Public Library—1900 E. Third Ave., Durango, CO 81301 Farmington Public Library—2101 Farmington Ave., Farmington, NM 87401 Octavia Fellin Public Library—115 W. Hill Ave., Gallup, NM 87301 Shiprock Branch Library—U.S. Highway 491, Shiprock, NM 87420 Tuba City Public Library—78 Main Street, Tuba City, AZ 86045 Chinle Chapter House—Highway 191, Chinle, AZ 86503 Coalmine Canyon Chapter House—Highway 160 and Main Street, Tuba City, AZ 86045 Nenahnezad Chapter House—County Road 6675, Navajo Route 365, Fruitland, NM 87416 Shiprock Chapter House—East on Highway 64, Shiprock, NM 87420 Tiis Tsoh Sikaad Chapter House—12 miles east of U.S. 491 on Navajo Route 5 and 1/2 mile south on Navajo Route 5080 Upper Fruitland Chapter House—N562 Building #006-001, North of Highway N36, Fruitland, NM 87416 BLM Rio Puerco Field Office—435 Montano Road, NE., Albuquerque, NM 87107 BIA Navajo Region—301 West Hill Street, Gallup, NM 87301 BIA Chinle Office—Navajo Route 7, Building 136-C, Chinle, AZ 86503 BIA Eastern Navajo Office—Highland Road Code Talker Street, Building 222, Crownpoint, NM 87313 BIA Fort Defiance Office—Bonita Drive, Building 251-3, Fort Defiance, AZ 86504 BIA Ramah Office—HC-61, Box 14, Ramah, NM 87321 BIA Shiprock Office—Nataani Nez Complex Building, Second Floor, Highway 491 South, Shiprock, NM 87420 BIA Southern Pueblos Office—1001 Indian School Road, NW., Albuquerque, NM 87104 BIA Southern Ute Office—383 Ute Road, Building 1, Ignacio, CO 81137 BIA Ute Mountain Ute Office—Phillip Coyote Sr. Memorial Hall, 440 Sunset Blvd., Towaoc, CO 81334 BIA Western Navajo Agency—East Highway 160 and Warrior Drive, Tuba City, AZ 86045

    In addition, a limited number of CD copies of the FEIS have been prepared and are available upon request. Because of the time and expense in producing and mailing CD and paper copies, OSMRE requests that the public review the Internet or publicly available copies, if possible. You may obtain a CD by contacting the person identified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information contact Mychal Yellowman, Project Coordinator, telephone: 303-293-5049; address: 1999 Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, Colorado 80202-5733; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background on the Project II. Background on the Four Corners Power Plant III. Background on the Pinabete Mine Permit and the Navajo Mine Permit Renewal IV. Alternatives V. Response to Public Comment I. Background on the Project

    The purpose of the Proposed Action is to allow continued operations of the FCPP and Navajo Mine and operation of the associated transmission lines. The Proposed Action would be consistent with federal Indian trust policies, including, but not limited to, a preference for tribal self-determination and promoting tribal economic development for all tribes affected by the Proposed Action. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) evaluates the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action at the FCPP, the proposed Pinabete Permit area, the existing Navajo Mine Permit area, and the rights-of-way renewals for segments of four transmission lines that transmit power from the FCPP. The public may view information about the Proposed Action on OSMRE's Web site at: http://www.wrcc.osmre.gov/Current_Initiatives/FCNAVPRJ/FCPPEIS.shtm.

    Cooperating agencies for this National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process include: The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Navajo Nation, and the Hopi Tribe.

    OSMRE complied with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.) (NHPA Section 106) as provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3) concurrent with the NEPA process, including public involvement requirements and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. Consultation with Tribes and individual Native Americans were conducted in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and Department of the Interior (DOI) trust policy as summarized in the FEIS. Consultation is complete and Programmatic Agreements have been signed by the consulting parties. These agreements are included as attachments to the FEIS.

    OSMRE also conducted formal consultation with the USFWS pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1536) and associated implementing regulations (50 CFR part 400). This formal consultation considered direct, indirect, and cumulative effects from the Proposed Action, and USFWS prepared a Biological Opinion which is included as an attachment to the FEIS.

    Federal actions related to FCPP and Navajo Mine Energy Project will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including: The Indian Business Site Leasing Act, 25 U.S.C. 415; the General Right-of-Way Act of 1948, 25 U.S.C. 323-328; the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), 30 U.S.C. 1201-1328; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251-1387; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q; the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013; and Executive Orders relating to Environmental Justice, Sacred Sites, and Government-to-Government Consultation.

    II. Background on Lease Amendment No. 3 at the Four Corners Power Plant

    The FCPP is a coal-fired electric generating station located on Navajo tribal trust lands. FCPP currently includes two energy generation units producing approximately 1,500 megawatts, and provides power to more than 500,000 customers throughout the southwestern U.S. Nearly 80 percent of the employees at the plant are Native American. Arizona Public Service (APS) operates the FCPP and executed a lease amendment (Lease Amendment No. 3) with the Navajo Nation to extend the term of the FCPP lease for an additional 25 years, to 2041. Continued operation of the FCPP would require several federal actions, including:

    • BIA approval of Lease Amendment No.3 for the FCPP, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 415. As approved, the ash disposal area would be expanded within the existing FCPP lease area. There are no additional proposed changes to the FCPP, the switch yard, or any of the transmission lines and ancillary facilities, as part of the Proposed Action.

    • BIA issuance of renewed rights-of-way, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 323, for the continued operation of the FCPP, switchyard, and ancillary facilities; for a 500 kilovolt (kV) transmission line and two 345 kV transmission lines; and for ancillary transmission line facilities, including the Moenkopi Switchyard, an associated 12 kV line, and an access road (collectively the “existing facilities”). These existing facilities are located on Navajo tribal trust lands, except for the 500 kV transmission line, which crosses both Navajo and Hopi tribal trust lands. The Proposed Action would continue operation and maintenance of these facilities. No upgrades to the existing facilities are part of the Proposed Action.

    • BIA issuance of renewed rights-of-way to the Public Service of New Mexico (PNM) for the existing 345 kV transmission line. The transmission line will continue to be maintained and operated as part of the Proposed Action. No upgrades to this transmission line are planned as part of the Proposed Action.

    In August 2012, the USEPA published its Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) at FCPP (40 CFR 49.5512). As a result, APS decommissioned Units 1, 2, and 3 at the FCPP in December 2013, and will install selective catalytic reduction equipment on Units 4 and 5 by 2018.

    III. Background on Pinabete Mine Permit and the Navajo Mine Permit Renewal

    NTEC proposes to conduct surface coal mining operations within a new 5,659-acre permit area, called the Pinabete Permit area. This proposed permit area lies within the boundaries of the existing Navajo Mine lease, which is located adjacent to the FCPP on Navajo tribal trust lands. Surface mining operations would occur on an approximately 2,744-acre portion of the proposed Pinabete Permit area, with a total disturbance footprint, including staging areas, of approximately 4,100 acres. The proposed Pinabete Permit area would, in conjunction with the mining of any reserves remaining within the existing Navajo Mine Permit area (Federal SMCRA Permit NM0003F), supply low-sulfur coal to the FCPP at a rate of approximately 5.8 million tons per year. Development of the Pinabete Permit area and associated coal reserves would use surface mining methods, and based on current projected customer needs, would supply coal to FCPP for up to 25 years beginning in 2016. The proposed Pinabete Permit area would include previously permitted but undeveloped coal reserves within Area IV North of the Navajo Mine Lease, and unpermitted and undeveloped coal reserves in a portion of Area IV South of the existing Navajo Mine Lease. Approval of the proposed Pinabete Permit would require several federal actions, including:

    • OSMRE approval of the new SMCRA permit.

    • BLM approval of a revised Mine Plan developed for the proposed maximum economic recovery of coal reserves.

    • USACE approval of a Section 404 Individual Permit for impacts to waters of the United States from proposed mining activities.

    • USEPA approval of a new source Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Industrial Permit associated with the mining and reclamation operations and coal preparation facilities.

    • BIA approval of a proposed realignment for approximately 2.8 miles of BIA 3005/Navajo Road N-5082 (Burnham Road) in Area IV South to avoid proposed mining areas. This realignment would not be needed until 2022; however, the potential impacts of this realignment are analyzed in the FEIS.

    • BIA approval or grant of permits or rights-of-way for access and haul roads, power supply for operations, and related facilities.

    In addition, in 2014, OSMRE administratively delayed its decision on NTEC's renewal application for its existing Navajo Mine SMCRA Permit No. NM00003F. The EIS, therefore, also addresses alternatives and direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the 2014 renewal application action.

    IV. Alternatives

    Alternatives considered in the EIS include three different mine plan configurations at Navajo Mine; implementing highwall or longwall mining techniques at the Navajo Mine; two different ash disposal facility configurations at FCPP; conversion of FCPP to a renewable energy plant; implementing carbon capture and storage at FCPP; and use of an off-site coal supply option for FCPP.

    V. Revisions to the Draft EIS

    In accordance with the CEQ's regulations for implementing NEPA and the DOI's NEPA regulations, OSMRE solicited public comments on the Draft EIS. OSMRE responses to comments are included in Appendix F of the FEIS. Comments on the Draft EIS received from the public were considered and incorporated as appropriate into the FEIS. Public comments resulted in the addition of clarifying text, but did not change any of the impact analyses or significance determinations.

    In addition, the FEIS includes updates based on evolving regulatory guidance and completion of the Section 106 and Section 7 consultation processes.

    The EPA published the Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement in the Federal Register by the OSMRE (80 FR 24965) on May 1, 2015. Printed and CD copies of the Draft EIS and Final EIS are available at the same locations as listed in ADDRESSES above. The ROD conditions OSMRE, BIA and BLM's approval on all mitigation measures identified in the Final EIS and additional mitigation measures identified in the Final Biological Opinion and the ROD.

    Because BIA's and BLM's decision is approved by the Secretary of the Interior, it is not subject to administrative appeal in accordance with the regulations at 43 CFR 4.410(a)(3). Any challenges to BIA & BLM's decisions, must be brought in federal district court. OSMRE's decisions may be appealed by a person with an interest which is or may be adversely affected under the procedures set forth in 30 CFR 775 and 43 CFRpart 4.

    Authority:

    40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Joseph G. Pizarchik, Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17881 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731-TA-1070A (Second Review)] Crepe Paper From China; Scheduling of an Expedited Five-Year Review AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of an expedited review pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on crepe paper from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 6, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Haberstroh, (202) 205-3390, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this review may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background.—On July 6, 2015, the Commission determined that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (80 FR 17499, April 1, 2015) of the subject five-year review was adequate and that the respondent interested party group response was inadequate. The Commission did not find any other circumstances that would warrant conducting a full review.1 2 Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would conduct an expedited review pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)).

    1 A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Web site.

    2 Chairman Meredith M. Broadbent and Commissioner F. Scott Kieff voted to conduct a full review.

    For further information concerning the conduct of this review 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 the review will be placed in the nonpublic record on August 3, 2015, and made available to persons on the Administrative Protective Order service list for this review. 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 the review and that have provided individually adequate responses to the notice of institution, and any party other than an interested party to the review may file written comments with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in the review. Comments are due on or before August 6, 2015 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to the five-year review nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to the review by August 6, 2015. However, should the Department of Commerce extend the time limit for its completion of the final results of its review, 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 review must be served on all other parties to the review (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.

    Authority:

    This review is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 15, 2015. Jennifer Rohrbach, Supervisory Attorney.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17741 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-462 and 731-TA-1156-1158 (First Review) and 731-TA-1043-1045 (Second Review)] Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam; Notice of Commission Determination To Conduct Full Five-Year Reviews AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with full reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“The Act”) to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene retail carrier bags from Vietnam and revocation of the antidumping duty orders on polyethylene retail carrier bags from China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. A schedule for the reviews will be established and announced at a later date.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 6, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nathanael Comly (202-205-3174), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this proceeding may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov.

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On July 6, 2015, the Commission determined that it should proceed to full reviews in the subject five-year reviews pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). The Commission found that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (80 FR 17490, April 1, 2015) and the respondent interested party group response with respect to the order on Malaysia were adequate. The Commission determined that it will proceed to a full review of the order on Malaysia. The Commission also found that the respondent interested party group responses with respect to the orders on China, Indonesia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam were inadequate. The Commission further determined that it will proceed to full reviews of the orders on China, Indonesia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam to promote administrative efficiency in light of its decision to proceed to a full review with respect to the order on Malaysia. A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Web site.

    Authority:

    These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 15, 2015. Jennifer Rohrbach, Supervisory Attorney.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17773 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-437 and 731-TA-1060-1061 (Second Review)] Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From China and India; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of expedited reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on carbazole violet pigment 23 from China and India would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: July 6, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Trainor ((202) 205-3354), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this review may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background. On July 6, 2015, the Commission determined that the domestic interested party group response to its notice of institution (80 FR 17499, April 1, 2015) of the subject five-year reviews was adequate and that the respondent interested party group responses were 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)).

    1 A record of the Commissioners' votes, the Commission's statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner's statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Web site.

    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 will be placed in the nonpublic record on August 20, 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 the reviews may file written comments with the Secretary on what determination the Commission should reach in these reviews. Comments are due on or before August 25, 2015 and may not contain new factual information. Any person that is neither a party to the five-year reviews nor an interested party may submit a brief written statement (which shall not contain any new factual information) pertinent to these reviews by August 25, 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.

    2 The Commission has found the responses submitted by Nation Ford Chemical Co. and Sun Chemical Corp. to be individually adequate. Comments from other interested parties will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)).

    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).

    Authority:

    These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 15, 2015. Jennifer Rohrbach, Supervisory Attorney.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17781 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Round Four Evaluation ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the information collection request (ICR) proposal titled, “Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Round Four Evaluation,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Public comments on the ICR are invited.

    DATES:

    The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201505-1291-001 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or by email at [email protected]

    Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OASAM, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: [email protected] Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or by email at [email protected]

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This ICR seeks PRA authority for the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAAACCCT) Grants Round Four Evaluation information collection. The fourth round of the TAACCCT grants program continues to provide community colleges and other eligible institutions of higher education with funds to expand and improve their ability to deliver education and career training programs that can be completed in two years or less and are suited for workers who are eligible for training under the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers program. The Round 4 evaluation will include an impact study involving random assignment and an implementation analysis. This ICR requests clearance for (1) collecting baseline information on participants of interventions in the Round 4 grantees selected for the impact study and (2) semi-structured fieldwork in the form of site visits to up to nine Round 4 grantees to learn from college administrators, program coordinators, faculty and instructional staff, industry and community partners, and employers. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 section 801 authorizes this information collection.

    This proposed information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if the collection of information does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. For additional information, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2015 (80 FR 10515).

    Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB ICR Reference Number 201505-1291-001. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • 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 submission of responses.

    Agency: DOL-OASP.

    Title of Collection: Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Round Four Evaluation.

    OMB ICR Reference Number: 201505-1291-001.

    Affected Public: Individuals and Households; State, Local and Tribal Governments; Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits and not-for-profit institutions.

    Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,608.

    Total Estimated Number of Responses: 11,270.

    Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 2,425 hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17830 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-X23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Tax Performance System ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Tax Performance System,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Public comments on the ICR are invited.

    DATES:

    The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before August 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201504-1205-011 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: [email protected] Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Tax Performance System (TPS) information collection. The TPS gathers and disseminates information on the timeliness and accuracy of State unemployment insurance (UI) tax operations. The DOL is required to review the timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of certain tax collections of States using the TPS. The TPS Operations Handbook, ET-407, prescribes the operation of this program. TPS data now are an integral part of UI PERFORMS, the performance management system for the UI program. UI PERFORMS incorporates a strategic planning process of identifying priorities; ongoing collection and monitoring of valid data to measure performance; identification of areas of potential improvement; and development of specific action steps to improve performance, followed by use of available data to determine whether the action steps are successful. Social Security Act section 303(a) authorizes this information collection. See 42 U.S.C. 503(a).

    This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1205-0332.

    OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on August 31, 2015. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2015 (80 FR 3653).

    Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1205-0332. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • 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 submission of responses.

    Agency: DOL-ETA.

    Title of Collection: Tax Performance System.

    OMB Control Number: 1205-0332.

    Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 52.

    Total Estimated Number of Responses: 52.

    Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 90,428 hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

    Dated: July 15, 2015. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17831 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P
    NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Thursday, July 23, 2015.

    PLACE:

    Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund Quarterly Report.

    2. NCUA Guaranteed Notes Performance Report, and Corporate Stabilization Fund Assessment Determination.

    3. NCUA's Rules and Regulations, Capital Planning and Stress Testing Schedules.

    4. NCUA Rules and Regulations, Federal Credit Union Ownership of Fixed Assets.

    5. NCUA's 2015 Mid-Year Operating Budget Reprogramming.

    RECESS:

    11:30 a.m.

    TIME AND DATE:

    11:45 a.m., Thursday, July 23, 2015.

    PLACE:

    Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Consideration of Supervisory Action. Closed pursuant to Exemptions (8), (9)(i)(B) and (9)(ii).

    2. Personnel. Closed pursuant to Exemptions (2) and (6).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17905 Filed 7-17-15; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2015-0031] Information Collection: NRC FORM 171, “DUPLICATION REQUEST” AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, NRC FORM 171, “DUPLICATION REQUEST”.

    DATES:

    Submit comments by September 21, 2015. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0031. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: Tremaine Donnell, Office of Information Services, Mail Stop: T-5 F53, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tremaine Donnell, Office of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6258; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0031 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0031.

    • NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing ADAMS Accession No. ML15140A422.

    • NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    • NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting NRC's Clearance Officer, Tremaine Donnell, Office of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6258; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2015-0031 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 171, “Duplication Request.”

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0066.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number, if applicable: NRC Form 171.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: As needed (determined by the public ordering documents.)

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: Individuals, companies, or organizations requesting document duplication.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 108.

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 108.

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 9.

    10. Abstract: This form is utilized by the Public Document Room (PDR) staff members who collect information from the public requesting reproduction of publicly available documents in NRC Headquarters' Public Document Room. Copies of the form are utilized by the reproduction contractor to accompany the orders. One copy of the form is kept by the contractor for their records, one copy is sent to the public requesting the documents, and the third copy (with no credit card data) is kept by the PDR staff for 90 calendar days, and then securely discarded.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of July 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Tremaine Donnell, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17765 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 40-8943; ASLBP No. 08-867-02-OLA-BD01] Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; Before Administrative Judges: Michael M. Gibson, Chair; Dr. Richard E. Wardwell; Brian K. Hajek; Alan S. Rosenthal (Special Assistant to the Board); In the Matter of Crow Butte Resources, INC.; (License Renewal for the In Situ Leach Facility, Crawford, Nebraska); Notice (Regarding Weapons at Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Proceeding) July 14, 2015.

    Notice is hereby given that the rules and policies regarding the possession of weapons in United States Courthouses and United States Federal Buildings in the State of Nebraska shall apply to all proceedings conducted in Nebraska by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This includes the evidentiary hearing in the above captioned proceeding scheduled to begin on Monday, August 24, 2015, at the Crawford Community Building in Crawford, Nebraska.1

    1 Licensing Board Notice of Hearing (Notice of Evidentiary Hearing and Opportunity to Provide Written Limited Appearance Statements) (July 13, 2015) (unpublished).

    Prohibited items, including weapons, will not be permitted. Accordingly, no person other than federal law enforcement personnel or law enforcement personnel from the Dawes County Sheriff's Department, or any other authorized Nebraska state or local law enforcement organization, while performing official duties, shall wear or otherwise carry a firearm, edged weapon, impact weapon, electronic control device, chemical weapon, ammunition, or other dangerous weapon.

    This notice does not apply to state or local law enforcement officers responding to a call for assistance from within the Crawford Community Building.

    It is so ordered.

    For The Atomic Safety And Licensing Board.

    Dated: July 14, 2015 in Rockville, Maryland. Michael M. Gibson, Chair, Administrative Judge.
    [FR Doc. 2015-17848 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2015-0171] Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Biweekly notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.

    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, from June 25, 2015, to July 8, 2015. The last biweekly notice was published on July 7, 2015.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by August 20, 2015. A request for a hearing must be filed by September 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject):

    • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0171. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lynn Ronewicz, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0171 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0171.

    • NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    • NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2015-0171, facility name, unit number(s), application date, and subject in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov, as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

    II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in Section 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

    A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license or combined license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.

    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing.

    If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.

    B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the Internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.

    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System, users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.

    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. However, in some instances, a request to intervene will require including information on local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).

    For further details with respect to these license amendment applications, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

    Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DNC), Docket No. 50-336, Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 2 (MPS2), New London County, Connecticut

    Date of amendment request: March 2, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15069A226.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS) 6.19, “Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program,” for MPS2. Specifically, DNC proposes to: (1) Revise the definition of Pa [peak calculated primary containment internal pressure] in TS 6.19 that was introduced into the TSs in License Amendment 203 to be consistent with the Pa value in TSs 3.6.1.2 and 3.6.1.3, and (2) revise the acceptance criteria for leakage rate testing of containment air lock door seals to substitute the use of the makeup flow method in lieu of the pressure decay method currently used at MPS2.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    Criterion 1

    [Does the] proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    This proposed license amendment would revise the definition of Pa that was introduced into TS 6.19 under License Amendment 203 to be consistent with the Pa value in TSs 3.6.1.2 and 3.6.1.3. The design basis accident remains unchanged for the postulated events described in the MPS2 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Since the initial conditions and assumptions included in the safety analyses are unchanged, the consequences of the postulated events remain unchanged. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    The proposed amendment [would] also revise the method of surveillance for leakage rate testing of the containment air lock door seals. The makeup flow method will continue to provide assurance that the containment leakage rate is within the limits assumed in the radiological consequences analysis of the design basis accident, therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    Criterion 2

    [Does the] proposed amendment create the possibility for a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment would: (1) Revise the definition of Pa in TS 6.19 to be consistent with the Pa value in TSs 3.6.1.2 and 3.6.1.3, and (2) revise the method of surveillance for leakage rate testing of the containment air lock door seals. The proposed amendment does not change the way the plant is operated and does not involve a physical alteration of the plant. No new or different types of equipment will be installed and there are no physical modifications to existing equipment associated with the proposed amendment. Similarly, the proposed amendment would not physically change any plant systems, structures, or components involved in the mitigation of any postulated accidents. Thus, no new initiators or precursors of a new or different kind of accident are created.

    Furthermore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new failure mode associated with any equipment or personnel failures.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    Criterion 3

    [Does the] proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment would: (1) Revise the definition of Pa in TS 6.19 to be consistent with the Pa value in TSs 3.6.1.2 and 3.6.1.3, and (2) revise the method of surveillance for leakage rate testing of the containment air lock door seals. The proposed amendment does not represent any physical change to plant systems, structures, or components, or to procedures established for plant operation. The proposed amendment does not affect the inputs or assumptions of any of the design basis analyses and current design limits will continue to be met. Since the proposed amendment does not affect the assumptions or consequences of any accident previously analyzed, there is no significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion Resources Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, VA 23219.

    Acting NRC Branch Chief: Michael I. Dudek.

    Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-336 and 50-423, Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, New London County, Connecticut

    Date of amendment request: January 15, 2015, as supplemented on April 15, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML15021A128 and ML15111A449, respectively.

    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendments would revise or add Surveillance Requirements to verify that the system locations susceptible to gas accumulation are sufficiently filled with water and to provide allowances which permit performance of the verification to the Technical Specifications. The changes are being made to address the concerns discussed in Generic Letter 2008-01, “Managing Gas Accumulation in Emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Containment Spray Systems.” The proposed amendments would be consistent with Technical Specification Task Force Traveler-523, Revision 2, Generic Letter 2008-01, “Managing Gas Accumulation.”

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    Criterion 1

    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change revises or adds Surveillance Requirements (SRs) that require verification that the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS), Shutdown Cooling (SDC) System, and the Containment Spray System are not rendered inoperable due to accumulated gas and to provide allowances which permit performance of the revised verification. Gas accumulation in the subject systems is not an initiator of any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased. The proposed SRs ensure that the subject systems continue to be capable to perform their assumed safety function and are not rendered inoperable due to gas accumulation. Thus, the consequences of any accident previously evaluated are not significantly increased.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    Criterion 2

    Does the proposed amendment create the possibility for a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change revises or adds SRs that require verification that the ECCS, SDC and the Containment Spray Systems are not rendered inoperable due to accumulated gas and provide allowances which permit performance of the revised verification. The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, the proposed change does not impose any new or different requirements that could initiate an accident. The proposed change does not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis and is consistent with the safety analysis assumptions.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    Criterion 3

    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change revises or adds SRs that require verification that the ECCS, SDC and the Containment Spray Systems are not rendered inoperable due to accumulated gas and provide allowances which permit performance of the revised verification. The proposed change adds new requirements to manage gas accumulation in order to ensure the subject systems are capable of performing their assumed safety functions. The proposed SRs are more comprehensive than the current SRs and will ensure that the assumptions of the safety analysis are protected. The proposed change does not adversely affect any current plant safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed in the safety analysis.

    Therefore, there are no changes being made to any safety analysis assumptions, safety limits or limiting safety system settings that would adversely affect plant safety as a result of the proposed change.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion Resources Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, VA 23219.

    Acting NRC Branch Chief: Michael I. Dudek.

    Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF), et al., Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3), Citrus County, Florida

    Date of amendment request: May 7, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15134A160.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise Technical Specifications 5.1.1, 5.2.1.b, 5.3.2, and 5.6.2.3 by changing the title of the position with overall responsibility for the safe handling and storage of nuclear fuel and licensee initiated changes to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) from either the Plant Manager or the Decommissioning Director to the General Manager Decommissioning.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, with NRC staff revisions provided in [brackets], which is presented below:

    Criterion 1

    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning changes to the Administrative Controls sections of the CR-3 Improved Technical Specifications has no effect on the performance of these defined responsibilities. The overall responsibility for these Administrative Controls sections remains at the same level or higher: (1) Delegating in writing the succession to this responsibility during any absence; (2) approving, prior to implementation, any change to tests, experiments or modifications to systems or equipment that affect stored nuclear fuel; (3) ensuring the acceptable performance of the staff involved in operating, maintaining, and providing technical support to ensure the safe handling and storage of the nuclear fuel; (4) ensuring that the training and retraining of the Certified Fuel Handler positions are in accordance with the applicable standards; and (5) ensuring that any licensee initiated changes to the ODCM are effective only after acceptance by the General Manager Decommissioning.

    The proposed CR-3 ITS [Improved Technical Specifications] Administrative Controls sections consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning are administrative in nature, and have no direct effect on any plant system, the operation and maintenance of CR-3 or any previously evaluated accident.

    These changes reflect DEF hierarchical changes associated with CR-3 decommissioning and placing the unit in the permanently defueled safe storage condition.

    Criterion 2

    Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed CR-3 ITS Administrative Controls sections consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning are administrative in nature, and have no direct effect on any plant system, the operation and maintenance of CR-3 or any previously evaluated accident. The consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning changes to the Administrative Controls sections of the CR-3 ITS have no effect on the performance of these previously delineated responsibilities. The overall responsibility for these Administrative Controls sections remains at the same level or higher.

    These changes reflect DEF hierarchical changes associated with CR-3 decommissioning and placing the unit in the permanently defueled safe storage condition.

    Criterion 3

    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed CR-3 ITS Administrative Controls sections consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning are administrative in nature, have no direct effect on any plant system, does not involve any physical plant limits or parameters, License Condition, Technical Specification Limiting Condition of Operability, or operating philosophy, and therefore cannot affect any margin of safety.

    The consolidation of Plant Manager and Decommissioning Director to General Manager Decommissioning changes to the Administrative Controls sections of the CR-3 ITS have no effect on the performance of these previously delineated responsibilities. The overall responsibility for these Administrative Controls sections remains at the same level or higher.

    These changes reflect DEF hierarchical changes associated with CR-3 decommissioning and placing the unit in the permanently defueled safe storage condition.

    Therefore, a no significant hazards consideration conclusion is reached.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Lara S. Nichols, 550 South Tryon Street, Charlotte NC 28202.

    NRC Branch Chief: Meena K. Khanna.

    Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, New Hill, North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: April 30, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15126A117.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the emergency plan by changing the emergency action levels from a scheme based upon Revision 5 of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)-99-01, “Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,” to one based upon Revision 6 of NEI 99-01, “Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors.” The NRC formally endorsed NEI 99-01, Revision 6, in a letter dated March 28, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12346A463).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    (1) Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    These changes affect the HNP [Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant] Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the Operating License or the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes do not reduce the effectiveness of the HNP Emergency Plan or the HNP Emergency Response Organization. The proposed changes do not modify any plant equipment and do not impact any failure modes that could lead to an accident. Additionally, the proposed changes do not impact the consequence of any analyzed accident since the changes do not affect any equipment related to accident mitigation.

    Based on this discussion, the proposed amendment does not increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    (2) Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    These changes affect the HNP Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the Operating License or the Technical Specifications. These changes do not modify any plant equipment and there is no impact on the capability of the existing equipment to perform their intended functions. No system setpoints are being modified and no changes are being made to the method in which plant operations are conducted. No new failure modes are introduced by the proposed changes. The proposed amendment does not introduce accident initiator or malfunctions that would cause a new or different kind of accident.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    (3) Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    These changes affect the HNP Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the Operating License or the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes do not affect any of the assumptions used in the accident analysis, nor do they affect any operability requirements for equipment important to plant safety.

    Therefore, the proposed changes will not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the bases for Technical Specifications covered in this license amendment request.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Lara S. Nichols, Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation, 550 South Tyron Street, Mail Code DEC45A, Charlotte, NC 28202.

    NRC Branch Chief: Shana R. Helton.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: May 7, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15127A469.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes changes to the Main Control Room Emergency Habitability System (VES) configuration and equipment safety designation. Because this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1 information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 Design Control Document (DCD), the licensee also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD Tier 1 in accordance with 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The design functions of the VES for the main control room (MCR) are to provide breathable air, maintain positive pressurization relative to the outside, provide cooling of MCR equipment and facilities, and provide passive air filtration within the MCR boundary. The VES is designed to satisfy these functions for up to 72 hours following a design basis accident.

    The proposed changes to the ASME Code [American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code] safety classification of components, equipment orientation and configuration, addition and deletion of components, and correction to the number of emergency air storage tanks would not adversely affect any design function. The proposed changes maintain the design function of the VES with safety-related equipment and system configuration consistent with the descriptions in UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] Figure 6.4.2. The proposed changes do not affect the support or operation of mechanical and fluid systems. There is no change to the response of systems to postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted radioactive releases due to postulated accident conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely affected, nor do the proposed changes described create any new accident precursors.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes to revise the VES design related to the ASME Code safety classification, equipment orientation and configuration, addition and deletion of components, and correction to the number of emergency air storage tanks maintain consistency with the design function information in the USFAR. The proposed changes do not create a new fault or sequence of events that could result in a radioactive release. The proposed changes would not affect any safety-related accident mitigating function.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not affect the ability of the VES to maintain the safety-related functions to the MCR. The VES continues to meet the requirements for which it was designed and continues to meet the regulations. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed changes, and no margin of safety is reduced.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    NRC Branch Chief: Paul Kallan.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: April 9, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML5099A568.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes changes to the Class 1E direct current and Uninterruptible Power Supply System, replacing four Spare Termination Boxes with a single Spare Battery Termination Box. Because this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1 information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 Design Control Document (DCD), the licensee also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD Tier 1 in accordance with 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not affect the operation of any systems or equipment that initiate an analyzed accident or alter any structures, systems, and components (SSC) accident initiator or initiating sequence of events. The [Uninterruptible Power Supply System] IDS design change involves replacing the four Spare Termination Boxes with a single Spare Battery Termination Box, and minor raceway and cable routing changes. The proposed changes maintain the method used to manually connect the Spare Battery Bank and Spare Battery Bank Charger to supply loads of one of the four 24 Hour Battery Switchboards or one of the two 72 Hour Battery Switchboards at a time while maintaining the independence of the IDS divisions. Therefore, the probabilities of the accidents evaluated in the [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR are not affected.

    The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on the ability of the IDS equipment to perform its design functions. The design of the IDS equipment continues to meet the same regulatory acceptance criteria, electrical codes, and standards as required by the UFSAR. Therefore, the proposed changes do not affect the prevention and mitigation of other abnormal events, e.g., accidents, anticipated operational occurrences, earthquakes, floods and turbine missiles, or their safety or design analyses. In addition, the proposed changes do not have an adverse effect on any safety-related SSC or function used to mitigate an accident; therefore, the consequences of the accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are not affected.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not change the design functions of IDS or any of the systems or equipment in the plant. The IDS design change involves replacing the four Spare Termination Boxes with a single Spare Battery Termination Box, and minor raceway and cable routing changes, and the electrical equipment continues to perform its design functions because the same electrical codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR continue to be met. The proposed changes maintain the method used to manually connect the Spare Battery Bank and Spare Battery Bank Charger to supply loads of one of the four 24 Hour Battery Switchboards or one of the two 72 Hour Battery Switchboards at a time while maintaining the independence of the IDS divisions.

    These proposed changes do not adversely affect any IDS or SSC design functions or methods of operation in a manner that results in a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of events that affect safety-related or non-safety-related equipment. Therefore, this activity does not allow for a new fission product release path, result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, or create a new sequence of events that result in significant fuel cladding failures.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes maintain existing safety margins. The proposed changes do not result in changes to the IDS design requirements or design functions. The proposed changes maintain existing safety margin through continued application of the existing requirements of the UFSAR. Therefore, the proposed changes satisfy the same design functions in accordance with the same codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR. These proposed changes do not affect any design code, function, design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or design/safety margin.

    Because no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by these proposed changes, no margin of safety is reduced.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    Acting NRC Branch Chief: Paul Kallan.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 (VEGP), Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: May 19, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15139A578.

    Description of amendment request: The licensee submitted a license amendment request (LAR) proposing to revise the minimum indicated nitrogen cover pressure required per Technical Specification (TS) Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.5.1.3 from the current requirement of 626 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) back to the previous requirement of 617 psig. The values for the nitrogen cover pressure specified in SR 3.5.1.3 are indicated values as read on the main control board (MCB) indication. As noted in the LAR, the minimum nitrogen cover pressure was previously revised from 617 psig to 626 psig. That revision was requested as an interim measure to compensate for an increase in the uncertainty associated with the accumulator nitrogen cover pressure indication instrumentation, from the transmitter to the MCB indication. That uncertainty was attributed to a specific production batch of Veritrak/Tobar transmitters which shown to exhibit a temperature compensation shift effect of 1.58 percent. Of the 16 pressure transmitters installed in VEGP, 15 were Veritrak/Tobar transmitters. A conservative decision was made to increase the TS minimum indicated value. Subsequent to the issuance of that amendment, the higher uncertainty transmitters were replaced with a different model. As a result of the transmitter replacement, the uncertainty of the affected instrumentation was restored to the value assumed in the Westinghouse accident analysis. Therefore, a decrease of the indicated minimum nitrogen pressure value specified in the TS is requested.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment revises the minimum nitrogen cover pressure specified for the accumulators in SR 3.5.1.3 from 626 psig to 617 psig. The accumulators are not a precursor to any accident previously evaluated. The accumulators are used to mitigate the consequences of accidents previously evaluated. The proposed change does not affect the probability or the consequences of any accident previously evaluated.

    Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change revises the minimum nitrogen cover pressure specified for the accumulators in SR 3.5.1.3 from 626 psig to 617 psig. The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed change to the requirements of the TS assures that the acceptance limits of the accumulators with respect to assumptions in the LOCA [loss-of-coolant-accident] analyses continue to be met. The proposed change does not adversely affect the design function or operation of any structures, systems, and components important to safety.

    Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change revises the minimum nitrogen cover pressure specified for the accumulators in SR 3.5.1.3 from 626 psig to 617 psig. The proposed change to the indicated accumulator nitrogen cover pressure provides assurance that the requirements of the TS continue to bound the acceptance limits of the accumulators with respect to the assumptions in the LOCA analyses. Thus the proposed change to the accumulator minimum nitrogen cover pressure assures the existing margin of safety is maintained.

    Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M. Buettner, Associate General Counsel, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 40 Inverness Center Parkway, Birmingham, AL 35201.

    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.

    STP Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda County, Texas

    Date of amendment request: April 29, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15127A260.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the South Texas Project Electric Generation Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Table 15.6-17 to correct errors introduced in UFSAR Revisions 16 and 17.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    The proposed change of correcting UFSAR Table 15.6-17 does not involve physical modifications to plant equipment and does not change the operational methods or procedures. The proposed change does not affect any of the parameters or conditions that could contribute to the initiation of any accidents. Since [design basis accident (DBA)] initiators are not being altered by adoption of the proposed change, the probability of an accident previously evaluated is not affected. The safety margins and analytical conservatisms associated with the [Alternate Source Term (AST)] methodology have been evaluated and were found acceptable. The results of the revised DBA analyses, performed in support of the AST methodology change, are subject to specific acceptance criteria as specified in [Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.183, “Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors,” July 2000; ADAMS Accession No. ML003716792]. The dose consequences resulting from these DBAs remain within the acceptance criteria presented in 10 CFR 50.67 and RG 1.183. The proposed change of correcting UFSAR Table 15.6-17 does not change the analytical results of the previously approved AST methodology change.

    Based on the above discussion, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    The proposed change is administrative in nature and does not require any physical changes to any structures, systems or components involved in the mitigation of any accidents. No new initiators or precursors of a new or different kind of accident are created. No new equipment or personnel failure modes that might initiate a new type of accident are created as a result of the proposed change.

    Based on the above discussion, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The proposed change is administrative in nature and does not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The safety margins and analytical conservatisms associated with the AST methodology were evaluated and found acceptable. The results of the revised DBA analyses, performed in support of the proposed change, are subject to specific acceptance criteria as specified in RG 1.183. The dose consequences resulting from these DBAs remain within the acceptance criteria presented in 10 CFR 50.67 and RG 1.183. The proposed change continues to ensure that the dose results at the exclusion area boundary (EAB) and low population zone boundary (LPZ), as well as the Control Room and TSC [Technical Support Center], are within the specified regulatory limits.

    Based on the above discussion, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the request for amendments involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Steve Frantz, Esq., Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.

    NRC Branch Chief: Michael M. Markley.

    Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket No. 50-339, North Anna Power Station, Unit No. 2, Louisa County, Virginia

    Date of amendment request: May 22, 2015. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15147A029.

    Description of amendment request: The proposed license amendment would revise Technical Specification 3.8.1, “AC Sources—Operating,” to delete Note 1 to Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.8.1.8 to remove the limitation that excludes Unit 2 from the verification test requirement.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The previously evaluated accident that could be affected is a complete loss of offsite power (LOOP). Analyses have been performed to confirm that power distribution system voltages and currents with both of the new Unit 2 alternate normal to emergency bus ties in service are adequate during a Unit trip scenario. The conditions under which the Unit 2 manual transfer capability is verified are the same as Unit 1. The verification test may only be performed under conditions that will not challenge steady state operation or challenge the safety of the Unit. Therefore, the Unit 2 verification test (manual transfer between Unit 2 normal offsite circuit and alternate required offsite circuit) will not significantly increase the probability of a LOOP.

    Once a LOOP has occurred, the consequences are unaffected by availability of offsite power (normal offsite circuit and alternate required offsite circuit). Therefore, the Unit 2 verification test (normal offsite circuit and alternate required offsite circuit) will not affect the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    Based on this discussion, the proposed amendment does not increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The purpose of the surveillance test is to verify the capability to manually transfer AC [alternating current] power sources from the normal offsite circuit to the alternate required offsite circuit. The only effect of the change is to permit the new Unit 2 required offsite circuits to be tested in the same manner and frequency as the corresponding Unit 1 circuits. Since the Unit 2 circuits are similar to the Unit 1 circuits, and the Unit 1 test is a required TS Surveillance to demonstrate operability of the alternate offsite circuits, permitting the Unit 2 circuits to undergo the same Surveillance test will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change enables SR testing of the new Unit 2 alternate offsite AC circuits to verify the capability to manually transfer AC power sources from the normal offsite circuit to the alternate required offsite circuit.

    The margin of safety is related to the confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to perform their design functions during and following an accident situation. These barriers include the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment system. The proposed change does not directly affect these barriers, nor does it involve any adverse impact on the Class 1E circuits or SSCs [systems, structures, and components] supplied by Class 1E power.

    Therefore, the proposed change will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion Resources Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, VA 23219.

    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.

    III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has determined for each of these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.

    A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal Register as indicated.

    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, it is so indicated.

    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as indicated. All of these items can be accessed as described in the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

    Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 and 3, Oconee County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: March 14, 2014.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Oconee Nuclear Station Technical Specifications (TSs) for the Inservice Testing Program to reflect the current edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code that is referenced in 10 CFR 50.55a(b).

    Date of Issuance: July 7, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 393, 395, and 394. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15174A267; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 31, 2015 (80 FR 17086).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated July 7, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Duke Energy Progress, Inc., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: June 19, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated October 23, 2014; November 13, 2014; January 30, 2015; May 13, 2015; and June 30, 2015.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment modifies Technical Specifications Table 3.3-4, “Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Instrumentation,” revising the Functional Unit 9.a, “Loss-of-Offsite Power 6.9 kV Emergency Bus Undervoltage—Primary,” instrumentation trip setpoint and associated allowable value, and adding two notes regarding channel setpoint surveillance.

    Date of issuance: June 30, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 146. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15163A056; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Facility Operating License No. NPF-63 The amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 2, 2014 (79 FR 52061). The supplemental letters dated October 23, 2014; November 13, 2014; January 30, 2015; May 13, 2015; and June 30, 2015, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 30, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: July 10, 2014, as supplemented by letter dated March 23, 2015.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised and added Technical Specification (TS) surveillance requirements to address the concerns discussed in Generic Letter 2008-01, “Managing Gas Accumulation in Emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Containment Spray Systems,” dated January 11, 2008. The TS changes are based on TS Task Force Traveler-523, Revision 2, “Generic Letter 2008-01, Managing Gas Accumulation,” dated February 21, 2013.

    Date of issuance: June 30, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, to be implemented by May 31, 2016.

    Amendments Nos.: 297 and 300. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15154A614; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56: The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and the TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 2, 2014 (79 FR 52063). The supplemental letter dated March 23, 2015, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 30, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York

    Date of amendment request: September 11, 2014, as supplemented by letter dated November 10, 2014.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendments revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) on licensed operator training and qualification education and experience eligibility requirements.

    Date of issuance: July 8, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 218 and 148. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15167A315; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-63 and NPF-69: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70215). The supplemental letter dated November 10, 2014, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated July 8, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (TMI-1), Dauphin County, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: July 10, 2014, as supplemented by letter dated May 7, 2015.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the TMI-1 Technical Specifications (TSs). Specifically, the amendment modified TMI-1 TSs to address NRC Generic Letter 2008-01, “Managing Gas Accumulation in Emergency Core Cooling, Decay Heat Removal, and Containment Spray Systems,” as described in Technical Specification Task Force Traveler 523, Revision 2, “Generic Letter 2008-01, Managing Gas Accumulation.”

    Date of issuance: June 30, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 285. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15121A589; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation (SE) enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-50. The amendment revised the Facility Operating License and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 2, 2014 (79 FR 52063). The supplemental letter dated May 7, 2015, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in an SE dated June 30, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station (FCS), Unit No. 1, Washington County, Nebraska

    Date of amendment request: August 16, 2013, as supplemented by letters dated August 13, 2014, and February 13 and March 24, 2015.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the design basis method in the FCS Updated Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) for controlling the raw water intake cell level during periods of elevated river levels.

    Date of issuance: June 30, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 180 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 282. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15111A399; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation (SE) enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-40: The amendment revised the license and the design basis as described in the UFSAR.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 18, 2014 (79 FR 15149). The supplemental letters dated August 13, 2014, and February 13 and March 24, 2015, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in an SE dated June 30, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (DCPP), San Luis Obispo County, California

    Date of amendment request: March 27, 2014, as supplemented by letters dated February 19 and April 29, 2015.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised various technical specification (TS) surveillance requirements associated with the DCPP emergency diesel generators (DGs). The changes reflect the results of a revised load study analysis, as well as a revision to the DG 30-minute load rating. These changes were submitted to address multiple issues identified by NRC and licensee investigations, and are intended to correct various non-conservative TS values associated with DG testing.

    Date of issuance: July 1, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 240 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 218 and 220. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15162A882; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82: The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 19, 2014 (79 FR 49109). The supplemental letters dated February 19 and April 29, 2015, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments and public comment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated July 1, 2015.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: Yes.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: January 30, 2015, as supplemented by letter dated March 20, 2015.

    Brief description of amendment: The license amendment revised the Combined Licenses by revising Tier 2 * information contained within the Human Factors Engineering Design Verification, Task Support Verification, and Integrated System Validation plans. These documents are incorporated by reference in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.

    Date of issuance: June 11, 2015.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 35. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15141A449; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: The amendments revised the Facility Combined Licenses.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 17, 2015 (80 FR 13902). The supplemental le