Federal Register Vol. 80, No.165,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 165 (August 26, 2015)

Page Range51723-51934
FR Document

80_FR_165
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 51845 - Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO): MeetingPDF
80 FR 51803 - National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of Public Meeting and Public CommentPDF
80 FR 51803 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Town Of Bennington, Vermont, Former Kocher Drive Dump Site, Bennington, VermontPDF
80 FR 51802 - Office of Research and Development; Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of a Two New Equivalent MethodsPDF
80 FR 51863 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Vatican Splendors” ExhibitionPDF
80 FR 51862 - Notice of Meeting of the Cultural Property Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 51860 - In the Matter of the Designation of Abdul Aziz Haqqani, also known as Aziz Haqqani, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as amendedPDF
80 FR 51860 - Renewal of International Security Advisory Board CharterPDF
80 FR 51811 - Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Announcement of MeetingPDF
80 FR 51759 - Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various CommoditiesPDF
80 FR 51810 - Federal Management Regulations; Improved Management of Undeliverable-as-Addressed MailPDF
80 FR 51774 - Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review; 2014-2015PDF
80 FR 51777 - Certain Uncoated Paper From Portugal: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
80 FR 51867 - Eighty-Second Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 147 (SC 147) Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Aircraft Collision Avoidance SystemsPDF
80 FR 51771 - Certain Uncoated Paper From Indonesia: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
80 FR 51861 - Issuance of a Presidential Permit to Plains Pipeline, L.P.PDF
80 FR 51860 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Pearls on a String: Artists, Patrons, and Poets at the Great Islamic Courts” ExhibitionPDF
80 FR 51866 - Thirty-Fifth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 224 (SC 224) Airport Security Access Control SystemsPDF
80 FR 51806 - Equal Employment Opportunity and DiversityPDF
80 FR 51865 - Twentieth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 222 (SC 222) AMS(R)S, Joint Meeting With EUROCAE WG-82PDF
80 FR 51768 - Certain Uncoated Paper From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
80 FR 51786 - NOAA Fisheries Climate Science StrategyPDF
80 FR 51860 - Notice of Proposal To Extend the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Colombia Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Materials From the Pre-Columbian Cultures and Certain Ecclesiastical Material From the Colonial Period of ColombiaPDF
80 FR 51783 - Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
80 FR 51861 - Foreign Affairs Policy Board Charter RenewalPDF
80 FR 51846 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 51859 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Photo-Poetics: An Anthology” ExhibitionPDF
80 FR 51789 - Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project, City of Woodland, Yolo County, California (CA)PDF
80 FR 51849 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Future Plant Designs; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 51861 - In the Matter of the Designation of Sajid Mohammad Badat as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Pursuant Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as AmendedPDF
80 FR 51864 - U.S. Department of State Advisory Committee on Private International Law: Notice of Annual MeetingPDF
80 FR 51848 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 51827 - Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) Priority List of Needs in Pediatric TherapeuticsPDF
80 FR 51759 - Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Notice of Open MeetingsPDF
80 FR 51827 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 51825 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 51835 - HEARTH Act Approval of Squaxin Island Tribe RegulationsPDF
80 FR 51763 - Endangered and Threatened Species; Identification and Proposed Listing of Eleven Distinct Population Segments of Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia mydasPDF
80 FR 51822 - Request for Quality Metrics; Notice of Draft Guidance Availability and Public Meeting; Request for Comments; Extension of Comment PeriodPDF
80 FR 51758 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
80 FR 51754 - Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Omnibus Amendment To Simplify Vessel BaselinesPDF
80 FR 51825 - National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 51826 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 51825 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 51826 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 51828 - National Infrastructure Advisory CouncilPDF
80 FR 51757 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
80 FR 51804 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring in Public Water Systems (UCMR 3) (Renewal)PDF
80 FR 51805 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Microbial Rules (Renewal)PDF
80 FR 51807 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
80 FR 51787 - Proposed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project; Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Scoping MeetingPDF
80 FR 51800 - Record of Decision for Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0408)PDF
80 FR 51794 - President's Council of Advisors on Science and TechnologyPDF
80 FR 51788 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51795 - Port Arthur LNG, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year PeriodPDF
80 FR 51793 - Strom, Inc.; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 25-Year PeriodPDF
80 FR 51790 - Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year PeriodPDF
80 FR 51792 - Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year PeriodPDF
80 FR 51875 - Special Inspector General for Troubled Asset Relief Program; Delegation of AuthoritiesPDF
80 FR 51843 - Comment Request for Information Collection for ETA 191, Statement of Expenditures and Financial Adjustments of Federal Funds for Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees and Ex-Servicemembers Report, Extension Without RevisionsPDF
80 FR 51765 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51723 - Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 Airplane; Installed Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery SystemsPDF
80 FR 51789 - TRICARE; Fiscal Year 2016 Continued Health Care Benefit Program Premium UpdatePDF
80 FR 51844 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Blasting and the Use of ExplosivesPDF
80 FR 51871 - Sanctions Actions Pursuant to Executive Order 13667PDF
80 FR 51798 - Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Company LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
80 FR 51797 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
80 FR 51798 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 51799 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
80 FR 51797 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 51811 - Reporting of Pregnancy Success Rates From Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) ProgramsPDF
80 FR 51819 - Fees for Sanitation Inspections of Cruise ShipsPDF
80 FR 51766 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Boundary and Annexation SurveyPDF
80 FR 51841 - Information Collection Activities: Global Positioning Systems (GPS) for Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) NTL; Submitted for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51838 - Information Collection Activities: Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast Line; Submitted for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51829 - Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 51837 - Notice of Public Meeting, Idaho Falls District Resource Advisory Council MeetingPDF
80 FR 51829 - Endangered Species; Recovery Permit ApplicationsPDF
80 FR 51823 - In Vitro Diagnostic Testing for Direct Oral Anticoagulants; Public Workshop; Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 51873 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 5735PDF
80 FR 51872 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8281PDF
80 FR 51852 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule 2.11, BATS Trading as Outbound RouterPDF
80 FR 51855 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule 2.11, BATS Trading as Outbound RouterPDF
80 FR 51850 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Kill Switch for NOMPDF
80 FR 51732 - Difenoconazole; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
80 FR 51807 - Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Orders to Aid Public CommentPDF
80 FR 51846 - Senior Executive Service; Appointment of Members to the Performance Review BoardPDF
80 FR 51824 - Meeting on American Indian/Alaska Native Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health IssuesPDF
80 FR 51859 - Indiana Disaster # IN-00055PDF
80 FR 51842 - Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public InterestPDF
80 FR 51858 - Missouri Disaster #MO-00075PDF
80 FR 51858 - Virginia Disaster #VA-00057PDF
80 FR 51859 - Nebraska Disaster Number NE-00065PDF
80 FR 51875 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for REG-157302-02 (Final), TD 9142PDF
80 FR 51873 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8822 and 8822-BPDF
80 FR 51874 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request on Information Collection Tools Relating to the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP); CorrectionPDF
80 FR 51820 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51782 - Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Revocation of the Antidumping Duty OrderPDF
80 FR 51868 - Ballast Defects and Conditions-Importance of Identification and Repair in Preventing Development of Unsafe Combinations of Track ConditionsPDF
80 FR 51820 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Medical Device Reporting: Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and Distributor ReportingPDF
80 FR 51847 - Information Collection: NRC's Policy Statement on Cooperation With States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Production and Utilization FacilitiesPDF
80 FR 51830 - Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Seventeenth Regular Meeting: Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES AppendicesPDF
80 FR 51730 - Illinois; Disapproval of State Board Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5PDF
80 FR 51725 - Export Administration Regulations: Removal of Special Comprehensive License ProvisionsPDF
80 FR 51834 - Proposed Joint Programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement With Assurances and Safe Harbor Agreement in the Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita River (Headwaters) Watersheds, ArkansasPDF
80 FR 51836 - HEARTH Act Approval of Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation RegulationsPDF
80 FR 51750 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Item Unique Identification Prescription Correction (DFARS Case 2014-D021)PDF
80 FR 51752 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States (DFARS Case 2014-D023)PDF
80 FR 51748 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Acquisition of the American Flag (DFARS Case 2015-D005)PDF
80 FR 51751 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Use of Military Construction Funds (DFARS Case 2015-D006)PDF
80 FR 51750 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Contracts or Delivery Orders Issued by a Non-DoD Agency (DFARS Case 2015-D014)PDF
80 FR 51739 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services (DFARS Case 2013-D018)PDF
80 FR 51864 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 51779 - Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
80 FR 51775 - Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty DeterminationPDF
80 FR 51866 - Notice of Intent To Rule on Request To Change Airport Property From Aeronautical Use to Non-Aeronautical Use at the Williamsport Regional Airport, Montoursville, PennsylvaniaPDF
80 FR 51867 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in CaliforniaPDF
80 FR 51870 - Office of Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Actions on Special Permit ApplicationsPDF
80 FR 51877 - 2015-2016 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing RegulationsPDF

Issue

80 165 Wednesday, August 26, 2015 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51765-51766 2015-21121 Safety Enviromental Enforcement Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Global Positioning Systems for Mobile Offshore Drilling Units NTL, 51841-51842 2015-21103 Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast Line, 51838-51840 2015-21102 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Boundary and Annexation Survey, 51766-51768 2015-21106 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Fees for Sanitation Inspections of Cruise Ships, 51819-51820 2015-21107 Reporting of Pregnancy Success Rates from Assisted Reproductive Technology Programs, 51811-51819 2015-21108 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51820 2015-21053 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Defense Acquisition Defense Acquisition Regulations System RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Acquisition of the American Flag, 51748-51749 2015-20873 Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the U.S., 51752-51754 2015-20875 Contracts or Delivery Orders Issued by a Non-DoD Agency, 51750-51751 2015-20871 Item Unique Identification Prescription Correction, 51750 2015-20876 Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services, 51739-51748 2015-20870 Use of Military Construction Funds, 51751-51752 2015-20872 Defense Department Defense Department See

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51788-51789 2015-21129 TRICARE: Continued Health Care Benefit Program Premium Update, 51789 2015-21116
Employment and Training Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Statement of Expenditures and Financial Adjustments of Federal Funds for Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees and Ex-Servicemembers Report, 51843-51844 2015-21123 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

See

Western Area Power Administration

PROPOSED RULES Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Meetings—Fans and Blowers Working Group, 51759 2015-21154 NOTICES Applications to Export Liquefied Natural Gas: Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC, 51790-51792 2015-21126 Port Arthur LNG, LLC, 51795-51797 2015-21128 Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, 51792-51793 2015-21125 Strom, Inc., 51793-51794 2015-21127 Meetings: President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 51794-51795 2015-21130
Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project, Woodland, Yolo County, CA, 51789-51790 2015-21165 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Illinois; Disapproval of State Board Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 and 2008 Ozone NAAQS, 51730-51732 2015-21010 Pesticide Tolerances: Difenoconazole, 51732-51739 2015-21078 PROPOSED RULES Petitions: Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various, 51759-51763 2015-21188 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Microbial Rules, 51805-51806 2015-21135 Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring in Public Water Systems, 51804-51805 2015-21136 Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of a Two New Equivalent Methods, 51802-51803 2015-21203 CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlements: Bennington, VT, Former Kocher Drive Dump Site, Bennington, Vermont, 51803 2015-21211 Meetings: National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, 51803-51804 2015-21212 Farm Credit Farm Credit Administration NOTICES Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity, 51806-51807 2015-21175 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 Airplane; Installed Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems, 51723-51725 2015-21118 NOTICES Meetings: RTCA Special Committee 147 (SC 147) Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Aircraft Collision Avoidance Systems, 51867 2015-21182 RTCA Special Committee 222 (SC 222) AMS(R)S, Joint Meeting with EUROCAE WG-82, 51865-51866 2015-21174 RTCA Special Committee 224 (SC 224) Airport Security Access Control Systems, 51866 2015-21177 Request to Change Airport Property from Aeronautical Use to Non-Aeronautical Use: Williamsport Regional Airport, Montoursville, PA, 51866-51867 2015-20755 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 51797-51800 2015-21109 2015-21110 2015-21111 2015-21112 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Co., LLC, 51798 2015-21113 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Federal Agency Actions: California; Proposed Highway, 51867-51868 2015-20697 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 51807 2015-21134 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Safety Advisory: Ballast Defects and Conditions; Importance of Identification and Repair in Preventing Development of Unsafe Combinations of Track Conditions, 51868-51870 2015-21044 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Proposed Consent Orders: Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 51807-51810 2015-21071 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES 2015-2016 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations, 51878-51934 2015-20472 PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Species: Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia mydas); Identification and Listing of Eleven Distinct Population Segments as Endangered or Threatened and Revision of Current Listings, 51763-51764 2015-21150 NOTICES Endangered Species Recovery Permit Applications, 51829-51830 2015-21096 Meetings: Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES Appendices, 51830-51834 2015-21033 Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group, 51829 2015-21100 Permit Applications: Proposed Joint Programmatic Candidate Conversion Agreement with Assurances and Safe Harbor Agreement in Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita River Headwaters Watersheds, AR, 51834-51835 2015-20960 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Medical Device Reporting -- Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and Distributor Reporting, 51820-51822 2015-21036 Guidance: Request for Quality Metrics, 51822-51823 2015-21149 Meetings: In Vitro Diagnostic Testing for Direct Oral Anticoagulants; Public Workshop, 51823-51824 2015-21095 Foreign Assets Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties, 51871-51872 2015-21114 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Federal Management Regulations: Improved Management of Undeliverable-as-Addressed Mail, 51810 2015-21187 Meetings: Commission to Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities, 51811 2015-21189 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Indian Health Service

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department NOTICES Meetings: National Infrastructure Advisory Council, 51828-51829 2015-21138 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Approval of Squaxin Island Tribe Regulations, 51835-51836 2015-21151 Approval of the Makah Indian Reservation Regulations, 51836-51837 2015-20888 Indian Health Indian Health Service NOTICES Meetings: American Indian/Alaska Native Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health Issues, 51824-51825 2015-21068 Industry Industry and Security Bureau RULES Export Administration Regulations: Removal of Special Comprehensive License Provisions, 51725-51730 2015-20980 Interior Interior Department See

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51872-51875 2015-21058 2015-21060 2015-21085 2015-21086 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Tools Relating to the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program; Correction, 51874-51875 2015-21057 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Boltless Steel Shelving Unites Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China, 51775-51777 2015-20785 Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China, 51774-51775 2015-21185 Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 51782-51783 2015-21046 Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China, 51779-51782 2015-20794 Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia, 51783-51786 2015-21170 Certain Uncoated Paper from Indonesia, 51771-51774 2015-21180 Certain Uncoated Paper from Portugal, 51777-51779 2015-21183 Certain Uncoated Paper from the People's Republic of China, 51768-51771 2015-21173 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith, 51842-51843 2015-21064 Labor Department Labor Department See

Employment and Training Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Blasting and the Use of Explosives, 51844-51845 2015-21115 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach, 51845-51846 2015-21213 Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board, 51846 2015-21070
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Idaho Falls District Resource Advisory Council, 51837-51838 2015-21099 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act Priority List of Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics, 51827-51828 2015-21155 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 51825, 51827 2015-21152 2015-21153 National Cancer Institute, 51825-51826 2015-21140 2015-21141 National Institute on Aging, 51826 2015-21139 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 51825 2015-21142 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 51758 2015-21145 Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 51757 2015-21137 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Omnibus Amendment to Simplify Vessel Baselines, 51754-51757 2015-21143 PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Species: Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia mydas); Identification and Listing of Eleven Distinct Population Segments as Endangered or Threatened and Revision of Current Listings, 51763-51764 2015-21150 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Monterey Peninsula Water Study, 51787-51788 2015-21133 NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy, 51786-51787 2015-21172 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Policy Statement on Cooperation with States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants and other Nuclear Production and Utilization Facilities, 51847-51848 2015-21035 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 51848-51849 2015-21159 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Future Plant Designs, 51849 2015-21164 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures, 51846-51847 2015-21167 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Special Permit Applications, 51870-51871 2015-20481 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: EDGA Exchange, Inc., 51855-51858 2015-21082 EDGX Exchange, Inc., 51852-51855 2015-21083 The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 51850-51852 2015-21080 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: Indiana, 51859 2015-21066 Missouri, 51858 2015-21063 Nebraska, 51859 2015-21061 Virginia, 51858 2015-21062 State Department State Department NOTICES Charter Renewals: Foreign Affairs Policy Board, 51861 2015-21168 International Security Advisory Board, 51860 2015-21190 Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Pearls on a String—Artists, Patrons, and Poets at the Great Islamic Courts, 51860 2015-21178 Photo-Poetics—An Anthology, 51859-51860 2015-21166 Vatican Splendors, 51863-51864 2015-21195 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Private International Law, 51864 2015-21161 Cultural Property Advisory Committee, 51862-51863 2015-21194 Memorandum of Understanding with Colombia Concerning the Importation of Artifacts, 51860-51861 2015-21171 Presidential Permits: Plains Pipeline, LP, 51861-51862 2015-21179 Specially Designated Global Terrorists: Abdul Aziz Haqqani, 51860 2015-21191 Sajid Mohammad Badat, 51861 2015-21162 Tennessee Tennessee Valley Authority NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51864-51865 2015-20847 2015-20850 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Foreign Assets Control Office

See

Internal Revenue Service

NOTICES Delegations of Authority, 51875-51876 2015-21124
Western Western Area Power Administration NOTICES Records of Decisions: Great Plains Wind Energy Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, 51800-51802 2015-21131 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 51878-51934 2015-20472 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.

80 165 Wednesday, August 26, 2015 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. FAA-2015-3463; Special Conditions No. 25-590-SC] Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Model BD-100-1A10 Airplane; Installed Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final special conditions; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc. Model BD-100-1A10 airplane. This airplane, as modified by S4A, Solutions for Aviation, S.L., will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. This design feature is the installation of an Aspire 200 satellite communications (satcom) system with wireless handsets that use rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems. Rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems have certain failure, operational, and maintenance characteristics that differ significantly from those of the nickel-cadmium and lead-acid rechargeable batteries currently approved for installation on transport category airplanes. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for these design features. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES:

This action is effective on Bombardier Inc. on August 26, 2015. We must receive your comments by September 25, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-3463 using any of the following methods:

Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.

Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.

Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.

Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nazih Khaouly, FAA, Airplane and Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington, 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2432; facsimile 425-227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The FAA has determined that notice of, and opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay issuance of the design approval and thus delivery of the affected airplanes. In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been subject to the public comment process in several prior instances with no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.

We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive.

Background

On June 18, 2014, S4A, Solutions for Aviation, S.L. applied for a supplemental type certificate to install an Aspire 200 satcom system with wireless handsets in the Bombardier Model BD-100-1A10 airplane (known as the “Challenger 300”). The BD-100-1A10 airplane is a corporate jet with an eight-passenger and two-crew capacity. It is equipped with two, rear-mounted Honeywell HTF7000 turbofan engines and has a maximum takeoff weight of 38,850 lb/17,622 kg.

Type Certification Basis

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.101, S4A, Solutions for Aviation, S.L. must show that the BD-100-1A10 airplane, as changed, continues to meet the regulations listed in T00005NY or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change except for earlier amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.

If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the BD-100-1A10 airplane because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16.

Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model included on the same type certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101.

In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the BD-100-1A10 airplane must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.

The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance with § 11.38, and they become part of the type-certification basis under § 21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

The BD-100-1A10 airplane will incorporate the following novel or unusual design feature: The installation of an Aspire 200 satcom system with wireless handsets that will use rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems. Rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems that have certain failure, operational, and maintenance characteristics that differ significantly from those of the nickel-cadmium and lead-acid rechargeable batteries currently approved for installation on large, transport category airplanes.

The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

Discussion

The current regulations governing installation of batteries in large, transport category airplanes were derived from Civil Air Regulations (CAR) part 4b.625(d) as part of the recodification of CAR 4b that established part 25 in February 1965. The recodified battery requirements, § 25.1353(c)(1) through (c)(4), basically reworded the CAR requirements.

Increased use of nickel-cadmium batteries in small airplanes resulted in increased incidents of battery fires and failures that led to additional rulemaking affecting large, transport category airplanes as well as small airplanes. On September 1, 1977, and March 1, 1978, with Amendments 25-41 and 25-42 respectively, the FAA added paragraphs (c)(5) and (c)(6) to § 25.1353 governing nickel-cadmium battery installations on large, transport category airplanes. On December 10, 2007, Amendment 25-123 moved the contents of paragraph (b) in § 25.1353 to the new subpart H, resulting in the relocation of the regulations governing the installation of batteries in § 25.1353 from paragraph (c) to paragraph (b).

The use of rechargeable lithium batteries for equipment and systems prompted the FAA to review the adequacy of these existing regulations. Our review indicated that the existing regulations do not adequately address several failure, operational, and maintenance characteristics of rechargeable lithium batteries that could affect the safety and reliability of the Bombardier BD-100-1A10 lithium battery installations.

At present, there is limited experience with the use of lithium batteries in applications involving commercial aviation. However, other users of this technology, ranging from wireless telephone manufacturers to the electric vehicle industry, have noted safety problems with lithium batteries. These problems include overcharging, over-discharging, and flammability of cell components.

1. Overcharging

In general, lithium batteries are significantly more susceptible to internal failures that can result in self-sustaining increases in temperature and pressure (i.e., thermal runaway) than their nickel-cadmium or lead-acid counterparts. This condition is especially true for overcharging, which causes heating and destabilization of the components of the cell, leading to the formation (by plating) of highly unstable metallic lithium. The metallic lithium can ignite, resulting in a self-sustaining fire or explosion. Finally, the severity of thermal runaway due to overcharging increases with increasing battery capacity due to the higher amount of electrolyte in large batteries.

2. Over-Discharging

Discharge of some types of lithium battery cells beyond a certain voltage (typically 2.4 volts), can cause corrosion of the electrodes of the cell, resulting in loss of battery capacity that cannot be reversed by recharging. This loss of capacity may not be detected by the simple voltage measurements commonly available to flightcrews as a means of checking battery status—a problem shared with nickel-cadmium batteries.

3. Flammability of Cell Components

Unlike nickel-cadmium and lead-acid batteries, some types of lithium batteries use liquid electrolytes that are flammable. The electrolyte can serve as a source of fuel for an external fire, if there is a breach of the battery container.

These problems experienced by users of lithium batteries raise concern about the use of these batteries in commercial aviation. The intent of these special conditions is to establish appropriate airworthiness standards for lithium battery installations in the BD-100-1A10 airplane and to ensure, as required by §§ 25.601, that these battery installations are not hazardous or unreliable.

Applicability

As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the Model No. BD-100-1A10 airplane. Should S4A, Solutions for Aviation, S.L. apply at a later date for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model included on Type Certificate No. T00005NY to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on one airplane model. It is not a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these features on the airplane.

The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. Therefore, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Bombardier BD-100-1A10 airplane modified by S4A, Solutions for Aviation, S.L.

In lieu of the requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.1353(c)(1) through (c)(4) at Amendment 25-101 for rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems, all installations must be designed and installed as follows:

1. Safe cell temperatures and pressures must be maintained during any foreseeable charging or discharging condition and during any failure of the charging or battery monitoring system not shown to be extremely remote. The rechargeable lithium battery installation must preclude explosion in the event of those failures.

2. Design of the rechargeable lithium batteries must preclude the occurrence of self-sustaining, uncontrolled increases in temperature or pressure.

3. No explosive or toxic gases emitted by any rechargeable lithium battery in normal operation, or as the result of any failure of the battery charging system, monitoring system, or battery installation which is not shown to be extremely remote, may accumulate in hazardous quantities within the airplane.

4. Installations of rechargeable lithium batteries must meet the requirements of § 25.863(a) through (d).

5. No corrosive fluids or gases that may escape from any rechargeable lithium battery may damage surrounding structure or any adjacent systems, equipment, or electrical wiring of the airplane in such a way as to cause a major or more severe failure condition, in accordance with § 25.1309(b) and applicable regulatory guidance.

6. Each rechargeable lithium battery installation must have provisions to prevent any hazardous effect on structure or essential systems caused by the maximum amount of heat the battery can generate during a short circuit of the battery or of its individual cells.

7. Lithium battery installations must have a system to control the charging rate of the battery automatically, so as to prevent battery overheating or overcharging, and,

a. A battery temperature sensing and over-temperature warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of an over-temperature condition, or,

b. A battery failure sensing and warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of battery failure.

8. Any rechargeable lithium battery installation, the function of which is required for safe operation of the airplane, must incorporate a monitoring and warning feature that will provide an indication to the appropriate flight crewmembers whenever the state-of-charge of the batteries has fallen below levels considered acceptable for dispatch of the airplane.

9. The instructions for continued airworthiness required by § 25.1529 must contain maintenance requirements to assure that the battery is sufficiently charged at appropriate intervals specified by the battery manufacturer and the equipment manufacturer that contain the rechargeable lithium battery or rechargeable lithium battery system. This is required to ensure that lithium rechargeable batteries and lithium rechargeable battery systems will not degrade below specified ampere-hour levels sufficient to power the aircraft system, for intended applications. The instructions for continued airworthiness must also contain procedures for the maintenance of batteries in spares storage to prevent the replacement of batteries with batteries that have experienced degraded charge retention ability or other damage due to prolonged storage at a low state of charge. Replacement batteries must be of the same manufacturer and part number as approved by the FAA. Precautions should be included in the instructions for continued airworthiness maintenance instructions to prevent mishandling of the rechargeable lithium battery and rechargeable lithium battery systems which could result in short-circuit or other unintentional impact damage caused by dropping or other destructive means that could result in personal injury or property damage.

Note 1:

The term “sufficiently charged” means that the battery will retain enough of a charge, expressed in ampere-hours, to ensure that the battery cells will not be damaged. A battery cell may be damaged by lowering the charge below a point where there is a reduction in the ability to charge and retain a full charge. This reduction would be greater than the reduction that may result from normal operational degradation.

Note 2:

These special conditions are not intended to replace § 25.1353(c) at Amendment 25-101 in the certification basis of the BD-100-1A10 airplane. These special conditions apply only to rechargeable lithium batteries and lithium battery systems and their installations. The requirements of § 25.1353(c) at Amendment 25-101 remain in effect for batteries and battery installations on the BD-100-1A10 airplane that do not use lithium batteries.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 7, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-21118 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security 15 CFR Parts 730, 732, 738, 743, 748, 752, 762, 772, and 774 [Docket No. 140613501-5698-02] RIN 0694-AG13 Export Administration Regulations: Removal of Special Comprehensive License Provisions AGENCY:

Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

In this final rule, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by removing the Special Comprehensive License (SCL) authorization. Based on changes to the EAR as part of Export Control Reform, BIS concludes that the SCL has outlived its usefulness to the exporting public since recent changes to the EAR permit exporters to accomplish similar results using individual licenses and without undertaking the more onerous SCL application. This rule also makes conforming amendments. These changes are part of BIS's efforts to further update export controls under the EAR consistent with the Retrospective Regulatory Review Initiative that directs BIS and other federal agencies to streamline regulations and reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on the public.

DATES:

This is effective September 25, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Andrukonis, Director, Export Management and Compliance Division, Office of Exporter Services, Bureau of Industry and Security, by telephone at (202) 482-6396 or by email at [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

BIS issues this final rule to remove the Special Comprehensive License (SCL) provisions from the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), consistent with the Retrospective Regulatory Review Initiative and Export Control Reform. In the preamble to a rule published in the Federal Register on September 30, 2014 (79 FR 58704) (hereinafter “the September 30 proposed rule” or “the September 30 rule”), BIS reviewed the origins and historical nature of the SCL, and described the specific sections of the EAR that BIS proposed to amend. Based on changes to the EAR as part of Export Control Reform, BIS concluded that the SCL has outlived its usefulness to the exporting public since recent changes to the EAR permit exporters to accomplish similar results using individual licenses and without undertaking the more onerous SCL application.

This rule finalizes the revisions to the EAR as described in the September 30 proposed rule except for a modification discussed in the Transition Guidance section of the preamble. In that guidance, BIS proposed that all SCLs would expire one year from the date of publication of a final rule that removes SCL provisions from the EAR or on the expiration date of the SCL under the particular terms of the license, whichever would come earlier. As a practical matter to facilitate administrative ease for SCL holders who already have begun to transition to licenses other than the SCL and for SCL holders who have yet to begin that transition for their transactions under the EAR, BIS provides instead in this final rule that all SCLs still in effect at this publication will expire one year from the effective date of this rule, which will be September 26, 2016. Further, during this transition period, BIS will not accept new SCL applications or amendments, including renewals, to outstanding SCLs. As stated in the proposed rule, with the publication of this final rule, SCL holders may choose to apply for four-year individual licenses for exporting and reexporting items under the EAR or use available license exceptions. Finally, as stated in the proposed rule, as with all transactions subject to the EAR, the applicable recordkeeping requirements under 15 CFR part 762 will continue to apply to SCL transactions until the applicable retention periods are fulfilled.

Public Comments on the September 30 Proposed Rule To Remove the SCL and BIS Responses

BIS received three comments from three SCL holders who are private companies in the fields of geophysical and seismic technology on the September 30 proposed rule. A summary of the comments and BIS responses are below. Where possible, similar comments on the proposed rule have been consolidated.

Advantages of the SCL Compared to Individual Licenses

Comment 1: One commenter acknowledged that while the current individual validated license, (individual license) offers advantages previously only available with the SCL, the SCL offers additional advantages that to a great extent do not exist with an individual license. The commenter explained that the SCL allows the company, given the company's volume of business, to operate effectively with minimal interruptions and to ensure compliance for the following reasons: The SCL is a single license requiring a single license application, which is easier to track than a large number of individual licenses with varying expiration dates; and the SCL has a four-year validity period, while individual licenses may be, but are not automatically, granted for up to four years, making planning for medium- and long-term operations onerous. The commenter also noted that unlike individual licenses for which amendments require a replacement license, the SCL item or end user may be amended without submitting an entirely new license application.

Response 1: BIS acknowledges, as a practical matter, that there is a likelihood exporters might need more than one individual license or need to replace an existing license more than once within a four-year validity period to complete transactions under the EAR. However, BIS licensing information indicates that SCL holders also have needed to amend their SCLs a number of times within the SCL four-year validity period. It also indicates that the initial SCL application and review process historically required that applicants submit more documents and wait for decisions on those applications for a longer period than that for an individual license. Currently, applying for an amendment to either a SCL or a replacement for an individual license requires that exporters submit in a less cumbersome manner such information electronically through SNAP-R. Further, not all changes to individual licenses require that they be replaced. As detailed in Section 750.7 of the EAR, non-material changes to a license may be made without the issuance of a replacement license. In addition, the four-year validity period for an individual license is not as tentative or unpredictable as the commenter suggests, given the updated provisions in Section 750.7(g) of the EAR. Finally, with regard to the ease of tracking SCLs versus individual licenses, exporters are responsible for keeping track of all authorizations allowed or granted to the exporter under the EAR. While BIS continually seeks to decrease any unreasonable burden exporters may have in complying with the EAR, BIS suggests that exporters develop a degree of familiarity or predictability regarding their business practices that allows them to review and predict what resources and activities will be needed to complete their regulatory obligations for export and reexport.

Comment 2: A commenter stated that an advantage of the SCL is that it contains a single set of conditions while the conditions for individual license vary. The commenter further stated that the varying conditions on individual licenses make compliance difficult if not impossible. However, another commenter stated that SCL conditions and individual license conditions for the commenter's individual licenses are the same, as agreed to by BIS and the State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC).

Response 2: BIS agrees with the second commenter on this issue. Conditions attached to a particular license, whether on an individual license or SCL, remain the same for the duration of the validity period. Should an exporter submit a replacement license, the related changes could reasonably impact the nature and scope of the conditions on that license. Even if there are variations between conditions on different individual licenses, these variations may be justified in light of the different fact sets for each license application.

Comment 3: A commenter stated that the SCL is more flexible and better fits a company that needs quick turnaround to compete in the international marketplace, such as the market for subsea remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) to support oil and gas exploration. The commenter added, as an example of flexibility, that the United Kingdom offers two week processing on flexible individual licenses, which impose significantly less restrictive conditions as compared to the individual licenses issued by the United States. The commenter further stated that the SCL is critical to enabling the company to compete effectively with foreign competitors while continuing to manufacture controlled ROVs in the United States. Without the SCL, according to the commenter, the commenter's competitiveness with foreign ROV manufacturers, who function under less restrictive export control regimes and with the benefit of flexible licensing, would be negatively impacted.

Response 3: BIS notes that the current features of the EAR's SCL can be replicated in an individual license. More importantly, as noted in Response to Comment 1, the review period for an individual license is less cumbersome and time consuming than for a SCL application, barring any missing information or significant interagency concerns about the proposed transaction. Finally, the SCL holders are companies with well-established license history under the EAR. These companies have conducted business in their industries long enough to reasonably forecast licensing needs, including needs for authorizations for potential additional export or reexport opportunities, and submit requests to BIS accordingly. Thus, the individual licensing process described by the commenter should not negatively impact the commenter's export and reexport interests under the EAR.

Comment 4: A commenter stated that the SCL advances U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. The commenter further stated that it was not surprising that the September 30 proposed rule did not suggest that eliminating the SCL furthers U.S. national security or foreign policy interests because the existence of the SCL provides an impetus for companies to develop and implement comprehensive Internal Control Programs (ICPs), which are subject to audits by BIS. The commenter also stated that the commenter's compliance with the EAR is reinforced due to the stringent requirements for obtaining and relying on a SCL.

Response 4: BIS finds merit in the commenter's point that the SCL has contributed to advancing U.S. national security and foreign policy interests and provided an impetus for companies to invest in comprehensive ICPs. Further, the commenter's point gives BIS an opportunity to note that the elements of a SCL ICP are strong, practical factors that will contribute to the success of transactions using individual licenses authorized under the EAR. These factors reflect that SCL holders are sophisticated businesses that manage well their export licensing obligations, as noted in the Response to Comment 1.

Comment 5: One commenter stated that SCL administrative and compliance benefits greatly outweigh the SCL administrative burden, unlike individual licenses. The commenter added that individual licenses are tedious, time consuming and repetitious, and hamper companies' abilities to respond to short-term bid opportunities.

Response 5: As mentioned in the Response to Comment 3, barring an insufficient individual license application or significant concerns raised during interagency review, objectively the individual license application process is less cumbersome and time consuming than the SCL application process. BIS appreciates that the commenter does not mind the administrative burden associated with the SCL. However, the point of Export Control Reform and the President's Retrospective Regulatory Review is for agencies to adopt regulatory changes that will remove redundancies and offer more streamlined and practical requirements and processes benefiting the greatest number of constituents while facilitating the agencies' missions. An individual license should be able to accommodate in a timely manner the commenter's efforts to pursue short-term bid opportunities, especially given the company's established licensing history under the EAR. Lastly, whether changes in transactions require companies to submit an application to amend a SCL or to replace an individual license (in case the change does not qualify as a non-material change), the thoroughness and accuracy of the application and the complexity of the basis for and type of change requested will impact how quickly BIS can process a license application, whether a SCL amendment or replacement license.

Alternative Authorizations Under the EAR (i.e., License Exceptions, Validated End User (VEU) Authorization, etc.)

Comment 6: One commenter stated that none of the changes to the EAR described in the preamble of the September 30 proposed rule would make up for that commenter's loss of the SCL. In particular, the commenter stated that the existing license exceptions do not offer a viable alternative for the commenter's operations because the majority of the commenter's commodities fall under Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 6A001.a.2 and the only license exception allowed would be License Exception Temporary imports, exports, reexports, and transfers (in-country) (TMP), which does not meet the commenter's business needs . A second commenter also stated that restrictions on available license exceptions significantly limit the benefit of the exceptions. For example, License Exceptions, such as Shipments to Country Group B countries (GBS), cover only a fraction of controlled spare parts for ROVs; and License Exception Servicing and replacement of parts and equipment (RPL) only authorizes a one-for-one replacement of parts. The second commenter also stated that License Exception Strategic Trade Authorization (STA) does not solve the commenter's authorization needs because the countries in which the commenter's ROVs are currently used are not in Country Group A:5 and ROVs under ECCN 8A001 are not eligible for export to STA Country Group A:6. Lastly, the commenter stated that TMP does not solve the commenter's needs because installation and use of ROVs abroad may go on for years and applying for individual licenses to keep the ROVs abroad is a cumbersome process.

Response 6: BIS understands that the scenario described by the commenter relative to potential assistance provided by license exceptions will not apply to every situation or exporter, but will assist some exporters in certain situations.

Comment 7: A commenter stated that the VEU Authorization would not be a viable alternative to the SCL because of the limited number of countries approved under the authorization.

Response 7: BIS acknowledges that currently there are few approved validated end users and countries. However, the use of VEU Authorization for the existing approved end users and the respective approved countries and items provides easier and accountable access for U.S. companies and other companies. Therefore, the authorization remains an option, which may be helpful for some exporters or reexporters, including SCL holders.

Improvements in Individual Licenses

Comment 8: One commenter stated that the process or procedures for obtaining individual licenses under the EAR has not grown noticeably simpler or more expeditious than when the commenter received its SCL. The commenter further stated that SNAP-R is not new to the commenter, and that application processing times also have not grown appreciably shorter, noting that BIS reported that the average processing time to review a license application was 29 days in FY 2010 and 26 days in FY 2013.

Response 8: The system for submitting and processing license applications has substantially improved over the decades. Although the improvements that BIS has implemented do not perfectly accommodate every licensable EAR transaction, they have resulted in a more streamlined and comparably versatile licensing process when compared to the protracted initial SCL application. BIS reminds exporters that the updates for individual license applications include four-year, or longer—per Section 750.7(g)—validity period, and allowing the listing of a greater number of end-users, among other enhancements. Lastly, the September 30 proposed rule described developments and improvements under the EAR that directly respond to the President's Retrospective Regulatory Review Initiative.

Projected Impact of Removal of the SCL

Comment 9: Raising a point similar to that in Comment 1, a commenter stated that the removal of the SCL will increase the number of individual licenses that must be managed, and that unlike the SCL, exporters will be unable to amend export and reexport licenses. The commenter noted that the commenter amends its SCL twice a year. The commenter further stated that an increase in individual licenses will require additional internal resources, and increased chances of freight forwarder errors.

Response 9: BIS acknowledges, as a practical matter, there is a likelihood exporters might need more than one individual license or need to replace an existing license more than once within a four-year validity period to complete transactions under the EAR. However, BIS licensing information indicates that SCL holders typically have applied for additional licenses under the EAR to fully accommodate the SCL holders'export and reexport needs under the EAR. Please see Response to Comment 1. Regarding the commenter's assertion that exporters will be unable to amend export and reexport licenses, BIS expects that changes to individual licenses will be handled in a similar fashion as amendments to SCL amendments.

Other

Comment 10: A commenter suggested that to offset the removal of the SCL, BIS should entertain the possibility of issuing export and reexport licenses to include all countries except those sanctioned or embargoed. The commenter believed that this approach would help mitigate the risk of losing new business opportunities.

Response 10: BIS will consider the commenter's recommendation consistent with pertinent authorities and U.S. and allied policy objectives.

Comment 11: A commenter asserted that the two 2012 comments from industry cited in the September 30 proposed rule that expressed reservations about the benefits of the SCL do not extend to other U.S. companies, including the commenter's company. The commenter went on to say that other companies should determine if the benefits of a SCL do not outweigh the burdens on an individual basis.

Response 11: BIS did not intend to imply that the SCL has not provided significant benefits to other U.S. companies. BIS included the comments in question in the September 30 proposed rule because their nature and quality were relevant to the priorities of the President's Retrospective Regulatory Initiative. In keeping with that Initiative, BIS published the September 30 proposed rule to determine if there were better ways to serve the broad spectrum of constituents under the jurisdiction of the EAR. That said, as already indicated, BIS believes all current features of the SCL can be replicated in an individual license, and thus the usefulness and effectiveness of export authorizations under the EAR should not be impacted negatively by removal of the SCL.

Description of Changes From the Proposed Rule

This rule publishes in final form the proposed amendments to the SCL as described initially in the September 30 rule, except for one change to the proposed expiration date of the SCL and two proposed amendments that were overtaken by a recent rulemaking.

Change to Expiration Date of the SCL

In the proposed rule, BIS proposed that all SCLs would expire one year from the date of publication of a final rule or the expiration date of the SCL under the particular terms of the license, whichever would come earlier. BIS provides instead in this final rule that all SCLs still in effect at this publication will expire one year from the effective date of this rule, which will be September 26, 2016.

The Intervening Changes

In the September 30 rule, BIS proposed to remove a reference to an exception to required filing of support documents for a SCL by removing and reserving paragraph (a)(6) of Section 748.9 (formerly Support documents for license applications). A final rule, Revisions to Support Document Requirements for License Applications under the Export Administration Regulations, published in the Federal Register March 13, 2015 (80 FR 13210) (hereinafter “the March 13 final rule”), revised Section 748.9 (currently Support documents for evaluation of foreign parties in license applications) and in doing so moved the reference to the SCL support documents exception to paragraph (c)(1)(vi) of the section. In this final rule, BIS removes and reserves paragraph (c)(1)(vi) of Section 748.9, which updates the amendment to Section 748.9(a)(6) proposed in the September 30 rule.

In addition, BIS proposed to remove the reference to the SCL in existing paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of Section 748.12 (formerly Special provisions for support documents). This paragraph provided that exporters had a grace period of 45 days to comply with support documents requirements for a license application if an item had been removed from SCL eligibility. The March 13 final rule revised that provision by removing references to the SCL in the provision and moving the remainder of the provision to Section 748.9(h) of the EAR. The revision in the March 13 final rule eliminates the need to retain the amendment to Section 748.12 (currently Firearms Convention (FC) Import Certificate) (a)(1)(iii) proposed in the September 30 rule. That update will be reflected in the regulatory text of this final rule.

Export Administration Act

Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001, the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015), has continued the Export Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order 13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. This rule has been determined to be a not significant regulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

2. This rule amends collections previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Control Numbers 0694-0088, “Simplified Network Application Processing + System (SNAP+) and the Multi-Purpose Application,” which carries a burden hour estimate of 43.8 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748; 0694-0089, “Special Comprehensive License,” which carries a burden hour estimate of 40 hours to complete an application, 30 minutes to complete annual extension requests, 4 hours to complete amendments, and six hours to perform recordkeeping and internal control program annual certifications; and 0694-0152, “Automated Export System (AES) Program,” which carries a burden hour estimate of three minutes or 0.05 hours per electronic submission.

The total burden hours associated with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) and the aforementioned OMB Control Numbers would be expected to decrease as a result of this removal of part 752 of the EAR and related provisions in this rule issued in final form, thereby reducing burden hours associated with approved collections related to the EAR.

Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.

4. The Chief Counsel for Regulation at the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy at the Small Business Administration that this rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis was published in the proposed rule and is not repeated here. BIS received no comments that addressed the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Therefore, a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and one was not prepared.

List of Subjects 15 CFR Part 730

Administrative practice and procedure, Advisory committees, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Strategic and critical materials.

15 CFR Parts 732, 748, and 752

Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Parts 738 and 772

Exports.

15 CFR Part 743

Administrative practice and procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 762

Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry, Confidential business information, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 774

Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, under the authority of 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., parts 730, 732, 738, 743, 748, 752, 762, 772 and 774 of the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730-774) are amended as follows:

PART 730—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 730 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c; 22 U.S.C. 2151 note; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42 U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C. 1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 11912, 41 FR 15825, 3 CFR, 1976 Comp., p. 114; E.O. 12002, 42 FR 35623, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 133; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12214, 45 FR 29783, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 256; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12854, 58 FR 36587, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12918, 59 FR 28205, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 899; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 12981, 60 FR 62981, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 419; E.O. 13020, 61 FR 54079, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 219; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; E.O. 13338, 69 FR 26751, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp., p 168; E.O. 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013); Notice of September 17, 2014, 79 FR 56475 (September 19, 2014); Notice of November 7, 2014, 79 FR 67035 (November 12, 2014); Notice of January 21, 2015, 80 FR 3461 (January 22, 2015); Notice of May 6, 2015, 80 FR 26815 (May 8, 2015); Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 730.8 [Amended]
2. Section 730.8 is amended by removing the next to last sentence in paragraph (a)(5).
Supplement No. 1 to Part 730 [Amended] 3. Supplement No. 1 to Part 730 is amended by: a. Revising the entries for Collection number “0694-0088” and Collection number “0694-0152”; and; b. Removing the entry for Collection number “0694-0089”.

The revisions read as follow:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 730—Information Collection Requirements Under the Paperwork Reduction Act: OMB Control Numbers Collection No. Title Reference in the EAR *         *         *         *         *         *         * 0694-0088 Simplified Network Application Processing+ System (SNAP+) and the Multipurpose Export License Application Parts 746 and 748, and § 762.2(b). *         *         *         *         *         *         * 0607-0152 Automated Export System (AES) Program §§ 740.1(d), 740.3(a)(3), 754.2(h), 754.4(c), 758.1, 758.2, and 758.3 of the EAR.
PART 732—[AMENDED] 4. The authority citation for part 732 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

5. Section 732.5 is amended by revising the next to last sentence of paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 732.5 Steps regarding Electronic Export Information (EEI) requirements, Destination Control Statements, and recordkeeping.

(b) * * * DCS requirements do not apply to reexports * * *

§ 732.6 [Amended]
6. Section 732.6 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (d).
PART 738—[AMENDED] 7. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 738 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42 U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C. 1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 738.4 [Amended]
8. Section 738.4 is amended by removing the phrase “or Special Comprehensive License” at the end of the sixth sentence in paragraph (b)(3).
PART 743—[AMENDED] 9. The authority citation for part 743 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013); 78 FR 16129; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 743.1 [Amended]
10. Section 743.1 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b)(2).
§ 743.4 [Amended]
11. Section 743.4 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b)(2).
PART 748—[AMENDED] 12. The authority citation for part 748 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 748.1 [Amended]
13. Section 748.1 is amended by removing the phrase “Special Comprehensive License or” from the first parenthetical in the first sentence in paragraph (d), introductory text.
§ 748.4 [Amended]
14. Section 748.4 is amended by removing the next to last sentence in paragraph (h).
§ 748.7 [Amended]
15. Section 748.7 is amended by removing the phrase “Special Comprehensive Licenses and” from the parenthetical in the second sentence in paragraph (a) and from the parenthetical in the first sentence in paragraph (d).
§ 748.9 [Amended]
16. Section 748.9 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (c)(1)(vi).
Supplement No. 1 to Part 748 [Amended] 17. Supplement No. 1 to Part 748 is amended by: a. Removing the next to last sentence and the caption, “Special Comprehensive License” that precedes it in paragraph “Block 5:” and b. Removing and reserving paragraph “Block 8”. PART 752—[REMOVED AND RESERVED] 18. Remove and reserve part 752. PART 762—[AMENDED] 19. The authority citation for part 762 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 762.2 [Amended]
20. Section 762.2 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (b)(31) through (38).
PART 772—[AMENDED] 21. The authority citation for part 772 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

§ 772.1 [Amended]
22. Section 772.1 is amended by removing the definition “Controlled in fact.”
PART 774—[AMENDED] 23. The authority citation for part 774 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c, 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42 U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C. 1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 7, 2015, 80 FR 48233 (August 11, 2015).

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774 [Amended] 24. Supplement No. 1 to part 774 (the Commerce Control List) is amended by removing the phrase “Special Comprehensive Licenses,” wherever it is found. Dated: August 17, 2015. Kevin J. Wolf, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-20980 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0805; EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0969; FRL-9932-97-Region 5] Illinois; Disapproval of State Board Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 and 2008 Ozone NAAQS AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is disapproving an element of State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from Illinois regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality management program are adequate to meet the requirements of the CAA. This action pertains specifically to infrastructure requirements concerning state board requirements.

DATES:

This final rule is effective on September 25, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0805 (2006 PM2.5 infrastructure elements) and EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0969 (2008 ozone infrastructure elements). All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886-9401 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-9401, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background of these SIP submissions? II. What is our response to comments received on the proposed rulemaking? III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background of these SIP submissions?

This rulemaking addresses August 9, 2011, and December 31, 2012, submissions from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA) intended to address all applicable infrastructure requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 and 2008 ozone NAAQS.

The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions “within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),” and these SIP submissions are to provide for the “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that “[e]ach such plan” submission must address.

This specific rulemaking only takes action on the CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirement of these submittals. The majority of the other infrastructure elements were approved October 29, 2012 (77 FR 65478) and October 16, 2014 (79 FR 62042).

II. What is our response to comments received on the proposed rulemaking?

The proposed rulemaking associated with this final action was published on June 12, 2015 (80 FR 33458), and EPA received no comments during the comment period, which ended on July 13, 2015.

III. What action is EPA taking?

EPA is disapproving as proposed a portion of submissions from Illinois certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the required infrastructure element under CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2006 PM2.5 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. This final disapproval triggers the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than two years from the effective date of the disapproval unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the Administrator promulgates such FIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and, therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This action merely disapproves state law as not meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Because this rule disapproves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely disapproves a state rule, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it disapproves a state rule.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

Because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 or a “significant energy action,” this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States.

EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve or disapprove state choices, based on the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely disapproves certain state requirements for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA and will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements. Accordingly, it does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898.

Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 26, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter.

Dated: August 14, 2015. Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator, Region 5.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

2. Section 52.745 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (e) to read as follows:
§ 52.745 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

(c) Approval and Disapproval—In an August 9, 2011, submittal, and supplemented on August 25, 2011, and June 27, 2012, Illinois certified that the State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is approving Illinois' submission addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with respect to enforcement, (D)(i)(II) with respect to visibility protection, (D)(ii), (E) except for state board requirements, (F) through (H), (J) except for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), and (K) through (M). EPA is not taking action on (D)(i)(I). EPA is disapproving the state board requirements of (E)(ii). EPA is disapproving Illinois' submission addressing PSD in (C), (D)(i)(II), and the PSD portion of (J). Although EPA is disapproving portions of Illinois' submission addressing PSD, Illinois continues to implement the Federally promulgated rules for this purpose as they pertain to (C), (D)(i)(II), and the PSD portion of (J).

(e) Approval and Disapproval—In a December 31, 2012, submittal, Illinois certified that the State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS except for 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA is approving Illinois' submission addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with respect to enforcement, (D)(i)(II) with respect to visibility protection, (D)(ii), (E) except for state board requirements, (F) through (H), (J) except for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), and (K) through (M). EPA is disapproving the state board requirements of (E)(ii). EPA is disapproving Illinois' submission addressing PSD in (C), (D)(i)(II), and the PSD portion of (J). Although EPA is disapproving portions of Illinois' submission addressing PSD, Illinois continues to implement the Federally promulgated rules for this purpose as they pertain to (C), (D)(i)(II), and the PSD portion of (J).

[FR Doc. 2015-21010 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470; FRL-9929-61] Difenoconazole; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of difenoconazole in or on artichoke, globe; ginseng; fruit, stone, group 12-12; and nut, tree, group 14-12. This regulation additionally removes existing tolerances in or on fruit, stone, group 12; nut, tree, group 14; and pistachio. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES:

This regulation is effective August 26, 2015. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before October 26, 2015, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan Lewis, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

• Crop production (NAICS code 111).

• Animal production (NAICS code 112).

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before October 26, 2015. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470, 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 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.

II. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance

In the Federal Register of September 5, 2014 (79 FR 53009) (FRL-9914-98), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 4E8274) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide difenoconazole, 1-[2-[2-chloro-4-(4-chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-4-methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole, in or on ginseng at 0.50 parts per million (ppm); artichoke, globe at 1.5 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.03 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.

Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has revised the proposed tolerance in or on ginseng. The reason for this change is explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .”

Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for difenoconazole including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with difenoconazole follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.

Subchronic and chronic studies with difenoconazole in mice and rats showed decreased body weights, decreased body weight gains and effects on the liver (e.g. hepatocellular hypertrophy, liver necrosis, fatty changes in the liver). No systemic toxicity was observed at the limit dose in the most recently submitted rat dermal toxicity study.

The available toxicity studies indicated no increased susceptibility of rats or rabbits from in utero or postnatal exposure to difenoconazole. In prenatal developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and in the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, fetal and offspring toxicity, when observed, occurred at equivalent or higher doses than in the maternal and parental animals.

In a rat developmental toxicity study, developmental effects were observed at doses higher than those which caused maternal toxicity. Developmental effects in the rat included increased incidence of ossification of the thoracic vertebrae and thyroid, decreased number of sternal centers of ossification, increased number of ribs and thoracic vertebrae, and decreased number of lumbar vertebrae. In the rabbit study, developmental effects (increases in post-implantation loss and resorptions and decreases in fetal body weight) were also seen at maternally toxic doses (decreased body weight gain and food consumption). In the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, toxicity to the fetuses and offspring, when observed, occurred at equivalent or higher doses than in the maternal and parental animals.

In an acute neurotoxicity study in rats, reduced fore-limb grip strength was observed on day one in males at the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL), and clinical signs of neurotoxicity were observed in females only at the highest dose tested. In a subchronic neurotoxicity study in rats, decreased hind limb strength was observed in males only at the mid- and high-doses. The effects observed in acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies were considered transient. Although there is some evidence that difenoconazole affects antibody levels at doses that cause systemic toxicity, there are no indications in the available studies that organs associated with immune function, such as the thymus and spleen, are affected by difenoconazole.

EPA is using the nonlinear reference dose (RfD) approach to assess cancer risk. Difenoconazole is not mutagenic, and no evidence of carcinogenicity was seen in rats.

Evidence for carcinogenicity was seen in mice (liver tumors), but statistically significant carcinoma tumors were only induced at excessively-high doses. Adenomas (benign tumors) and liver necrosis only were seen at 300 ppm (46 and 58 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in males and females, respectively). Based on excessive toxicity observed at the two highest doses in the mouse carcinogenicity study, the presence of only benign tumors and necrosis at the mid-dose, the absence of tumors at the study's lower doses, and the absence of genotoxic effects, EPA has concluded that the chronic point of departure (POD) from the chronic mouse study will be protective of any cancer effects. The POD from this study is the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) of 30 ppm (4.7 and 5.6 mg/kg/day in males and females, respectively), which was chosen based upon only those biological endpoints which were relevant to tumor development (i.e., hepatocellular hypertrophy, liver necrosis, fatty changes in the liver and bile stasis). EPA has concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing cancer risk to difenoconazole and a separate quantitative cancer exposure assessment is unnecessary since the chronic dietary risk estimate will be protective of potential cancer risk.

Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by difenoconazole as well as the NOAEL and the LOAEL from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document, “Difenoconazole: Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed New Foliar Uses on Globe Artichoke, Ginseng and Greenhouse Grown Cucumbers and Conversion of the Established Foliar Uses/Tolerances for Stone Fruit Group 12 and Tree Nut Crop Group 14 to Stone Fruit Group 12-12 and Tree Nut Group 14-12.” at pp. 36-43 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA identifies toxicological POD and levels of concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified. Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe exposure level—generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or an RfD—and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.

A summary of the toxicological endpoints for difenoconazole used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule published in the Federal Register of April 2, 2015 (80 FR 17697) (FRL-9923-82).

C. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to difenoconazole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing difenoconazole tolerances in 40 CFR 180.475. EPA assessed dietary exposures from difenoconazole in food as follows:

i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.

Such effects were identified for difenoconazole. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) information.

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA used USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitoring data, average field trial residues for some commodities, tolerance level residues for the remaining commodities, average PCT for some commodities, and 100 PCT for the remaining commodities.

iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available, a threshold or nonlinear approach is used and a cancer RfD is calculated based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic mode of action data are not available, or if the mode of action data determines a mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope factor approach is utilized.

Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing cancer risk to difenoconazole. Therefore, a separate quantitative cancer exposure assessment is unnecessary since the chronic dietary risk estimate will be protective of potential cancer risk.

iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.

Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary risk only if:

• Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain the pesticide residue.

• Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group.

• Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not understate exposure for the population in such area.

In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit data on PCT.

For the chronic dietary exposure analysis, the Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows:

Almond, 5%; cabbage, 2.5%; cucumber, 5%; garlic, 5%; grape, 5%; grapefruit, 2.5%; onion, 5%; orange, 2.5%; peach, 1%; pecan, 2.5%; pepper, 2.5%; pistachio, 2.5%; pumpkin, 2.5%; squash, 5%; strawberry, 2.5%; sugar beet, 15%; tangerine, 2.5%; tomato, 25%; walnut, 2.5%; watermelon, 5%; and wheat, 10%.

In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.

The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which difenoconazole may be applied in a particular area.

2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The drinking water assessment was performed using a total toxic residue method, which considers both parent difenoconazole and its major metabolite, CGA 205375, in surface and groundwater. Therefore, the Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for difenoconazole and its major metabolite in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of difenoconazole and CGA 205375. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.

Based on Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC), Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW), and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW) models, the combined estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of difenoconazole and CGA 205375 are estimated to be 20.0 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 1.77 ppb for ground water. For chronic exposure assessments, EDWCs are estimated to be 13.6 ppb for surface water; EDWCs were not detected for ground water for chronic assessments.

Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 20.0 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 13.6 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).

Difenoconazole is currently registered for the following uses that could result in residential exposures: Treatment of ornamental plants in commercial and residential landscapes and interior plantscapes. EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: For residential handlers, adult short-term dermal and inhalation exposure is expected from mixing, loading, and applying difenoconazole on ornamentals (gardens and trees). For residential post-application exposures, short-term dermal exposure is expected for both adults and children from post-application activities in treated residential landscapes.

The scenarios used in the aggregate assessment were those that resulted in the highest exposures. The highest exposures consist of the short-term dermal exposure to adults from post-application activities in treated gardens and short-term dermal exposure to children 6 to 11 years old from post-application activities in treated gardens. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/residential-exposure-sop.html.

4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.”

Difenoconazole is a member of the triazole-containing class of pesticides. Although conazoles act similarly in plants (fungi) by inhibiting ergosterol biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a relationship between their pesticidal activity and their mechanism of toxicity in mammals. Structural similarities do not constitute a common mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish that the chemicals operate by the same, or essentially the same, sequence of major biochemical events (EPA, 2002). This document may be found at EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/trac/science/cumulativeguidance.pdf.

In conazoles, however, a variable pattern of toxicological responses is found; some are hepatotoxic and hepatocarcinogenic in mice. Some induce thyroid tumors in rats. Some induce developmental, reproductive, and neurological effects in rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles produce a diverse range of biochemical events including altered cholesterol levels, stress responses, and altered DNA methylation. It is not clearly understood whether these biochemical events are directly connected to their toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is currently no evidence to indicate that conazoles share common mechanisms of toxicity and EPA is not following a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity for the conazoles. For information regarding EPA's procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism of toxicity, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

Difenoconazole is a triazole-derived pesticide. This class of compounds can form the common metabolite 1,2,4-triazole and two triazole conjugates (triazolylalanine and triazolylacetic acid). To support existing tolerances and to establish new tolerances for triazole-derivative pesticides, including difenoconazole, EPA conducted a human health risk assessment for exposure to 1,2,4-triazole, triazolylalanine, and triazolylacetic acid resulting from the use of all current and pending uses of any triazole-derived fungicide. The risk assessment is a highly conservative, screening-level evaluation in terms of hazards associated with common metabolites (e.g., use of a maximum combination of uncertainty factors) and potential dietary and non-dietary exposures (i.e., high end estimates of both dietary and non-dietary exposures). In addition, the Agency retained the additional 10X Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF) for the protection of infants and children. The assessment includes evaluations of risks for various subgroups, including those comprised of infants and children.

The Agency's complete risk assessment may be found in the propiconazole reregistration docket at http://www.regulations.gov, docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0497. The Agency's latest complete risk assessment for the triazole-containing metabolites was finalized on April 9, 2015 and is entitled, “Common Triazole Metabolites: Updated Dietary (Food + Water) Exposure and Risk Assessment to Address The New Section 3 Registrations For Use of Propiconazole on Tea, Dill, Mustard Greens, Radish, and Watercress; Use of Difenoconazole on Globe Artichoke, Ginseng and Greenhouse Grown Cucumbers and Conversion of the Established Foliar Uses/Tolerances for Stone Fruit and Tree Nut Crop Groups to Fruit, Stone, Group 12-12 and the Nut, Tree, Group 14-12.; and Use of Flutriafol on Hops.” The assessment may be found in the propiconazole reregistration docket at http://www.regulations.gov, docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0470.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA SF. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.

2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal toxicology database for difenoconazole includes rat and rabbit prenatal developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity study in rats. The available Agency guideline studies indicated no increased qualitative or quantitative susceptibility of rats or rabbits to in utero and/or postnatal exposure to difenoconazole. In the prenatal developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, toxicity to the fetuses/offspring, when observed, occurred at equivalent or higher doses than in the maternal/parental animals. In a rat developmental toxicity study developmental effects were observed at doses higher than those which caused maternal toxicity. In the rabbit study, developmental effects (increases in post-implantation loss and resorptions and decreases in fetal body weight) were also seen at maternally toxic doses (decreased body weight gain and food consumption). In the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, toxicity to the fetuses/offspring, when observed, occurred at equivalent or higher doses than in the maternal/parental animals.

3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on the following findings:

i. The toxicity database for difenoconazole is complete.

ii. There are no clear signs of neurotoxicity following acute, subchronic, or chronic exposure in multiple species in the difenoconazole study database. The effects observed in acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are transient, and the dose-response is well characterized with identified NOAELs. Based on the toxicity profile, and lack of concern for neurotoxicity, there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.

iii. There is no evidence that difenoconazole results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction study.

iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary risk assessment utilized tolerance level residues and 100 PCT for the acute assessment; the chronic assessment was refined by using USDA PDP monitoring data, average field trial residues for some commodities, tolerance level residues for remaining commodities, and average PCT for some commodities. These assumptions will not underestimate dietary exposure to difenoconazole. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to difenoconazole in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by difenoconazole.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.

1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to difenoconazole will occupy 49% of the aPAD for all infants less than 1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to difenoconazole from food and water will utilize 89% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of difenoconazole is not expected.

3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Difenoconazole is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with short-term residential exposures to difenoconazole.

Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 170 for adults and 190 for children. Because EPA's level of concern for difenoconazole is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.

4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, difenoconazole is not registered for any use patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for difenoconazole.

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., the chronic dietary risk assessment is protective of any potential cancer effects. Based on the results of that assessment, EPA concludes that difenoconazole is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.

6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to difenoconazole residues.

IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

Adequate enforcement methodology, gas chromatography with nitrogen phosphorus detection (GC/NPD) method AG-575B, is available for the determination of residues of difenoconazole per se in or on plant commodities. Liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method REM 147.07b is available for the determination of residues of difenoconazole and CGA-205375 in livestock commodities. Adequate confirmatory methods are also available.

The methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

B. International Residue Limits

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.

The Codex has not established a MRL in or on artichoke, globe. Codex has established the following MRLs for difenoconazole: Ginseng at 0.08 ppm; dried and red ginseng at 0.2 ppm; ginseng extracts at 0.6 ppm; cherry and plum, including prune at 0.2 ppm; nectarine and peach at 0.5 ppm; and tree nut at 0.03 ppm. The MRL for tree nut at 0.03 ppm is the same as the tolerance being established for difenoconazole in the United States for nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.03 ppm. Based on the data reviewed in conjunction with this action, harmonization with Codex MRLs is not possible for ginseng and stone fruit commodities (including cherry, nectarine, peach, plum, and prune). The data supporting the EPA petition support the establishment of tolerance levels that are higher than the established Codex MRLs. The U.S. tolerances are being recommended by EPA are as follows: Ginseng at 1.0 ppm; and fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm.

C. Response to Comments

Several comments were received in response to the notice of filing. All but one were concerned with potential environmental impacts, and were not specifically related to the difenoconazole action. EPA notes that these comments address potential environmental concerns; however, the safety standard for approving tolerances under section 408 of the FFDCA focuses on potential harms to human health and does not permit consideration of effects on the environment.

One additional comment was received that did not specifically address the difenoconazole action, but that raised concerns about the toxicity of pesticides and requested that no tolerance be established. The Agency understands the commenter's concerns and recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops. However, the existing legal framework provided by Section 408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This citizen's comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework. EPA has found that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to humans after considering the toxicological studies and the exposure levels of humans to difenoconazole.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances

Based on the data supporting the petition, EPA determined that the proposed tolerance in or on ginseng at 0.50 ppm should be established at 1.0 ppm. Residues of difenoconazole appeared to increase significantly with a pre-harvest interval (PHI) longer than the proposed 0-day PHI. Average per-trial residues increased by a factor of as much as 2.3x between the 0- and 21-day PHIs and based on this finding, EPA determined that average per-trial residues of difenoconazole for trials reflecting a 0-day PHI should be adjusted by a factor of 2.3x to account for the maximum demonstrated increase in difenoconazole residues resulting from PHIs longer than the proposed 0-day PHI. Therefore, the adjusted residues were used in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) tolerance calculation procedures, resulting in the recommend tolerance in or on ginseng at 1.0 ppm.

V. Conclusion

Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of difenoconazole, 1-[2-[2-chloro-4-(4-chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-4-methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole, in or on artichoke, globe at 1.5 ppm; ginseng at 1.0 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.03 ppm. Additionally, this regulation removes the established tolerances for residues of difenoconazole in or on fruits, stone group 12 at 2.5 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.03 ppm; and pistachio at 0.03 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), do not apply.

This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: August 13, 2015. Susan Lewis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority:

21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

2. In § 180.475: a. Remove the entries “Fruits, stone, group 12”; “Nut, tree, group 14”; and “Pistachio” from the table in paragraph (a)(1). b. Add alphabetically the following commodities to the table in paragraph (a)(1).

The amendments read as follows:

§ 180.475 Difenoconazole; tolerances for residues.

(a)(1) * * *

Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *    *    *    *    * Artichoke, globe 1.5 *    *    *    *    * Fruit, stone, group 12-12 2.5 Ginseng 1.0 *    *    *    *    * Nut, tree, group 14-12 0.03 *    *    *    *    *
    [FR Doc. 2015-21078 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 202, 204, 212, 239, and 252 [Docket No. DARS-2015-0039] RIN 0750-AI61 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services (DFARS Case 2013-D018) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Interim rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 and a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, both of which require contractor reporting on network penetrations. Additionally, this rule implements DoD policy on the purchase of cloud computing services.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    Comment date: Comments on the interim rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before October 26, 2015 to be considered in the formation of a final rule.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2013-D018, using any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering “DFARS Case 2013-D018” under the heading “Enter keyword or ID” and selecting “Search.” Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “DFARS Case 2013-D018.” Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “DFARS Case 2013-D018” on your attached document.

    Email: [email protected] Include DFARS Case 2013-D018 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: 571-372-6094.

    Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Dustin Pitsch, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Dustin Pitsch, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, telephone 571-372-6090.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    This interim rule requires contractors and subcontractors to report cyber incidents that result in an actual or potentially adverse effect on a covered contractor information system or covered defense information residing therein, or on a contractor's ability to provide operationally critical support. DoD is working to establish a single reporting mechanism for DoD contractor reporting of cyber incidents on unclassified information systems. This rule is intended to streamline the reporting process for DoD contractors and minimize duplicative reporting processes. Cyber incidents involving classified information on classified contractor systems will continue to be reported in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (see DoD-M 5220.22 available at http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/522022m.pdf).

    The rule revises the DFARS to implement section 941 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 (Pub. L. 112-239) and section 1632 of the NDAA for FY 2015. Section 941 of the NDAA for FY 2013 requires cleared defense contractors to report penetrations of networks and information systems and allows DoD personnel access to equipment and information to assess the impact of reported penetrations. Section 1632 of the NDAA for FY 2015 requires that a contractor designated as operationally critical must report each time a cyber incident occurs on that contractor's network or information systems.

    In addition, this rule also implements DoD policies and procedures for use when contracting for cloud computing services. The DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) issued a memo on December 15, 2014, entitled “Updated Guidance on the Acquisition and Use of Commercial Cloud Computing Services” to clarify DoD guidance when acquiring commercial cloud services (See memo here: http://iase.disa.mil/cloud_security/Pages/docs.aspx). The DoD CIO also released a Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide (SRG) Version 1, Release 1 on January 13, 2015, for cloud service providers to comply with when providing the DoD with cloud services (See SRG here: http://iase.disa.mil/cloud_security/Pages/index.aspx). This rule implements these new policies developed within the DoD CIO memo and the SRG in the DFARS to ensure uniform application when contracting for cloud services across the DoD. The combination of the two statutes as well as the cloud computing policy will serve to increase the cyber security requirements placed on DoD information in contractor systems and will help the DoD to mitigate the risks related to compromised information as well as gather information for future improvements in cyber security policy.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    To implement section 941 of the NDAA for FY 2013 and section 1632 of the NDAA for FY 2015, an existing DFARS subpart and clause have been utilized and expanded upon, and a new provision and clause added. A new subpart, provision, and clause are added for the implementation of cloud contracting policies.

    (1) DFARS subpart 204.73 is modified to expand safeguarding and reporting policy to require protection of covered defense information, which includes controlled technical information, export controlled information, critical information, and other information requiring protection by law, regulation, or Government-wide policy.

    (2) The clause at 252.204-7012 is renamed “Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting” and the scope of the clause is expanded to cover the safeguarding of covered defense information and require contractors to report cyber incidents involving this new class of information as well as any cyber incident that may affect the ability to provide operationally critical support. The table of security controls based on National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53 is replaced by NIST SP 800-171, entitled “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations.” NIST SP 800-171 is a publication specifically tailored for use in protecting sensitive information residing in contractor information systems that refines the requirements from Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 200 and controls from NIST SP 800-53 and presents them in an easier to use format. In addition to being easier to use, NIST SP 800-171 greatly increases the protections of Government information in contractor information systems, while simultaneously reducing the burden placed on the contractor by eliminating Federal-centric processes and requirements currently embedded in NIST SP 800-53. For example, a task analysis comparing the requirements of NIST SP 800-171 to the current table of security controls (based on NIST SP 800-53) demonstrates a reduction in required tasks by 30 percent.

    (3) A new provision at 252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls, is added to ensure that offerors are aware of the requirements of clause 252.204-7012 and allow for a process to explain; (i) how alternative, but equally effective, security measures can compensate for the inability to satisfy a particular requirement; or (ii) why a particular requirement is not applicable.

    (4) A new clause at 252.204-7009, Limitations on the Use and Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information, is added to protect information submitted to DoD in response to a cyber incident.

    (5) DFARS subpart 239.76 is added to implement policy for the acquisition of cloud computing services.

    (6) A new provision at 252.239-7009, Representation of Use of Cloud Computing, is added to allow the offeror to represent their intention to utilize cloud computing services in performance of the contract or not.

    (7) A new clause at 252.239-7010, Cloud Computing Services, is added to provide standard contract language for the acquisition of cloud computing services; including access, security and reporting requirements.

    (8) The term “cyber incident,” is removed from the definitions section of subpart 204.73 and is now defined at 202.1. The terms “compromise” and “media” are also added to 202.1, because the terms are used in parts 204 and 239.

    (9) The new clauses and provisions added by this rule are added to the list of solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items at 212.301(f).

    This rule is part of DoD's retrospective plan, completed in August 2011, under Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.” DoD's full plan and updates can be accessed at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=DOD-2011-OS-0036.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    DoD expects that this interim rule may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared and is summarized as follows:

    This rule expands on the existing information safeguarding policies in the DFARS and requires contractors to report cyber incidents to the Government in a broader scope of circumstances.

    The objectives of this rule are to improve information security for DoD information stored on or transiting contractor systems as well as in a cloud environment. The rule implements section 941 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 (Pub. L. 112-239), section 1632 of the NDAA for FY 2015, and DoD CIO policy for the acquisition of cloud computing services. The benefits of the increased security requirements implemented through this rule are that more information will be protected from release, inadvertently or through malicious intent. Additional protection for DoD information will assist with a greater overall level of national security across the board.

    This rule will apply to all contractors with covered defense information transiting their information systems. DoD estimates that this rule may apply to 10,000 contractors and that less than half of those are small businesses.

    This rule requires that contractors report cyber incidents to the DoD. Of the required reporting fields several of them will likely require an information technology expert to provide information describing the cyber incident or at least to determine what information was affected, to be noted in the report.

    The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.

    No significant alternatives, that would minimize the economic impact of the rule on small entities, were identified.

    DoD invites comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small entities.

    DoD will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2013-D018), in correspondence.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule affects the information collection requirements in the provisions at DFARS 252.204-7012, currently approved under OMB Control Number 0704-0478, titled “Enhanced Safeguarding and Cyber Incident Reporting of Unclassified DoD Information Within Industry,” in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The rule revises the collection reporting requirements based on—

    • Changes to DFARS clause 252.204-7012, which is now titled “Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting”;

    • A new DFARS provision 252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls;

    • A new DFARS provision at 252.239-7009, Representation of Use of Cloud Computing; and

    • A new DFARS clause 252.239-7010, Cloud Computing Services.

    The revisions to the information collection requirements contained in this rule require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). OMB has provided emergency clearance for the revision of 0704-0478. This collection is being revised to reflect the expanded contractually mandated cyber incident reporting requirements as well as contracting for cloud services, which are covered by the DFARS clause and provision collection requirements as discussed in the beginning of this section.

    Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated to average approximately 4 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The annual reporting burden is estimated as follows:

    Respondents: 10,954.

    Responses per respondent: 5.5 approximately.

    Total annual responses: 60,494.

    Preparation hours per response: 4.15 hours approximately.

    Total response Burden Hours: 250,840.

    Request for Comments Regarding Paperwork Burden. Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the DFARS, and will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Written comments and recommendations including suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or email [email protected], with a copy to the Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Dustin Pitsch, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060, or email [email protected] Comments should be received not later than 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by the following method: Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. 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.

    There are two other OMB Control Numbers currently in place for information collection requirements associated with the overall cyber reporting program. They are discussed below and are not being changed as a result of this rule.

    OMB Control Number 0704-0489, Defense Industrial Base Voluntary Cyber Security/Information Assurance (DIB CS/IA) Cyber Incident Reporting, (regulations codified under Title 32 of the CFR) supports “voluntary” reporting and covers the online collection medium, a Defense Industrial Base/Information Assurance Incident Collection database, which is an online repository used for both voluntary reporting and reporting that is contractually mandated under the DFARS clauses and provisions.

    OMB Control Number 0704-0490, Defense Industrial Base Voluntary Cyber Security/Information Assurance (DIB CS/IA) Points of Contact (POC) Information, (regulations codified under Title 32 of the CFR) addresses the application process for participating companies. OMB Control Number 0704-0490 involves collection of personally identifiable information and is supported by a System of Records Notices for the cyber incident reporting program. The Privacy Act Statement of Records Notice (SORN) system identifier, DCIO 01, Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity Records, includes stipulations related to the release and disclosure of information collected. An update was published in the Federal Register on May 21, 2015, at 80 FR 29315 (see http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-05-21/pdf/2015-12324.pdf).

    VI. Determination To Issue an Interim Rule

    A determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary of Defense that urgent and compelling reasons exist to promulgate this interim rule without prior opportunity for public comment. This action is necessary because of the urgent need to protect covered defense information and gain awareness of the full scope of cyber incidents being committed against defense contractors. The proliferation of information technology and increased information access allowed by cloud computing environments has also increased the vulnerability of DoD information via attacks on its systems and networks and those of DoD contractors. The combination of the two statutes as well as implementation of the DoD cloud computing policy will serve to increase the cyber security requirements placed on DoD information on contractor systems and will help the DoD to mitigate the risks related to compromised information as well as gather information, through the reporting requirements, for future improvements in cyber security policy.

    This rule expands upon the existing coverage in the DFARS, which previously only covered the protection of and reporting of incidents affecting the controlled technical information, but not other incidents within the contractor system. This interim rule expands the protection and reporting to entire contractor systems (i.e., “covered contractor information system”) as well as a new type of information “covered defense information” which includes controlled technical information as a subset. This interim rule increases the number of circumstances where contractors must implement security controls as well as when they must report incidents.

    Recent high-profile breaches of Federal information show the need to ensure that information security protections are clearly, effectively, and consistently addressed in contracts. Failure to implement this rule may cause harm to the Government through the compromise of covered defense information or other Government data, or the loss of operationally critical support capabilities, which could directly impact national security. However, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707 and FAR 1.501-3(b), DoD will consider public comments received in response to this interim rule in the formation of the final rule.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 204, 212, 239, and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202, 204, 212, 239, and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 202, 204, 212, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 202—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS 2. Amend section 202.101 by adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions for “compromise,” “cyber incident,” and “media” to read as follows:
    202.101 Definitions.

    Compromise means disclosure of information to unauthorized persons, or a violation of the security policy of a system, in which unauthorized intentional or unintentional disclosure, modification, destruction, or loss of an object, or the copying of information to unauthorized media may have occurred.

    Cyber incident means actions taken through the use of computer networks that result in a compromise or an actual or potentially adverse effect on an information system and/or the information residing therein.

    Media, as used in parts 204 and 239, means physical devices or writing surfaces including, but not limited to, magnetic tapes, optical disks, magnetic disks, large-scale integration memory chips, and printouts onto which covered defense information is recorded, stored, or printed within a covered contractor information system.

    PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 3. Revise subpart 204.73 heading to read as follows: Subpart 204.73—Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting 4. Revise section 204.7300 to read as follows:
    204.7300 Scope.

    (a) This subpart applies to contracts and subcontracts requiring contractors and subcontractors to safeguard covered defense information that resides in or transits through covered contractor information systems by applying specified network security controls. It also requires reporting of cyber incidents.

    (b) This subpart does not abrogate any other requirements regarding contractor physical, personnel, information, technical, or general administrative security operations governing the protection of unclassified information, nor does it affect requirements of the National Industrial Security Program.

    5. Amend section 204.7301 by— a. Removing the definition of “cyber incident”; b. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions for “contractor attributional/proprietary information,” “covered contractor information system,” “covered defense information,” “information system,” “operationally critical support,” and “rapid(ly) report(ing)”; and c. Revising the definition for “controlled technical information”.

    The additions and revision read as follows:

    204.7301 Definitions.

    Contractor attributional/proprietary information means information that identifies the contractor(s), whether directly or indirectly, by the grouping of information that can be traced back to the contractor(s) (e.g., program description, facility locations), personally identifiable information, as well as trade secrets, commercial or financial information, or other commercially sensitive information that is not customarily shared outside of the company.

    Controlled technical information means technical information with military or space application that is subject to controls on the access, use, reproduction, modification, performance, display, release, disclosure, or dissemination. Controlled technical information would meet the criteria, if disseminated, for distribution statements B through F using the criteria set forth in DoD Instruction 5230.24, Distribution Statements on Technical Documents. The term does not include information that is lawfully publicly available without restrictions.

    Covered contractor information system means an information system that is owned, or operated by or for, a contractor and that processes, stores, or transmits covered defense information.

    Covered defense information means unclassified information that—

    (1) Is—

    (i) Provided to the contractor by or on behalf of DoD in connection with the performance of the contract; or

    (ii) Collected, developed, received, transmitted, used, or stored by or on behalf of the contractor in support of the performance of the contract; and

    (2) Falls in any of the following categories:

    (i) Controlled technical information.

    (ii) Critical information (operations security). Specific facts identified through the Operations Security process about friendly intentions, capabilities, and activities vitally needed by adversaries for them to plan and act effectively so as to guarantee failure or unacceptable consequences for friendly mission accomplishment (part of Operations Security process).

    (iii) Export control. Unclassified information concerning certain items, commodities, technology, software, or other information whose export could reasonably be expected to adversely affect the United States national security and nonproliferation objectives. To include dual use items; items identified in export administration regulations, international traffic in arms regulations, and munitions list; license applications; and sensitive nuclear technology information.

    (iv) Any other information, marked or otherwise identified in the contract, that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls pursuant to and consistent with law, regulations, and Governmentwide policies (e.g., privacy, proprietary business information).

    Information system means a discrete set of information resources organized for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information.

    Operationally critical support means supplies or services designated by the Government as critical for airlift, sealift, intermodal transportation services, or logistical support that is essential to the mobilization, deployment, or sustainment of the Armed Forces in a contingency operation.

    Rapid(ly) report(ing) means within 72 hours of discovery of any cyber incident.

    6. Revise section 204.7302 to read as follows:
    204.7302 Policy.

    (a) DoD and its contractors and subcontractors will provide adequate security to safeguard covered defense information on their unclassified information systems from unauthorized access and disclosure.

    (1) Contractors and subcontractors are required to submit to DoD—

    (i) A cyber incident report;

    (ii) Malicious software, if detected and isolated; and

    (iii) Media (or access to covered contractor information systems and equipment) upon request.

    (2) Contracting officers shall refer to PGI 204.7303-4(a)(1)(ii) for instructions on contractor submissions of media and malicious software.

    (b) Subcontractors are required to rapidly report cyber incidents directly to DoD at http://dibnet.dod.mil and to the prime contractor. Subcontractors shall provide the incident report number from DoD to the prime contractor. Lower-tier subcontractors are required to likewise report the same information to their higher-tier subcontractor, until the prime contractor is reached.

    (c) The Government acknowledges that information shared by the contractor under these procedures may include contractor attributional/proprietary information that is not customarily shared outside of the company, and that the unauthorized use or disclosure of such information could cause substantial competitive harm to the contractor that reported the information. The Government shall protect against the unauthorized use or release of information that includes contractor attributional/proprietary information.

    (d) A cyber incident that is reported by a contractor or subcontractor shall not, by itself, be interpreted as evidence that the contractor or subcontractor has failed to provide adequate information safeguards for covered defense information on their unclassified information systems, or has otherwise failed to meet the requirements of the clause at 252.204-7012. When a cyber incident is reported, the contracting officer shall consult with the DoD component CIO/cyber security office prior to assessing contractor compliance (see PGI 204.7303-3(a)(2)). The contracting officer shall consider such cyber incidents in the context of an overall assessment of a contractor's compliance with the requirements of the clause at 252.204-7012.

    (e) Support services contractors directly supporting Government activities related to safeguarding covered defense information and cyber incident reporting (e.g., providing forensic analysis services, damages assessment services, or other services that require access to data from another contractor) are subject to restrictions on use and disclosure.

    204.7303 [Amended]
    7. Amend section 204.7303 by removing “unclassified controlled technical information” and adding “covered defense information” in its place.
    8. Revise section 204.7304 to read as follows:
    204.7304 Solicitation provision and contract clauses.

    (a) Use the provision at 252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls, in all solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items.

    (b) Use the clause at 252.204-7009, Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Information, in all solicitations and contracts for services that include support for the Government's activities related to safeguarding covered defense information and cyber incident reporting.

    (c) Use the clause at 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, in all solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items.

    PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEM 9. Amend section 212.301 by— a. Redesignating paragraphs (f)(ii)(A) through (E) as paragraphs (f)(ii)(C) through (G); b. Adding new paragraphs (f)(ii)(A) and (B); c. Revising the newly redesignated (f)(ii)(D); d. Redesignating paragraphs (f)(xv)(A) and (B) as paragraphs (f)(xv)(C) and (D); e. Adding new paragraphs (f)(xv)(A) and (B).

    The additions and revision read as follows:

    212.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

    (f) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (A) Use the provision at 252.204-7008 Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls, as prescribed in 204.7304(b).

    (B) Use the clause at 252.204-7009, Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Information, as prescribed in 204.7304(c).

    (D) Use the clause at 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, as prescribed in 204.7304(a).

    (xv) * * *

    (A) Use the provision 252.239-7009, Representation of Use of Cloud Computing, as prescribed in 239.7603(a).

    (B) Use the clause 252.239-7010, Cloud Computing Services, as prescribed in 239.7603(b).

    PART 239—ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 10. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 239 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    11. Add subpart 239.76 to read as follows: Subpart 239.76—Cloud Computing Sec. 239.7600 Scope of subpart. 239.7601 Definitions. 239.7602 Policy and responsibilities. 239.7602-1 General. 239.7602-2 Required storage of data within the United States or outlying areas. 239.7603 Solicitation provision and contract clause. Subpart 239.76—Cloud Computing
    239.7600 Scope of subpart.

    This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for the acquisition of cloud computing services.

    239.7601 Definitions.

    As used in this subpart—

    Authorizing official, as described in DoD Instruction 8510.01, Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology (IT), means the senior Federal official or executive with the authority to formally assume responsibility for operating an information system at an acceptable level of risk to organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation.

    Cloud computing means a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. This includes other commercial terms, such as on-demand self-service, broad network access, resource pooling, rapid elasticity, and measured service. It also includes commercial offerings for software-as-a-service, infrastructure-as-a-service, and platform-as-a-service.

    Government data means any information, document, media, or machine readable material regardless of physical form or characteristics, that is created or obtained by the Government in the course of official Government business.

    Government-related data means any information, document, media, or machine readable material regardless of physical form or characteristics that is created or obtained by a contractor through the storage, processing, or communication of Government data. This does not include a contractor's business records (e.g., financial records, legal records, etc.) or data such as operating procedures, software coding, or algorithms that are not uniquely applied to the Government data.

    Spillage means a security incident that results in the transfer of classified or controlled unclassified information onto an information system not accredited (i.e., authorized) for the appropriate security level.

    239.7602 Policy and responsibilities.
    239.7602-1 General.

    (a) Generally, the DoD shall acquire cloud computing services using commercial terms and conditions that are consistent with Federal law, and an agency's needs, including those requirements specified in this subpart. Some examples of commercial terms and conditions are license agreements, End User License Agreements (EULAs), Terms of Service (TOS), or other similar legal instruments or agreements. Contracting officers shall incorporate any applicable service provider terms and conditions into the contract by attachment or other appropriate mechanism. Contracting officers shall carefully review commercial terms and conditions and consult counsel to ensure these are consistent with Federal law, regulation, and the agency's needs.

    (b) The contracting officer shall only award a contract to acquire cloud computing services from any cloud service provider (e.g., contractor or subcontractor, regardless of tier) that has been granted provisional authorization by Defense Information Systems Agency, at the level appropriate to the requirement, to provide the relevant cloud computing services in accordance with the Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide (SRG) (version in effect at the time the solicitation is issued or as authorized by the contracting officer) found at http://iase.disa.mil/cloud_security/Pages/index.aspx. Provisional authorization processes are also available at the SRG Web site. Cloud service providers with existing provisional authorization are listed at http://www.disa.mil/Computing/Cloud-Services/Cloud-Support.

    (c) When contracting for cloud computing services, the contracting officer shall ensure the following information is provided in the purchase request—

    (1) Government data and Government-related data descriptions;

    (2) Data ownership, licensing, delivery and disposition instructions specific to the relevant types of Government data and Government-related data (e.g., CDRL, SOW task, line item). Disposition instructions shall provide for the transition of data in commercially available, or open and non-proprietary format (and for permanent records, in accordance with disposition guidance issued by National Archives and Record Administration);

    (3) Appropriate limitations and requirements regarding contractor and third-party access to, and use and disclosure of, Government data and Government-related data;

    (4) Appropriate requirements to support applicable inspection, audit, investigation, or other similar authorized activities specific to the relevant types of Government data and Government-related data, or specific to the type of cloud computing services being acquired;

    (5) Appropriate requirements to support and cooperate with applicable system-wide search and access capabilities for inspections, audits, investigations, litigation, eDiscovery, records management associated with the agency's retention schedules, and similar authorized activities; and

    (6) A requirement for the contractor to coordinate with the responsible Government official designated by the contracting officer, in accordance with agency procedures, to respond to any spillage occurring in connection with the cloud computing services being provided.

    239.7602-2 Required storage of data within the United States or outlying areas.

    (a) Cloud computing service providers are required to maintain within the 50 states, the District of Columbia, or outlying areas of the United States, all Government data that is not physically located on DoD premises, unless otherwise authorized by the authorizing official, as described in DoD Instruction 8510.01, Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology (IT), in accordance with the SRG.

    (b) The contracting officer shall provide written notification to the contractor when the contractor is permitted to maintain Government data at a location outside the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas of the United States.

    239.7603 Solicitation provision and contract clause.

    (a) Use the provision at 252.239-7009, Representation of Use of Cloud Computing, in solicitations, including solicitations using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial item, for information technology services.

    (b) Use the clause at 252.239-7010, Cloud Computing Services, in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial item, for information technology services.

    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 12. Add section 252.204-7008 to read as follows:
    252.204-7008 Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls.

    As prescribed in 204.7304(a), use the following provision:

    Compliance With Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls (Aug 2015)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this provision—

    Controlled technical information, covered contractor information system, and covered defense information are defined in clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting.

    (b) The security requirements required by contract clause 252.204-7012, Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, shall be implemented for all covered defense information on all covered contractor information systems that support the performance of this contract.

    (c) If the Offeror proposes to deviate from any of the security requirements in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171, “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations, http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-171 that is in effect at the time the solicitation is issued or as authorized by the Contracting Officer, the Offeror shall submit to the Contracting Officer, for consideration by the DoD CIO, a written explanation of—

    (1) Why a particular security requirement is not applicable; or

    (2) How an alternative but equally effective, security measure is used to compensate for the inability to satisfy a particular requirement and achieve equivalent protection.

    (d) An authorized representative of the DoD CIO will approve or disapprove offeror requests to deviate from NIST SP 800-171 requirements in writing prior to contract award. Any approved deviation from NIST SP 800-171 shall be incorporated into the resulting contract.

    (End of provision)
    13. Add section 252.204-7009 to read as follows:
    252.204-7009 Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information.

    As prescribed in 204.7304(b), use the following clause:

    Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information (AUG 2015)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

    Controlled technical information means technical information with military or space application that is subject to controls on the access, use, reproduction, modification, performance, display, release, disclosure, or dissemination. Controlled technical information would meet the criteria, if disseminated, for distribution statements B through F using the criteria set forth in DoD Instruction 5230.24, Distribution Statements on Technical Documents. The term does not include information that is lawfully publicly available without restrictions.

    Covered defense information means unclassified information that—

    (1) Is—

    (i) Provided to the contractor by or on behalf of DoD in connection with the performance of the contract; or

    (ii) Collected, developed, received, transmitted, used, or stored by or on behalf of the contractor in support of the performance of the contract; and

    (2) Falls in any of the following categories:

    (i) Controlled technical information.

    (ii) Critical information (operations security). Specific facts identified through the Operations Security process about friendly intentions, capabilities, and activities vitally needed by adversaries for them to plan and act effectively so as to guarantee failure or unacceptable consequences for friendly mission accomplishment (part of Operations Security process).

    (iii) Export control. Unclassified information concerning certain items, commodities, technology, software, or other information whose export could reasonably be expected to adversely affect the United States national security and nonproliferation objectives. To include dual use items; items identified in export administration regulations, international traffic in arms regulations and munitions list; license applications; and sensitive nuclear technology information.

    (iv) Any other information, marked or otherwise identified in the contract, that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls pursuant to and consistent with law, regulations, and Governmentwide policies (e.g., privacy, proprietary business information).

    Cyber incident means actions taken through the use of computer networks that result in a compromise or an actual or potentially adverse effect on an information system and/or the information residing therein.

    (b) Restrictions. The Contractor agrees that the following conditions apply to any information it receives or creates in the performance of this contract that is information obtained from a third-party's reporting of a cyber incident pursuant to DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (or derived from such information obtained under that clause):

    (1) The Contractor shall access and use the information only for the purpose of furnishing advice or technical assistance directly to the Government in support of the Government's activities related to clause 252.204-7012, and shall not be used for any other purpose.

    (2) The Contractor shall protect the information against unauthorized release or disclosure.

    (3) The Contractor shall ensure that its employees are subject to use and non-disclosure obligations consistent with this clause prior to the employees being provided access to or use of the information.

    (4) The third-party contractor that reported the cyber incident is a third-party beneficiary of the non-disclosure agreement between the Government and Contractor, as required by paragraph (b)(3) of this clause.

    (5) A breach of these obligations or restrictions may subject the Contractor to—

    (i) Criminal, civil, administrative, and contractual actions in law and equity for penalties, damages, and other appropriate remedies by the United States; and

    (ii) Civil actions for damages and other appropriate remedies by the third party that reported the cyber incident, as a third party beneficiary of this clause.

    (c) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (c), in all subcontracts for services that include support for the Government's activities related to safeguarding covered defense information and cyber incident reporting, including subcontracts for commercial items.

    (End of clause)
    14. Revise section 252.204-7012 to read as follows:
    252.204-7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting.

    As prescribed in 204.7304c, use the following clause:

    Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (AUG 2015)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

    Adequate security means protective measures that are commensurate with the consequences and probability of loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to, or modification of information.

    Compromise means disclosure of information to unauthorized persons, or a violation of the security policy of a system, in which unauthorized intentional or unintentional disclosure, modification, destruction, or loss of an object, or the copying of information to unauthorized media may have occurred.

    Contractor attributional/proprietary information means information that identifies the contractor(s), whether directly or indirectly, by the grouping of information that can be traced back to the contractor(s) (e.g., program description, facility locations), personally identifiable information, as well as trade secrets, commercial or financial information, or other commercially sensitive information that is not customarily shared outside of the company.

    Contractor information system means an information system belonging to, or operated by or for, the Contractor.

    Controlled technical information means technical information with military or space application that is subject to controls on the access, use, reproduction, modification, performance, display, release, disclosure, or dissemination. Controlled technical information would meet the criteria, if disseminated, for distribution statements B through F using the criteria set forth in DoD Instruction 5230.24, Distribution Statements on Technical Documents. The term does not include information that is lawfully publicly available without restrictions.

    Covered contractor information system means an information system that is owned, or operated by or for, a contractor and that processes, stores, or transmits covered defense information.

    Covered defense information means unclassified information that—

    (i) Is—

    (A) Provided to the contractor by or on behalf of DoD in connection with the performance of the contract; or

    (B) Collected, developed, received, transmitted, used, or stored by or on behalf of the contractor in support of the performance of the contract; and

    (ii) Falls in any of the following categories:

    (A) Controlled technical information.

    (B) Critical information (operations security). Specific facts identified through the Operations Security process about friendly intentions, capabilities, and activities vitally needed by adversaries for them to plan and act effectively so as to guarantee failure or unacceptable consequences for friendly mission accomplishment (part of Operations Security process).

    (C) Export control. Unclassified information concerning certain items, commodities, technology, software, or other information whose export could reasonably be expected to adversely affect the United States national security and nonproliferation objectives. To include dual use items; items identified in export administration regulations, international traffic in arms regulations and munitions list; license applications; and sensitive nuclear technology information.

    (D) Any other information, marked or otherwise identified in the contract, that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls pursuant to and consistent with law, regulations, and Governmentwide policies (e.g., privacy, proprietary business information).

    Cyber incident means actions taken through the use of computer networks that result in an actual or potentially adverse effect on an information system and/or the information residing therein.

    Forensic analysis means the practice of gathering, retaining, and analyzing computer-related data for investigative purposes in a manner that maintains the integrity of the data.

    Malicious software means computer software or firmware intended to perform an unauthorized process that will have adverse impact on the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system. This definition includes a virus, worm, Trojan horse, or other code-based entity that infects a host, as well as spyware and some forms of adware.

    Media means physical devices or writing surfaces including, but is not limited to, magnetic tapes, optical disks, magnetic disks, large-scale integration memory chips, and printouts onto which information is recorded, stored, or printed within an information system.

    Operationally critical support means supplies or services designated by the Government as critical for airlift, sealift, intermodal transportation services, or logistical support that is essential to the mobilization, deployment, or sustainment of the Armed Forces in a contingency operation.

    Rapid(ly) report(ing) means within 72 hours of discovery of any cyber incident.

    Technical information means technical data or computer software, as those terms are defined in the clause at DFARS 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data-Non Commercial Items, regardless of whether or not the clause is incorporated in this solicitation or contract. Examples of technical information include research and engineering data, engineering drawings, and associated lists, specifications, standards, process sheets, manuals, technical reports, technical orders, catalog-item identifications, data sets, studies and analyses and related information, and computer software executable code and source code.

    (b) Adequate security. The Contractor shall provide adequate security for all covered defense information on all covered contractor information systems that support the performance of work under this contract. To provide adequate security, the Contractor shall—

    (1) Implement information systems security protections on all covered contractor information systems including, at a minimum—

    (i) For covered contractor information systems that are part of an Information Technology (IT) service or system operated on behalf of the Government—

    (A) Cloud computing services shall be subject to the security requirements specified in the clause 252.239-7010, Cloud Computing Services, of this contract; and

    (B) Any other such IT service or system (i.e., other than cloud computing) shall be subject to the security requirements specified elsewhere in this contract; or

    (ii) For covered contractor information systems that are not part of an IT service of system operated on behalf of the Government and therefore are not subject to the security requirement specified at paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this clause—

    (A) The security requirements in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171, “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations, http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-171 that is in effect at the time the solicitation is issued or as authorized by the Contracting Officer; or

    (B) Alternative but equally effective security measures used to compensate for the inability to satisfy a particular requirement and achieve equivalent protection approved in writing by an authorized representative of the DoD CIO prior to contract award; and

    (2) Apply other security measures when the Contractor reasonably determines that such measures, in addition to those identified in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, may be required to provide adequate security in a dynamic environment based on an assessed risk or vulnerability.

    (c) Cyber incident reporting requirement.

    (1) When the Contractor discovers a cyber incident that affects a covered contractor information system or the covered defense information residing therein, or that affects the contractor's ability to perform the requirements of the contract that are designated as operationally critical support, the Contractor shall—

    (i) Conduct a review for evidence of compromise of covered defense information, including, but not limited to, identifying compromised computers, servers, specific data, and user accounts. This review shall also include analyzing covered contractor information system(s) that were part of the cyber incident, as well as other information systems on the Contractor's network(s), that may have been accessed as a result of the incident in order to identify compromised covered defense information, or that affect the Contractor's ability to provide operationally critical support; and

    (ii) Rapidly report cyber incidents to DoD at http://dibnet.dod.mil.

    (2) Cyber incident report. The cyber incident report shall be treated as information created by or for DoD and shall include, at a minimum, the required elements at http://dibnet.dod.mil.

    (3) Medium assurance certificate requirement. In order to report cyber incidents in accordance with this clause, the Contractor or subcontractor shall have or acquire a DoD-approved medium assurance certificate to report cyber incidents. For information on obtaining a DoD-approved medium assurance certificate, see http://iase.disa.mil/pki/eca/certificate.html.

    (d) Malicious software. The Contractor or subcontractors that discover and isolate malicious software in connection with a reported cyber incident shall submit the malicious software in accordance with instructions provided by the Contracting Officer.

    (e) Media preservation and protection. When a Contractor discovers a cyber incident has occurred, the Contractor shall preserve and protect images of all known affected information systems identified in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this clause and all relevant monitoring/packet capture data for at least 90 days from the submission of the cyber incident report to allow DoD to request the media or decline interest.

    (f) Access to additional information or equipment necessary for forensic analysis. Upon request by DoD, the Contractor shall provide DoD with access to additional information or equipment that is necessary to conduct a forensic analysis.

    (g) Cyber incident damage assessment activities. If DoD elects to conduct a damage assessment, the Contracting Officer will request that the Contractor provide all of the damage assessment information gathered in accordance with paragraph (e) of this clause.

    (h) DoD safeguarding and use of contractor attributional/proprietary information. The Government shall protect against the unauthorized use or release of information obtained from the contractor (or derived from information obtained from the contractor) under this clause that includes contractor attributional/proprietary information, including such information submitted in accordance with paragraph (c). To the maximum extent practicable, the Contractor shall identify and mark attributional/proprietary information. In making an authorized release of such information, the Government will implement appropriate procedures to minimize the contractor attributional/proprietary information that is included in such authorized release, seeking to include only that information that is necessary for the authorized purpose(s) for which the information is being released.

    (i) Use and release of contractor attributional/proprietary information not created by or for DoD. Information that is obtained from the contractor (or derived from information obtained from the contractor) under this clause that is not created by or for DoD is authorized to be released outside of DoD—

    (1) To entities with missions that may be affected by such information;

    (2) To entities that may be called upon to assist in the diagnosis, detection, or mitigation of cyber incidents;

    (3) To Government entities that conduct counterintelligence or law enforcement investigations;

    (4) For national security purposes, including cyber situational awareness and defense purposes (including with Defense Industrial Base (DIB) participants in the program at 32CFR 236); or

    (5) To a support services contractor (“recipient”) that is directly supporting Government activities under a contract that includes the clause at 252.204-7009, Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information.

    (j) Use and release of contractor attributional/proprietary information created by or for DoD. Information that is obtained from the contractor (or derived from information obtained from the contractor) under this clause that is created by or for DoD (including the information submitted pursuant to paragraph (c) of this clause) is authorized to be used and released outside of DoD for purposes and activities authorized by paragraph (i) of this clause, and for any other lawful Government purpose or activity, subject to all applicable statutory, regulatory, and policy based restrictions on the Government's use and release of such information.

    (k) The Contractor shall conduct activities under this clause in accordance with applicable laws and regulations on the interception, monitoring, access, use, and disclosure of electronic communications and data.

    (l) Other safeguarding or reporting requirements. The safeguarding and cyber incident reporting required by this clause in no way abrogates the Contractor's responsibility for other safeguarding or cyber incident reporting pertaining to its unclassified information systems as required by other applicable clauses of this contract, or as a result of other applicable U.S. Government statutory or regulatory requirements.

    (m) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall—

    (1) Include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (m), in all subcontracts, including subcontracts for commercial items; and

    (2) Require subcontractors to rapidly report cyber incidents directly to DoD at http://dibnet.dod.mil and the prime Contractor. This includes providing the incident report number, automatically assigned by DoD, to the prime Contractor (or next higher-tier subcontractor) as soon as practicable.

    (End of clause)
    15. Add section 252.239-7009 to read as follows:
    252.239-7009 Representation of Use of Cloud Computing.

    As prescribed in 239.7603(a), use the following provision:

    Representation of Use of Cloud Computing (AUG 2015)

    (a) Definition. Cloud computing, as used in this provision, means a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. This includes other commercial terms, such as on-demand self-service, broad network access, resource pooling, rapid elasticity, and measured service. It also includes commercial offerings for software-as-a-service, infrastructure-as-a-service, and platform-as-a-service.

    (b) The Offeror shall indicate by checking the appropriate blank in paragraph (b) of this provision whether the use of cloud computing is anticipated under the resultant contract.

    (c) Representation. The Offeror represents that it—

    __Does anticipate that cloud computing services will be used in the performance of any contract or subcontract resulting from this solicitation.

    __Does not anticipate that cloud computing services will be used in the performance of any contract or subcontract resulting from this solicitation.

    (End of provision)
    16. Add section 252.239-7010 to read as follows:
    252.239-7010 Cloud Computing Services.

    As prescribed in 239.7603(b), use the following clause:

    Cloud Computing Services (AUG 2015)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

    Authorizing official, as described in DoD Instruction 8510.01, Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology (IT), means the senior Federal official or executive with the authority to formally assume responsibility for operating an information system at an acceptable level of risk to organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation.

    Cloud computing means a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. This includes other commercial terms, such as on-demand self-service, broad network access, resource pooling, rapid elasticity, and measured service. It also includes commercial offerings for software-as-a-service, infrastructure-as-a-service, and platform-as-a-service.

    Cyber incident means actions taken through the use of computer networks that result in a compromise or an actual or potentially adverse effect on an information system and/or the information residing therein.

    Government data means any information, document, media, or machine readable material regardless of physical form or characteristics, that is created or obtained by the Government in the course of official Government business.

    Government-related data means any information, document, media, or machine readable material regardless of physical form or characteristics that is created or obtained by a contractor through the storage, processing, or communication of Government data. This does not include contractor's business records e.g. financial records, legal records etc. or data such as operating procedures, software coding or algorithms that are not uniquely applied to the Government data.

    Media means physical devices or writing surfaces including, but not limited to, magnetic tapes, optical disks, magnetic disks, large-scale integration memory chips, and printouts onto which covered defense information is recorded, stored, or printed within a covered contractor information system.

    Spillage security incident that results in the transfer of classified or controlled unclassified information onto an information system not accredited (i.e., authorized) for the appropriate security level.

    (b) Cloud computing security requirements. The requirements of this clause are applicable when using cloud computing to provide information technology services in the performance of the contract.

    (1) If the Contractor indicated in its offer that it “does not anticipate the use of cloud computing services in the performance of a resultant contract,” in response to provision 252.239-7009, Representation of Use of Cloud Computing, and after the award of this contract, the Contractor proposes to use cloud computing services in the performance of the contract, the Contractor shall obtain approval from the Contracting Officer prior to utilizing cloud computing services in performance of the contract.

    (2) The Contractor shall implement and maintain administrative, technical, and physical safeguards and controls with the security level and services required in accordance with the Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide (SRG) (version in effect at the time the solicitation is issued or as authorized by the Contracting Officer) found at http://iase.disa.mil/cloud_security/Pages/index.aspx;

    (3) The Contractor shall maintain within the United States or outlying areas all Government data that is not physically located on DoD premises, unless the Contractor receives written notification from the Contracting Officer to use another location, in accordance with DFARS 239.7602-2(a).

    (c) Limitations on access to, and use and disclosure of Government data and Government-related data.

    (1) The Contractor shall not access, use, or disclose Government data unless specifically authorized by the terms of this contract or a task order or delivery order issued hereunder.

    (i) If authorized by the terms of this contract or a task order or delivery order issued hereunder, any access to, or use or disclosure of, Government data shall only be for purposes specified in this contract or task order or delivery order.

    (ii) The Contractor shall ensure that its employees are subject to all such access, use, and disclosure prohibitions and obligations.

    (iii) These access, use, and disclosure prohibitions and obligations shall survive the expiration or termination of this contract.

    (2) The Contractor shall use Government-related data only to manage the operational environment that supports the Government data and for no other purpose unless otherwise permitted with the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

    (d) Cloud computing services cyber incident reporting. The Contractor shall report all cyber incidents that are related to the cloud computing service provided under this contract. Reports shall be submitted to the Department of Defense via http://dibnet.dod.mil/.

    (e) Malicious software. The Contractor or subcontractors that discover and isolate malicious software in connection with a reported cyber incident shall submit the malicious software in accordance with instructions provided by the Contracting Officer.

    (f) Media preservation and protection. When a Contractor discovers a cyber incident has occurred, the Contractor shall preserve and protect images of all known affected information systems identified in paragraph (d) of this clause and all relevant monitoring/packet capture data for at least 90 days from the submission of the cyber incident report to allow DoD to request the media or decline interest.

    (g) Access to additional information or equipment necessary for forensic analysis. Upon request by DoD, the Contractor shall provide DoD with access to additional information or equipment that is necessary to conduct a forensic analysis.

    (h) Cyber incident damage assessment activities. If DoD elects to conduct a damage assessment, the Contracting Officer will request that the Contractor provide all of the damage assessment information gathered in accordance with paragraph (f) of this clause.

    (i) Records management and facility access.

    (1) The Contractor shall provide the Contracting Officer all Government data and Government-related data in the format specified in the contract.

    (2) The Contractor shall dispose of Government data and Government-related data in accordance with the terms of the contract and provide the confirmation of disposition to the Contracting Officer in accordance with contract closeout procedures.

    (3) The Contractor shall provide the Government, or its authorized representatives, access to all Government data and Government-related data, access to contractor personnel involved in performance of the contract, and physical access to any Contractor facility with Government data, for the purpose of audits, investigations, inspections, or other similar activities, as authorized by law or regulation.

    (j) Notification of third party access requests. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer promptly of any requests from a third party for access to Government data or Government-related data, including any warrants, seizures, or subpoenas it receives, including those from another Federal, State, or Local agency. The Contractor shall cooperate with the Contracting Officer to take all measures to protect Government data and Government-related data from any unauthorized disclosure.

    (k) Spillage. Upon notification by the Government of a spillage, or upon the Contractor's discovery of a spillage, the Contractor shall cooperate with the Contracting Officer to address the spillage in compliance with agency procedures.

    (l) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (l), in all subcontracts that involve or may involve cloud services, including subcontracts for commercial items.

    (End of clause)
    [FR Doc. 2015-20870 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 205, 212, 225, and 252 [Docket No. DARS-2015-0014] RIN 0750-AI51 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Acquisition of the American Flag (DFARS Case 2015-D005) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement sections of the Department of Defense Appropriations Acts for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015 that prohibit use of funds made available under these acts for the purchase or manufacture of a flag of the United States, unless such flag is manufactured in the United States.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Tresa Sullivan, telephone 571-372-6089.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 10452 on February 26, 2015, to amend the DFARS to implement section 8123 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 (division C, title VIII of Pub. L. 113-76) and section 8119 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2015 (division C, title VIII of Pub. L. 113-235). These sections prohibit the use of funds appropriated under those acts for the purchase or manufacture of a flag of the United States, unless such flag is treated as a covered item under 10 U.S.C. 2533a(b) (commonly known as the Berry Amendment). With some exceptions, the Berry Amendment restricts the purchase of certain items of food, clothing, fabrics, and hand or measuring tools (whether as end products or components), unless the items have been grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States. The public comment period ended April 27, 2015, with comments submitted by two respondents in response to the proposed rule.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    DoD reviewed the public comments in the development of the final rule. Two responses were received. There are no changes from the substance of the proposed rule. One respondent commended the rule. Another respondent requested flags be purchased from his company in Serbia; however, section 8123 and section 8119 of the DoD Appropriations Acts for 2014 and 2015, respectively, prohibit the use of funds made available under the acts for the purchase or manufacture of a flag of the United States, unless such flag is manufactured in the United States.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    A final regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., and is summarized as follows:

    This rule is necessary to implement sections 8123 and 8119 of the DoD Appropriations Acts for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015, respectively, and the same provisions in subsequent DoD appropriations acts.

    The objective of the rule is to prohibit acquisition of a flag of the United States (Product or Service Code 8345), unless such flag, including the materials and components thereof, is manufactured in the United States, consistent with the requirements at 10 U.S.C. 2533a. The legal basis for the rule is sections 8123 and 8119 of the DoD Appropriations Acts for FYs 2014 and 2015 (Division C of Pub. Laws 113-76 and 113-235, respectively).

    No comments were received from the public relative to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    DoD does not expect this final rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. Based on data available in the Federal Procurement Data System, there was only one acquisition of flags from a small business that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold in fiscal year 2013. There are no reporting or recordkeeping requirements. The rule only requires that if a contractor is to provide flags of the United States to DoD under a contract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, the flags must be manufactured in the United States.

    The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. There are no significant alternatives that meet the requirement of the statute.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 205, 212, 225, and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 205, 212, 225, and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 205, 212, 225, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 205—PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS
    205.301 [Amended]
    2. Amend section 205.301, in paragraph (a)(S-70)(i) introductory text by removing “225.7002-1(a)(2) through (10)” and adding “225.7002-1(a)(1)(ii) through (x)” in its place.
    PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS 3. Amend section 212.301 by— a. Redesignating sections (f)(x)(C) through (BB) as paragraphs (f)(x)(D) through (CC), respectively; and b. Adding a new paragraph (f)(x)(C).

    The addition reads as follows:

    212.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

    (f) * * *

    (x) * * *

    (C) Use the clause at 252.225-7006, Acquisition of the American Flag, as prescribed in 225.7002-3(c), to comply with section 8123 of the DoD Appropriations Act, 2014 (Pub. L. 113-76, division C, title VIII), and the same provision in subsequent DoD appropriations acts.

    PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 4. Revise the section 225.7002 heading to read as follows:
    225.7002 Restrictions on food, clothing, fabrics, hand or measuring tools, and flags.
    5. Amend section 225.7002-1 by— a. Redesignating paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively; b. Redesignating the introductory text as paragraph (a); c. In the newly redesignated paragraph (1), further redesignating paragraphs (1) through (10) as paragraphs (1)(i) through (x), respectively; d. In the newly redesignated paragraph (1)(ii), removing “PGI 225.7002-1(a)(2)” and adding “PGI 225.7002-1(a)(1)(ii)” in its place; e. In the newly redesignated paragraph (1)(iii), further redesignating paragraphs (i) through (iii) as paragraphs (1)(iii)(A) through (C), respectively; r. In the newly redesignated paragraph (1)(x), removing “(Federal Supply Class 8465)” and adding “(Product or Service Code (PSC) 8465)” in its place, and removing “paragraph (a)” and adding “paragraph (a)(1)” in its place; g. In the newly redesignated paragraph (2), removing “see PGI 225.7002-1(b)” and adding “see PGI 225.7002-1(a)(2)” in its place; and h. Adding a new paragraph (b).

    The addition reads as follows:

    225.7002-1 Restrictions.

    (b) In accordance with section 8123 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 (Pub. L. 113-76, division C, title VIII), and the same provision in subsequent Defense appropriations acts, except as provided in 225.7002-2, do not acquire a flag of the United States (PSC 8345), unless such flag, including the materials and components thereof, is manufactured in the United States, consistent with the requirements at 10 U.S.C. 2533a. This restriction does not apply to the acquisition of any end-items or components related to flying or displaying the flag (e.g., flag poles and accessories).

    225.7002-2 [Amended]
    6. Amend section 225.7002-2 by— a. In paragraph (l), removing “Section 8118” and adding “section 8118” in its place; b. In paragraph (m)(1)(i), removing “Federal Supply Group” and adding “Product or Service Group (PSG)” in its place; c. In paragraph (m)(1)(ii), removing “Federal Supply Group” and adding “PSG” in its place in two places; and d. In paragraph (m)(1)(iv), removing “Federal Supply Class” and adding “PSC” in its place. 7. Amend section 225.7002-3 by— a. In the introductory text, removing “exception” and adding “exception at 223.7002-2” in its place; and b. Adding a new paragraph (c).

    The addition reads as follows:

    225.7002-3 Contract clauses.

    (c) Use the clause at 252.225-7006, Acquisition of the American Flag, in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, that are for the acquisition of the American flag, with an estimated value that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold.

    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 8. Add section 252.225-7006 to read as follows:
    252.225-7006 Acquisition of the American Flag.

    As prescribed in 225.7002-3(c), insert the following clause:

    ACQUISITION OF THE AMERICAN FLAG (AUG 2015)

    (a) Definition. United States, as used in this clause, means the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas.

    (b) If the Contractor is required to deliver under this contract one or more American flags (Product or Service Code 8345), such flag(s), including the materials and components thereof, shall be manufactured in the United States, consistent with the requirements at 10 U.S.C. 2533a (commonly known as the “Berry Amendment”).

    (c) This clause does not apply to the acquisition of any end items or components related to flying or displaying the flag (e.g., flagpoles and accessories).

    (End of clause)
    [FR Doc. 2015-20873 Filed 8-25-15; 08:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001 6820-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Part 211 [Docket No. DARS-2015-0041] RIN 0750-AI65 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Item Unique Identification Prescription Correction (DFARS Case 2014-D021) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to correct the prescription for a clause.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Dustin Pitsch, telephone 571-372-6090.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    This final rule corrects the clause prescription at DFARS 211.274-6(a)(1) to reflect a change that was addressed and previously published for public comment in the Federal Register for proposed rule 2011-D055, Item Unique Identifier Update, on June 15, 2012 (77 FR 35921). The proposed rule presented edits to the prescription for the clause 252.211-7003, Item Unique Identification and Valuation. One of the changes was inadvertently omitted from the final rule, which was published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2013 (78 FR 76067). Due to baseline changes that occurred (in DFARS rule 2012-D001) between the time when the proposed rule was published and the final rule was published, the revision from the proposed rule to the clause prescription was not reflected in the publication of the final rule. One of the public comments received in response to the proposed rule was related to the clause prescription. The comment, which recommended inclusion of clarifying text related to “real property,” was addressed in the final rule, had no impact on the clause prescription in the final rule, and is inconsequential to the correction being made in this rule.

    The correction to the prescription at DFARS 211.274-6(a)(1) for clause 252.211-7003, Item Unique Identification and Valuation, clarifies that the clause is used in solicitations and contracts that include the furnishing of “supplies, and for services involving the furnishing of supplies, unless the exceptions at 211.274-2(b) apply.” The current clause prescription does not directly address the exceptions for use of the clause and instead states that the clause applies to items “that require item identification or valuation, or both, in accordance with 211.274-2 and 211.274-3.” This final rule corrects the clause prescription to reflect the changes anticipated by the 2011-D055 proposed rule.

    II. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    III. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses were previously prepared consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., under the DFARS Case 2011-D055 proposed and final rules, respectively.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 211

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR part 211 is amended as follows:

    PART 211—DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 211 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    2. Amend section 211.274-6 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    211.274-6 Contract clauses.

    (a)(1) Use the clause at 252.211-7003, Item Unique Identification and Valuation, in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, for supplies, and for services involving the furnishing of supplies, unless the conditions in 211.274-2(b) apply.

    [FR Doc. 2015-20876 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Part 217 [Docket No. DARS-2015-0039] RIN 0750-AI63 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Contracts or Delivery Orders Issued by a Non-DoD Agency (DFARS Case 2015-D014) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to remove duplicative text relating to contracts or delivery orders issued by a non-DoD Agency and relocate remaining text to conform to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Tresa Sullivan, 571-372-6089.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    DoD is amending the DFARS to move the coverage at DFARS subpart 217.78, Contracts or Delivery Orders Issued by a Non-DoD Agency, to DFARS subpart 217.7, Interagency Acquisitions: Acquisitions by Nondefense Agencies on Behalf of the Department of Defense. This change will align the DFARS with the same coverage in the FAR. In addition, some duplicative text and definitions for “non-DoD agency” and “non-DoD agency that is an element of the intelligence community” were removed from the DFARS coverage, since the subject matter is now addressed in FAR subpart 17.7.

    II. Publication of This Final Rule for Public Comment Is Not Required by Statute

    The statute that applies to the publication of the Federal Acquisition Regulation is 41 U.S.C. 1707, Publication of Proposed Regulations. Paragraph (a)(1) of the statute requires that a procurement policy, regulation, procedure or form (including an amendment or modification thereof) must be published for public comment if it has either a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the agency issuing the policy, regulation, procedure or form, or has a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors. This final rule is not required to be published for public comment, because it deletes duplicative text and relocates text within the DFARS. These DFARS updates are administrative in nature and therefore do not have a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to this rule because this final rule does not constitute a significant DFARS revision within the meaning of FAR 1.501-1, and 41 U.S.C. 1707 does not require publication for public comment.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 217

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR part 217 is amended as follows:

    PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR part 217 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    2. Add subpart 217.7 to read as follows: Subpart 217.7—Interagency Acquisitions: Acquisitions by Nondefense Agencies on Behalf of the Department of Defense Sec. 217.700 Scope of subpart. 217.701 Definitions. 217.770 Procedures. Subpart 217.7—Interagency Acquisitions: Acquisitions by Nondefense Agencies on Behalf of the Department of Defense
    217.700 Scope of subpart.

    This subpart—

    (a) Implements section 854 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Pub. L. 108-375), section 801 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Pub. L. 110-181), and section 806 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111-84); and

    (b) Prescribes policy for the acquisition of supplies and services through the use of contracts or orders issued by non-DoD agencies.

    217.701 Definitions.

    As used in this subpart—

    Assisted acquisition means the type of interagency contracting through which acquisition officials of a non-DoD agency award a contract or a task or delivery order for the acquisition of supplies or services on behalf of DoD.

    Direct acquisition means the type of interagency contracting through which DoD orders a supply or service from a Governmentwide acquisition contract maintained by a non-DoD agency.

    Governmentwide acquisition contract means a task or delivery order contract that—

    (1) Is entered into by a non-defense agency; and

    (2) May be used as the contract under which property or services are procured for one or more other departments or agencies of the Federal Government.

    217.770 Procedures.

    Departments and agencies shall establish and maintain procedures for reviewing and approving orders placed for supplies and services under non-DoD contracts, whether through direct acquisition or assisted acquisition, when the amount of the order exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold. These procedures shall include—

    (a) Evaluating whether using a non-DoD contract for the acquisition is in the best interest of DoD. Factors to be considered include—

    (1) Satisfying customer requirements;

    (2) Schedule;

    (3) Cost effectiveness (taking into account discounts and fees). In order to ensure awareness of the total cost of fees associated with use of a non-DoD contract, follow the procedures at PGI 217.703(1)(iii); and

    (4) Contract administration (including oversight);

    (b) Determining that the tasks to be accomplished or supplies to be provided are within the scope of the contract to be used;

    (c) Reviewing funding to ensure that it is used in accordance with appropriation limitations; and

    (d) Collecting and reporting data on the use of assisted acquisition for analysis. Follow the reporting requirements in subpart 204.6.

    Subpart 217.78 [Removed and Reserved] 3. Remove and reserve subpart 217.78, consisting of sections 217.7800, 217.7801, and 217.7802.
    [FR Doc. 2015-20871 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 225 and 236 [Docket No. DARS-2015-0019] RIN 0750-AI52 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Use of Military Construction Funds (DFARS Case 2015-D006) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD has adopted as final, without change, an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, to require offerors bidding on DoD military construction contracts to provide opportunity for competition to American steel producers, fabricators, and manufacturers; and restrict use of military construction funds in certain foreign countries, including countries that border the Arabian Gulf.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Julie Hammond, telephone 571-372-6174.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    DoD published an interim rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 15909 on March 26, 2015, to implement sections 108, 111, and 112 of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (division I of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Resolution Appropriations Act, 2015, Pub. L. 113-235), enacted December 16, 2014.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    There were no public comments submitted in response to the interim rule. The interim rule has been converted to a final rule, without change.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    A final regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., and is summarized as follows:

    This rule is necessary to require offerors bidding on DoD military construction contracts to provide opportunity for competition to American steel producers, fabricators, and manufacturers, and implement the preference for award only to U.S. firms when awarding certain military construction and architect-engineer contracts to be performed in countries bordering the Arabian Gulf.

    The objective of this rule is to implement sections 108, 111, and 112 of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (division I of Pub. L. 113-235). This rule extends the applicability of the requirement to provide opportunity for competition to American steel producers, fabricators, and manufacturers, and revises the preference for award to U.S. firms of military construction contracts that have an estimated value greater than $1,000,000 and the restriction requiring award only to U.S. firms for architect-engineer contracts that have an estimated value greater than $500,000, to make it applicable to contracts to be performed in a country bordering the Arabian Gulf, rather than a country bordering the Arabian Sea (as required in earlier statutes).

    No comments were received from the public relative to the publication of the initial regulatory flexibility analysis in the interim rule.

    Section 108 will benefit any small business entities involved in producing, fabricating, or manufacturing steel products to be used in military construction. Sections 111 and 112 will only apply to a very limited number of small entities—those entities that submit offers in response to solicitations for military construction contracts that have an estimated value greater than $1,000,000 and architect-engineer contracts that have an estimated value greater than $500,000, when the contracts are to be performed in countries bordering the Arabian Gulf.

    The rule does not impose any additional reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements.

    No alternatives were identified that will accomplish the objectives of the statutes and the rule.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 225 and 236

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Accordingly, the interim rule amending 48 CFR parts 225 and 236, which was published at 80 FR 15909 on March 26, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change.

    [FR Doc. 2015-20872 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 225 and 252 [Docket No. 2015-0010] RIN 0750-AI45 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States (DFARS Case 2014-D023) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to provide updates and clarifications regarding requirements for contractor personnel supporting U.S. Armed Forces deployed outside the United States.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Julie Hammond, Telephone 571-372-6174.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 4850 on January 29, 2015, to update the DFARS clause at 252.225-7040, Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States. No public comments were submitted in response to the proposed rule.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    No changes are made to the substance of the final rule. Subsequent to the publication of the proposed rule, however, DFARS subpart 225.74 was redesignated as DFARS 225.3 (see 80 FR 36900 published on June 26, 2015) to align with the coverage in the Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 25.3. This final rule is updated accordingly to reflect these baseline changes.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    A final regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., and is summarized as follows:

    The rule is needed make the following updates to the clause at the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.225-7040, Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States—

    • Remove “humanitarian assistance operations” from the list of applicable operations covered by the clause because it is a subset of “peace operations”;

    • Clarify that both contractors authorized to accompany the Force (CAAF) and non-CAAF personnel must be made aware of information related to sexual assault offenses;

    • Clarify that the section on reporting alleged crimes does not create any rights or privileges that are not authorized by law or DoD policy;

    • Update the reference for special area, country, and theater clearance requirements for deploying personnel;

    • Update the form used to show vaccinations are current;

    • Update the SPOT Web address; and,

    • Add the title of DoD Instruction 3020.41.

    No comments were received from the public in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    DoD does not expect this proposed rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The rule updates DFARS clause 252.225-7040, which is required for use in contracts that authorize contractor personnel to support U.S. Armed Forces deployed outside the United States in: (1) Contingency operations; (2) peace operations consistent with Joint Publication 3-07.3; or (3) other military operations or military exercises, when designated by the combatant commander or as directed by the Secretary of Defense.

    According to the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), DoD awarded 506 contracts in fiscal year 2013 requiring performance overseas in support of contingency, humanitarian or peace operations. Of the 506 contracts, only 76 contracts (15%) were awarded to small businesses. At this time, there is no way of estimating how many contracts may be awarded requiring performance outside the United States in support of other military operations or exercises, when designated by the Combatant Commander. However, the number of small businesses awarded such contracts is expected to be minimal.

    The rule does not impose any additional reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements. DoD did not identify any alternatives that could meet the objectives of the rule.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule contains information collection requirements that require the approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35); however, these changes to the DFARS do not impose additional information collection requirements to the paperwork burden previously approved under OMB Control Number 0704-0460, entitled Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) System.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 225 and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 225 and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 225 and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION
    252.371-5 [Amended]
    2. Amend section 225.371-5 by removing paragraph (a)(2) and redesignating paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) as paragraphs (a)(2) and (3), respectively.
    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 3. Amend section 252.225-7040 by— a. Removing the clause date “(JUN 2015)” and adding “(AUG 2015)” in its place; b. Removing paragraph (b)(1)(ii) and redesignating paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (iv) as paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), respectively; c. In paragraph (d)(3) introductory text, removing “CAAF are aware” and adding “CAAF and non-CAAF are aware” in its place; d. In paragraph (d)(3)(i), removing “DoDD 6495.01” and adding “DoD Directive 6495.01” in its place; e. Adding paragraph (d)(5)(iii); f. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(C)(3); g. In paragraph (e)(1)(iv), removing “DoD Directive 4500.54, Official Temporary Duty Abroad, and DoD 4500.54-G, DoD Foreign Clearance Guide” and adding “DoD Directive 4500.54E, DoD Foreign Clearance Program” in its place; h. In paragraph (g)(2), removing “https://spot.altess.army.mil/privacy.aspx” and addinghttps://spot.dmdc.mil” in its place; i. In paragraph (j)(1), removing “DoD Instruction 3020.41” and adding “DoD Instruction 3020.41, Operational Contractor Support” in its place; j. In paragraph (j)(2), removing “will-notify” and adding “will notify” in its place; and k. Removing paragraph (q)(2) and redesignating paragraphs (q)(3) and (4) as paragraphs (q)(2) and (3), respectively.

    The addition and revision read as follows:

    252.225-7040 Contractor Personnel Supporting U.S. Armed Forces Deployed Outside the United States.

    (d) * * *

    (5) * * *

    (iii) That this section does not create any rights or privileges that are not authorized by law or DoD policy.

    (e) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (C) * * *

    (3) All CAAF and selected non-CAAF, as specified in the statement of work, shall bring to the designated operational area a copy of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Form 731, International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis as Approved by the World Health Organization, (also known as “shot record” or “Yellow Card”) that shows vaccinations are current.

    [FR Doc. 2015-20875 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No: 110907562-5681-03] RIN 0648-BB40 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Omnibus Amendment To Simplify Vessel Baselines AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule announces the approval of the Omnibus Amendment to the Fishery Management Plans of the Northeastern United States and implements the amendment's approved management measures to simplify vessel baselines. The Baseline Amendment eliminates the one-time limit on vessel upgrades and removes gross and net tonnages from the vessel baseline specifications that NMFS considers when determining a vessel's baseline for replacement purposes. Implementing these measures reduces the administrative burden to permit holders and NMFS and has little effect on fleet capacity.

    This rule also removes the requirement for vessels to send in negative fishing reports (i.e., “did not fish” reports) during months or weeks when vessels were inactive. NMFS no longer needs these reports due to improved trip-level matching. Therefore, NMFS removes this requirement to simplify the regulations and reduce reporting burdens for the industry.

    DATES:

    Effective August 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    NMFS developed an environmental assessment (EA) for this action that describes the action and other considered alternatives and provides a thorough analysis of the impacts of these measures. Copies of the Amendment, the EA, and the small entity compliance guide are available upon request from John K. Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298, or available on the Internet at: http://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/mediacenter/ongoing/omnibus_amendment_to_simplify_vessel_baselines.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Travis Ford, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9233.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils submitted the Baseline Amendment to NMFS for approval at their November 18, 2014, and October 8, 2014, meetings, respectively. We prepared the amendment on behalf of the Councils. We reviewed and finalized the amendment document to ensure consistency with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the fishery management plans that have vessel baseline requirements, and other applicable laws. NMFS has approved the Baseline Amendment in its entirety.

    Baseline regulations currently require that a replacement vessel or an upgrade made to an existing vessel with a limited access permit be within 10 percent of the size (i.e., length, gross tonnage, and net tonnage) and 20 percent of the horsepower of the permit's baseline vessel. In addition, regulations limit permit holders to a one-time upgrade of the vessel size and horsepower specifications.

    This final rule eliminates gross and net tonnage from the baseline specifications that NMFS considers when determining a vessel's baseline for replacement purposes. Both the Councils and NMFS consider tonnages the most variable of vessel baseline specifications and; therefore, they have little effect on limiting vessel capacity when compared to length and horsepower restrictions. Eliminating tonnages simplifies the vessel baseline verification and replacement process. In addition, it could reduce the cost burden on the industry if vessel owners only need horsepower verification because eliminating the tonnage baselines will eliminate the need for owners to get a marine survey of their vessel prior to any permit replacement or upgrade transactions.

    This final rule removes the one-time limit on vessel upgrades. Eliminating the one-time upgrade limit will provide more flexibility for vessel owners in the selection of replacement vessels and upgrades to existing vessels. Eliminating the one-time limit will also simplify the baseline verification and vessel replacement process for vessel owners and NMFS by eliminating the need to research and document whether a vessel owner used the one-time upgrade during the vessel's entire limited access history.

    The Baseline Amendment implemented by this final rule does not modify any other baseline specifications or measures.

    This final rule also removes the requirement for vessels to send in negative fishing reports (i.e., “did not fish” reports) during months or weeks when vessels are inactive. This change in reporting requirements was not part of the Baseline Amendment. We are removing this requirement under the Secretary's authority at section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to promulgate regulations necessary to carry out Councils' amendments consistently with the Act. Eliminating this requirement simplifies the regulations and reduces reporting burdens for the industry. In the past, these negative fishing reports were necessary to aid in data matching and quota monitoring. In recent years, we updated our monitoring systems at the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and these negative fishing reports are no longer necessary. Vessels that fish will still be required to report all trips on a monthly or weekly basis, depending on permits that they retain.

    Comments and Responses

    NMFS received two comment letters in response to the proposed rule from the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen's Association and Lund's Fisheries Incorporated. We provide responses below to the issues these commenters raised. NMFS may only approve, disapprove, or partially approve measures in the Baseline Amendment, and cannot substantively amend, add, or delete measures beyond what is necessary under section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to discharge its responsibility to carry out such measures.

    Comment 1: Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen's Association was supportive of this action, but it was concerned that the changes in the Baseline Amendment could encourage additional requests to liberalize the vessel upgrading/replacement regulations. It strongly opposes any further liberalization of vessel baseline requirements because it believes it would result in a large increase in fleet capacity, which would have negative impacts on a number of offshore fisheries.

    Response: This action is limited in scope and will not increase the capacity of the fleet. Any changes that would affect fleet capacity must go through both the MAFMC and the NEFMC. NMFS encourages the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen's Association and all other interested parties to participate in the Council process should the Councils consider any future changes to vessel baseline and capacity issues.

    Comment 2: Lund's Fisheries Incorporated supported the amendment, but it asked that we clarify that the baseline specification for fish hold capacity remains in place.

    Response: Currently, Tier 1 or Tier 2 limited access mackerel permits have an additional baseline specification for fish hold capacity. This rule does not remove fish hold capacity from the Tier 1 or Tier 2 limited access mackerel baseline specifications.

    Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this final rule is consistent with the FMPs, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable law.

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this rule is not significant according to Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.

    This final rule does not contain policies with federalism or “takings” implications, as those terms are defined in E.O. 13132 and E.O. 12630, respectively.

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration at the proposed rule stage that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

    This action contains collection-of-information requirements subject the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The request to remove the collection burden for vessel gross and net tonnages, vessel upgrades, and did not fish report requirements were approved by OMB under the NMFS Greater Atlantic Region Family of Forms (OMB Control No. 0648-0202 and 0648-0212).

    Removing tonnages from vessel baselines may simplify or eliminate the need for a permit holder to hire a naval architect to determine and document tonnage if it was not previously established. NMFS estimates the resulting average cost savings of as much as $375 per survey. Removing tonnages and upgrades may negate the need for a permit holder to hire a third party to research the permit's history and prepare the replacement application. Estimates of the costs for these third party services were not available, but NMFS estimates that permit holders spend an average of 3 hours, or $270 in labor costs, preparing vessel replacement applications.

    In 2014, NMFS received 92 vessels replacement requests for permits that had baseline requirements for a total cost of $25,875 and 279 burden hours. We estimate that the removal of GRT and NT and the one-time upgrade will reduce the need for surveys and the time involved in preparing a vessel replacement application. We estimate that this change will reduce the cost burden on the industry by $12,750 and 139 burden hours per year for a total of $13,125 and 140 burden hours.

    Vessels are no longer required to send in negative fishing reports (i.e., “did not fish” reports) during months or weeks when fishing did not occur. Vessel owners are still required to report all fishing trip activity on a monthly or weekly basis, depending on the requirements associated with their vessel permits. The collection of negative fishing reports is no longer needed to determine if a vessel has engaged in fishing activity and submitted required trip reports due to improved trip-level data matching and the expansion of other monitoring systems (e.g., Vessel Monitoring Systems).

    The relief of burden estimates for removing this requirement applies to all federally permitted vessels. In 2014, NMFS received approximately 78,294 did not fish reports. We estimated public reporting burden for submitting these reports to average 2 min per response with an associated cost of $0.45. Therefore, the removal of 78,294 did not fish reports reduces total compliance costs by $35,232, and reduce reporting burden by 2,609 hr annually.

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries has determined that because this rule is relieving restrictions, there is good cause, under authority contained in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness and to make the Baseline Amendment final measures upon publication in the Federal Register.

    This rule relieves restrictions by removing gross tonnage and net tonnage from vessel baseline specifications, removing the one-time baseline size and horsepower upgrade restriction, and removing the requirement for vessels to send in negative fishing reports. Removing gross tonnage and net tonnage from vessel baseline specifications and removing the one-time baseline size and horsepower upgrade restrictions will provide vessel owners the opportunity to replace their vessels on a larger number of compatible vessels. This will give vessel owners more flexibility while not increasing the capacity of the fleet. Removing the requirement to send in negative fishing reports will eliminate the burden of sending in weekly or monthly reports for non-active vessels. Vessel owners will be able to take advantage of these changes immediately upon publication and will not have to wait for the regulations to become effective to finalize vessel sales or upgrades that they may have been looking into during the final development of this action and the proposed rule.

    This rule should be implemented quickly because it relieves these restrictions and does not add any measures that require preparation. Immediately upon its implementation it will increase flexibility for the fleet and reduce industry and Federal cost/time burdens for vessel specification verifications, vessel replacement, vessel upgrades, and VTR processing/reporting.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 21, 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 648 is amended as follows:

    PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES 1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    § 648.2 [Amended]
    2. In § 648.2, remove the definition of “Substantially similar harvesting capacity.”
    3. In § 648.4, revise paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(E)(1), (a)(1)(i)(E)(2), (a)(1)(i)(F)(1), (a)(1)(i)(F)(2), (a)(1)(i)(H), (a)(3)(i)(H), (a)(13)(i)(E)(1), (a)(13)(i)(F), and (a)(13)(i)(H) to read as follows:
    § 648.4 Vessel permits.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (i) * * *

    (E) * * *

    (1) The replacement vessel's horsepower may not exceed the horsepower of the vessel's baseline specifications by more than 20 percent, as applicable.

    (2) The replacement vessel's length overall may not exceed the length overall of the vessel's baseline specifications by more than 10 percent, as applicable.

    (F) * * *

    (1) The upgraded vessel's horsepower may not exceed the horsepower of the vessel's baseline specifications by more than 20 percent, as applicable.

    (2) The upgraded vessel's length overall may not exceed the vessel's baseline length overall by more than 10 percent, as applicable.

    (H) Vessel baseline specifications. The vessel baseline specifications in this section are the respective specifications (length, horsepower) of the vessel that was initially issued a limited access permit as of the date the initial vessel applied for such permit.

    (3) * * *

    (i) * * *

    (H) Vessel baseline specifications. The vessel baseline specifications in this section are the respective specifications (length, horsepower) of the vessel as of March 22, 1999, unless the vessel is in the process of construction or rerigging or under agreement or written contract for construction or rerigging, as of the effective baseline specification date in which case the baseline specifications will be established no later than February 19, 2000.

    (13) * * *

    (i) * * *

    (E) * * *

    (1) To be eligible for a limited access permit under this section, the replacement vessel's length overall may not exceed the vessel's baseline length overall by more than 10 percent. The replacement vessel must also meet any other applicable criteria under paragraph (a)(13)(i)(F) of this section.

    (F) Upgraded vessel. A vessel may be upgraded, whether through refitting or replacement, and be eligible to retain or renew a limited access permit, provided that the new length overall of the upgraded vessel does exceed the vessel's baseline length overall by more than 10 percent, as applicable.

    (H) Vessel baseline length. The vessel baseline length in this section is the overall length of the vessel indicated on the vessel's initial limited access permit as of the date the initial vessel applies for such permit.

    4. In § 648.7, revise paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (f)(2)(i) to read as follows:
    § 648.7 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

    (b) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (i) The owner or operator of any vessel issued a valid permit or eligible to renew a limited access permit under this part must maintain on board the vessel, and submit, an accurate fishing log report for each fishing trip, regardless of species fished for or taken, on forms supplied by or approved by the Regional Administrator. If authorized in writing by the Regional Administrator, a vessel owner or operator may submit reports electronically, for example by using a VMS or other media. With the exception of those vessel owners or operators fishing under a surfclam or ocean quahog permit, at least the following information and any other information required by the Regional Administrator must be provided: Vessel name; USCG documentation number (or state registration number, if undocumented); permit number; date/time sailed; date/time landed; trip type; number of crew; number of anglers (if a charter or party boat); gear fished; quantity and size of gear; mesh/ring size; chart area fished; average depth; latitude/longitude (or loran station and bearings); total hauls per area fished; average tow time duration; hail weight, in pounds (or count of individual fish, if a party or charter vessel), by species, of all species, or parts of species, such as monkfish livers, landed or discarded; and, in the case of skate discards, “small” (i.e., less than 23 inches (58.42 cm), total length) or “large” (i.e., 23 inches (58.42 cm) or greater, total length) skates; dealer permit number; dealer name; date sold, port and state landed; and vessel operator's name, signature, and operator's permit number (if applicable).

    (f) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (i) For any vessel not issued a NE multispecies; Atlantic herring permit; or any Atlantic mackerel, longfin squid, Illex squid, or butterfish permit; fishing vessel log reports, required by paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, must be postmarked or received by NMFS within 15 days after the end of the reporting month. For any vessel issued a NE multispecies permit; Atlantic herring permit; or any Atlantic mackerel, longfin squid, Illex squid, or butterfish permit; fishing vessel log reports must be postmarked or received by midnight of the first Tuesday following the end of the reporting week. For the purposes of this paragraph (f)(2)(i), the date when fish are offloaded will establish the reporting week or month the VTR must be submitted to NMFS, as appropriate.

    5. In § 648.14, revise paragraphs (b)(4) and (k)(2)(i) to read as follows:
    § 648.14 Prohibitions.

    (b) * * *

    (4) Fish for, possess, or land species regulated under this part with or from a vessel that is issued a limited access or moratorium permit under § 648.4(a) and that has had the horsepower or length overall of such vessel or its replacement upgraded or increased in excess of the limitations specified in § 648.4(a)(1)(i)(E) and (F).

    (k) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (i) Fish for, possess, or land NE multispecies with or from a vessel that has had the length overall of such vessel, or its replacement, increased or upgraded in excess of limitations specified in § 648.4(a)(1)(i)(E) and (F).

    6. In § 648.82, revise paragraphs (l)(1)(ii) and (l)(1)(iii) to read as follows:
    § 648.82 Effort-control program for NE multispecies limited access vessels.

    (l) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (ii) NE multispecies DAS may be transferred only to a vessel with a baseline main engine horsepower rating that is no more than 20 percent greater than the baseline engine horsepower of the transferor vessel. NE multispecies DAS may be transferred only to a vessel with a baseline length overall that is no more than 10 percent greater than the baseline length overall of the transferor vessel. For the purposes of this program, the baseline horsepower and length overall are those associated with the permit as of January 29, 2004. Upon approval of the transfer, the baseline of the transferee vessel would be the smaller baseline of the two vessels or the vessel owner could choose to adopt the larger baseline of the two vessels provided such an upgrade is consistent with provisions of this paragraph (l)(1)(ii). A vessel that has executed a one-time downgrade of a DAS Leasing Program baseline in accordance with paragraph (k)(4)(xi) of this section is subject to the restrictions of paragraph (k)(4)(xi)(C) of this section.

    (iii) The transferor vessel must transfer all of its Federal limited access permits for which it is eligible to the transferee vessel in accordance with the vessel replacement restrictions under § 648.4, or permanently cancel such permits. When duplicate permits exist, i.e., those permits for which both the transferor and transferee vessel are eligible, one of the duplicate permits must be permanently cancelled.

    [FR Doc. 2015-21143 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 141021887-5172-02] RIN 0648-XE139 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; reallocation.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is reallocating the projected unused amount of Pacific cod from vessels using jig gear and catcher vessels greater than or equal to 60 feet (18.3 meters) length overall (LOA) using hook-and-line gear to catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 meters) LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. This action is necessary to allow the 2015 total allowable catch of Pacific cod to be harvested.

    DATES:

    Effective August 21, 2015 through 2400 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), December 31, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

    The 2015 Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) specified for vessels using jig gear in the BSAI is 1,418 metric tons (mt) as established by the final 2015 and 2016 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (80 FR 11919, March 5, 2015) and one inseason adjustment (80 FR 3496, January 23, 2015).

    The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator) has determined that jig vessels will not be able to harvest 1,318 mt of the remaining 2015 Pacific cod TAC allocated to those vessels under § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(1). Therefore, in accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A), NMFS apportions 1,318 mt of Pacific cod to the annual amount specified for catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear.

    The 2015 Pacific cod TAC specified for catcher vessels greater than or equal to 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line gear in the BSAI is 444 mt as established by the final 2015 and 2016 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (80 FR 11919, March 5, 2015). The Regional Administrator has determined that catcher vessels greater than or equal to 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line gear will not be able to harvest 424 mt of the remaining 2015 Pacific cod TAC allocated to those vessels under § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(3). Therefore, in accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A), NMFS apportions 424 mt of Pacific cod to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear.

    The harvest specifications for Pacific cod included in the final 2015 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (80 FR 11919, March 5, 2015) and inseason adjustment (80 FR 3496, January 23, 2015) are revised as follows: 100 mt for vessels using jig gear, 20 mt for catcher vessels greater than or equal to 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line gear, and 7,880 mt to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear.

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the reallocation of Pacific cod specified from other sectors to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear. Since the fishery is currently open, it is important to immediately inform the industry as to the revised allocations. Immediate notification is necessary to allow for the orderly conduct and efficient operation of this fishery, to allow the industry to plan for the fishing season, and to avoid potential disruption to the fishing fleet as well as processors. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of August 20, 2015.

    The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.

    This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21137 Filed 8-21-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 141021887-5172-02] RIN 0648-XE140 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; modification of a closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is opening directed fishing for Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 meters) length overall (LOA) using hook-and-line or pot gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI). This action is necessary to fully use the 2015 total allowable catch of Pacific cod allocated to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), September 1, 2015, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2015. Comments must be received at the following address no later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., September 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2014-0134, by any of the following methods:

    • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0134, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    • Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. 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), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

    NMFS closed directed fishing for Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) on February 2, 2015 (80 FR 5992, February 4, 2015).

    NMFS has determined that as of August 20, 2015, approximately 1,126 metric tons of Pacific cod remain in the 2015 Pacific cod apportionment for catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI. Therefore, in accordance with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully use the 2015 total allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific cod in the BSAI, NMFS is terminating the previous closure and is opening directed fishing for Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI. The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator) considered the following factors in reaching this decision: (1) The current catch of Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI and, (2) the harvest capacity and stated intent on future harvesting patterns of vessels in participating in this fishery.

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the opening of directed fishing for Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI. Immediate notification is necessary to allow for the orderly conduct and efficient operation of this fishery, to allow the industry to plan for the fishing season, and to avoid potential disruption to the fishing fleet and processors. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of August 20, 2015.

    The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.

    Without this inseason adjustment, NMFS could not allow the fishery for Pacific cod by catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the BSAI to be harvested in an expedient manner and in accordance with the regulatory schedule. Under § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this action to the above address until September 9, 2015.

    This action is required by § 679.25 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21145 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 165 Wednesday, August 26, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 430 [Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006] RIN 1904-AC55 Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Notice of Open Meetings AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces additional meetings of the Fans and Blowers Working Group. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that agencies publish notice of an advisory committee meeting in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for meeting dates.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meetings will be held at U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8E-089, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. Individuals will also have the opportunity to participate by webinar. To register for the webinar and receive call-in information, please visit: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=25 .

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-7935. Email: [email protected] Mr. Peter Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9496. Email: [email protected] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meetings will be held September 1 through September 3, 2015 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Members of the public are welcome to observe the business of the meeting and, if time allows, may make oral statements during the specified period for public comment. To attend the meeting and/or to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, email [email protected] . In the email, please indicate your name, organization (if appropriate), citizenship, and contact information. Please note that foreign nationals participating in the public meeting are subject to advance security screening procedures which require advance notice prior to attendance at the public meeting. If a foreign national wishes to participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Regina Washington at (202) 586-1214 or by email: [email protected] so that the necessary procedures can be completed. Anyone attending the meeting will be required to present a government photo identification, such as a passport, driver's license, or government identification. Due to the required security screening upon entry, individuals attending should arrive early to allow for the extra time needed.

    Due to the REAL ID Act implemented by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recent changes have been made regarding ID requirements for individuals wishing to enter Federal buildings from specific states and U.S. territories. Driver's licenses from the following states or territory will not be accepted for building entry and one of the alternate forms of ID listed below will be required.

    DHS has determined that regular driver's licenses (and ID cards) from the following jurisdictions are not acceptable for entry into DOE facilities: Alaska, Louisiana, New York, American Samoa, Maine, Oklahoma, Arizona, Massachusetts, Washington, and Minnesota.

    Acceptable alternate forms of Photo-ID include: U.S. Passport or Passport Card; an Enhanced Driver's License or Enhanced ID-Card issued by the states of Minnesota, New York or Washington (Enhanced licenses issued by these states are clearly marked Enhanced or Enhanced Driver's License); A military ID or other Federal government issued Photo-ID card.

    Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov, including Federal Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt from public disclosure.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2015. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. [FR Doc. 2015-21154 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0032; FRL-9931-74] Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces EPA's receipt of several initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by the Docket Identification (ID) Number and the Pesticide Petition Number (PP) of interest as shown in the body of this document, 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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert McNally, Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) (7511P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: [email protected]; or Susan Lewis, Director, Registration Division (RD) (7505P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: [email protected] The mailing address for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the end of each pesticide petition summary.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for the division listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, EPA seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

    II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food commodities. EPA is taking public comment on the requests before responding to the petitioners. EPA is not proposing any particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide petitions described in this document contain the data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA can make final determinations on these pesticide petitions.

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket for each of the petitions is available at http://www.regulations.gov.

    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA is publishing notice of the petitions so that the public has an opportunity to comment on these requests for the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food commodities. Further information on the petitions may be obtained through the petition summaries referenced in this unit.

    New Tolerances

    1. PP 4F8261. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397). BASF Corp., 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.361 for residues of the herbicide pendimethalin in or on milk at 0.04 parts per million (ppm); cattle, fat at 0.30 ppm; cattle, liver at 1.5 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.1 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm; goat, fat at 0.30 ppm; goat, liver at 1.5 ppm; goat, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm; horse, fat at 0.30 ppm; horse, liver at 1.5 ppm; horse, meat at 0.10 ppm; horse, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.30 ppm; sheep, liver at 1.5 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.10 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm. The aqueous organic solvent extraction, column clean up, and quantitation by a gas chromatography (GC) method is used to measure and evaluate pendimethalin and its metabolite. Contact: RD.

    2. PP 4F8284. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0443). Bayer CropScience LP, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.661 for residues of the fungicide fluopyram (N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide) in or on the raw agricultural commodities artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; aspirated grain fractions at 50.0 ppm; peanut hay at 40.0 ppm; hops at 60.0 ppm; root vegetables, except beet, sugar, root, crop subgroup 1B at 0.30 ppm; tuberous and corm vegetables, crop subgroup 1C at 0.10 ppm; potato wet peel at 0.30 ppm; vegetables, leaves of root and tuber, crop group 2 at 30.0 ppm; bulb vegetables, bulb onion (crop subgroup 3-07A) at 0.30 ppm; bulb vegetables, green onions (crop subgroup 3-07B) at 15.0 ppm; leafy greens (crop subgroup 4A), without spinach at 20.0 ppm; leafy greens (crop subgroup 4A) spinach at 40.0 ppm; leafy petioles subgroup, celery (crop subgroup 4B) at 20.0 ppm; brassica leafy vegetables: Head and stem (crop subgroup 5A) at 4.0 ppm; brassica leafy vegetables: Leafy greens (crop subgroup 5B) at 50.0 ppm; soybean forage at 9.0 ppm; soybean hay at 30.0 ppm; legume vegetables: Edible podded (crop subgroup 6A) at 4.0 ppm; legume vegetables: Succulent shelled peas and beans (crop subgroup 6B) at 0.20 ppm; legume vegetables: Dried shelled peas and beans (crop subgroup 6C) at 0.70 ppm; vegetable, foliage of legume vegetables, forage, hay and vines, forage (crop group 7) at 90.0 ppm; fruiting vegetables, tomato subgroup (crop subgroup 8-10A) at 1.00 ppm; fruiting vegetables, pepper/eggplant subgroup (crop subgroup 8-10B) at 3.00 ppm; cucurbit vegetables (crop group 9A), melon subgroup at 0.90 ppm; cucurbit vegetables (crop group 9B), cucumber/squash subgroup at 0.30 ppm; citrus fruits (crop group 10-10) at 0.90 ppm; citrus oil at 8.0 ppm; pome fruit (crop group 11-10) at 2.0 ppm; stone fruit (crop group 12-12A), cherry subgroup at 2.00 ppm; stone fruit (crop group 12-12B), peach subgroup at 1.00 ppm; stone fruit (crop group 12-12C), plum subgroup at 0.50 ppm; berries and small fruit: Caneberry (crop subgroup 13-07A) at 5.0 ppm; berries and small fruit: Bushberry (crop subgroup 13-07B) at 7.0 ppm; raisins at 4.0 ppm; berries and small fruit, small fruit vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwi (crop subgroup 13-07F) at 1.5 ppm; berries and small fruit: Low growing berry (crop subgroup 13-07G) at 2.0 ppm; sorghum, grain at 1.5 ppm; wheat milled by-products at 2.0 ppm; grass forage, fodder and hay: Forage (crop group 17) at 80.0 ppm; herb crop (subcrop group 19A) at 70.0 ppm; dill seed at 70.00 ppm; herbs, dried at 400 ppm; oilseeds, rapeseed, canola (crop subgroup 20A) at 0.70 ppm; oilseeds, sunflower, seed (crop subgroup 20B) at 0.70 ppm; and oilseeds: Cottonseed (crop subgroup 20C) at 0.80 ppm and in or on the animal commodities chicken, meat byproducts at 0.40 ppm; chicken, fat at 0.15 ppm; chicken, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, fat at 4.00 ppm; and goat, meat at 4.00 ppm. Bayer CropScience LP also requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.661 for indirect or inadvertent residues of the fungicide fluopyram (N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide) in or on the raw agricultural commodity sugarcane, cane at 0.08 ppm. High performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) is used to measure and evaluate the chemical fluopyram. Contact: RD.

    3. PP5E8362. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0439). Makhteshim Agan of North America, Inc., d/b/a ADAMA, 3120 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27604, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.427 for residues of the insecticide/miticide tau-fluvalinate in or on wine grapes at 1.0 ppm. The Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Volume II lists Method I, a GC method with electron capture detection (ECD), which is used to measure and evaluate the chemical tau-fluvalinate, cyano-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl N-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-D-valinate, in or on plant and animal commodities. The stated limits of quantitation are 0.01 ppm for plant commodities (except oil) and animal commodities and 0.02 ppm for oil. In addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) multi-residue methods published in the PAM Volume I, section 302 and 303, showed an acceptable recovery (>80%) for tau-fluvalinate. Contact: RD.

    4. PP 5E8363. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0390). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), Rutgers University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.494 for residues of the insecticide pyridaben [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] in or on cucumber at 0.5 ppm; berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry at 2.5 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.5 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.75 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit at 1.5 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.05 ppm. The proposed analytical methodology for enforcement involves extraction, partition, clean up, and detection of pyridaben residues by gas chromatography/electron capture detector (GC/ECD). The limit of quantitation (LOQ) of pyridaben by the method is 0.01192 ppm, which will allow monitoring of food residues at the level proposed for the tolerances. Contact: RD.

    5. PP 5E8371. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235). IR-4, Rutgers University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628 for residues of the insecticide chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)-carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm and fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm. In requesting these tolerances, IR-4 notes that the proposed tolerances represent a lowering of established, related tolerances in or on fruit, stone, group 12-12, except cherry, chickasaw plum, and damson plum at 4.0 ppm and nut, tree, group 14 at 0.04 ppm. Analytical methodology has been developed and validated for enforcement purposes. Contact: RD.

    6. PP 5F8343. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0226). Gowan Co., P.O. Box 5569, Yuma, AZ 85366, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide benzobicyclon in or on rice (grain, straw) at 0.1 ppm. The practical analytical method LC/MS is used to measure and evaluate the chemical benzobicyclon and the metabolite 1315P-070. Contact: RD.

    7. PP 5F8344. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0324). BASF Corp., 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.666 for residues of the fungicide fluxapyroxad in or on citrus, dried pulp at 2.7 ppm; citrus, oil at 19 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 1.0 ppm; grass forage, fodder and hay, group 17 at 30 ppm; nongrass animal feeds, group 18 at 30 ppm; and poultry, fat at 0.005 ppm. Independently validated analytical methods have been submitted for analyzing residues of parent fluxapyroxad (BAS 700 F) plus metabolites M700F008, M700F048, and M700F002 with appropriate sensitivity in/on plant/crop raw agricultural commodities and processed fractions and in animal meat, fat, liver and kidney matrices, skim milk, cream, poultry meat, fat, liver, and eggs for which tolerances have been established or are being proposed. Contact: RD.

    8. PP 5F8359. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0405). ISK Biosciences Corp., 7470 Auburn Rd., Suite A, Concord, OH, 44077, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide tolpyralate 1-[[1-Ethyl-4-[3-(2-methoxyethoxy)-2-methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)benzoyl]-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]oxy]ethyl methyl carbonate (CAS), including its metabolite MT-2153, in or on the raw agricultural commodities of corn that include field corn, sweet corn, and popcorn at 0.01 ppm. Liquid chromatography-MS/MS is used to measure and evaluate tolpyralate and its metabolite. Contact: RD.

    9. PP 5F8367. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0412). Lewis and Harrison, LLC, 122 C St., NW., Suite 505, Washington, DC 20001 (on behalf of Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., 7-1, 3-chome, Kanda-Nishiki-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-0054, Japan), requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR 180.441 for residues of the herbicide quizalofop-p-ethyl in or on crayfish at 0.04 ppm and rice, grain at 0.05 ppm. A modified Morse Method Meth-147 using reverse HPLC with fluorescence detection is used to measure and evaluate the chemical quizalofop-p-ethyl, convertible to 2-methoxy-6-chloroquinoxaline (MeCHQ). Contact: RD.

    Amended Tolerances

    1. PP 4F8261. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397). BASF Corp., 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.361 for residues of the herbicide pendimethalin in or on grass forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, forage at 1,000 ppm and grass forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, hay at 2,000 ppm. The aqueous organic solvent extraction, column clean up, and quantitation by a GC method is used to measure and evaluate the chemicals pendimethalin and its metabolite. Contact: RD.

    2. PP 4F8284. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0443). Bayer CropScience LP, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.661 for residues of the fungicide fluopyram (N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide) in or on the raw agricultural commodities peanut at 0.20 ppm; sugar beet, roots at 0.09 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.30 ppm; soybean forage at 9.0 ppm; soybean hay at 30.0 ppm; tree nuts (crop group 14) at 0.04 ppm; almond hulls at 10.00 ppm; grain, cereal, except rice and sorghum (crop group 15) at 0.90 ppm; cereal grain, except rice, forage, fodder and straw (crop group 16) at 20.0 ppm; and cotton gin by-product at 30.00 ppm and in or on the animal commodities cattle, meat byproducts at 40.00 ppm; cattle, fat at 4.00 ppm; cattle, meat at 4.00 ppm; milk, cattle at 2.00 ppm; eggs, chicken at 0.20 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.40 ppm; hog, fat at 0.04 ppm; hog, meat at 0.04 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 40.00 ppm; horse, fat at 4.00 ppm; horse, meat at 4.00 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 40.00 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 40.00 ppm; sheep, fat at 4.00 ppm; and sheep, meat at 4.00 ppm. Bayer CropScience LP also requests to delete tolerances in 40 CFR 180.661 for residues of the fungicide fluopyram (N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide) in or on the raw agricultural commodities apple at 0.30 ppm; bean, dry at 0.09 ppm; beet, sugar, roots at 0.04 ppm; apple wet pomace at 0.60 ppm; cherry at 0.60 ppm; grape, wine at 2.0 ppm; potato at 0.02 ppm; strawberry at 1.5 ppm; and watermelon at 1.0 ppm. High performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) is used to measure and evaluate the chemical fluopyram. Contact: RD.

    3. PP 5E8363. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0390). IR-4, Rutgers University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to remove existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.494 for residues of the insecticide pyridaben [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] in or on apple at 0.5 ppm; pear at 0.75 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; citrus (fruit) at 0.5 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12 at 2.5 ppm; pistachio at 0.05 ppm; grape at 1.5 ppm; and strawberry at 2.5 ppm upon approval of tolerances listed under New Tolerances, Unit II., Number 4, PP 5E8363 as they would be redundant. The proposed analytical methodology for enforcement is gas chromatography/electron capture detector (GC/ECD). The limit of quantitation (LOQ) of pyridaben by the method is 0.01192 ppm, which will allow monitoring of food residues at the level proposed for the tolerances. Contact: RD.

    4. PP 5E8371. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235). IR-4, Rutgers University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to amend the existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628 for residues of the insecticide chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)-carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Artichoke, globe from 4.0 ppm to 2.0 ppm; and hop, dried cones from 90 ppm to 40 ppm. In requesting these tolerances, IR-4 notes that the proposed amended tolerances for hop, dried cones; and artichoke, globe represent a lowering of established tolerances. Upon establishment of the tolerances associated with PP 5E8371, IR-4 requests to remove the following existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628: Nut, tree, group 14 at 0.04 ppm; pistachio at 0.04 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12, except cherry, chickasaw plum, and damson plum at 4.0 ppm; cherry, sweet at 2.0 ppm; cherry, tart at 2.0 ppm; plum, chickasaw at 2.0 ppm; and plum, damson at 2.0 ppm. Analytical methodology has been developed and validated for enforcement purposes. Contact: RD.

    5. PP 5F8344. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0324). BASF Corp., 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.666 for residues of the fungicide fluxapyroxad (BAS 700 F) in or on egg from 0.002 ppm to 0.01 ppm and to delete the established tolerance for inadvertent residues for nongrass animal feeds, group 18 at 0.3 ppm. Independently validated analytical methods have been submitted for analyzing residues of parent fluxapyroxad (BAS 700 F) plus metabolites M700F008, M700F048, and M700F002 with appropriate sensitivity in/on plant/crop raw agricultural commodities and processed fractions and in animal meat, fat, liver and kidney matrices, skim milk, cream, poultry meat, fat, liver, and eggs for which tolerances have been established or are being proposed. Contact: RD.

    New Tolerance Exemptions

    1. PP 4F8280. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0457). Spring Trading Co., 10805 W. Timberwagon Cir., Spring, TX 77380-4030 (on behalf of CH Biotech R&D Co. LTD, No. 121, Xian an Rd., Xianxi Township, Changhua County 507, Taiwan (R.O.C.) 50741), requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the plant growth regulator betaine in or on all food commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because betaine is used as an additive in baby formula as a food supplement and because there was no increased susceptibility demonstrated in the developmental toxicity and reproduction studies. Contact: BPPD.

    2. PP 4F8317. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0420). LidoChem, Inc., 20 Village Ct., Hazlet, NJ 07730, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide, nematocide, and plant growth regulator Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain PTA-4838 in or on all food commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is petitioning for a tolerance exemption. Contact: BPPD.

    3. PP IN-10786. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0373). Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, monoester with 2,2,4-trimethyl-l,3-pentanediol (CAS Reg. No. 25265-77-4) when used as an inert ingredient (solvent, cosolvent) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest under 40 CFR 180.910. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    4. PP IN-10792. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0249). Clariant Corp., 4000 Monroe Rd., Charlotte, NC 28205, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of D-Glucitol, 1-deoxy-1-(methylamino)-, N-C8-10 acyl derivs. (CAS Reg. No. 1591782-62-5) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops or to raw agricultural commodities after harvest under 40 CFR 180.910. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    5. PP IN-10807. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0421). Lamberti USA, Inc., 161 Washington St., Suite 1000, Conshohocken, PA 19428, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of polymers of tamarind seed gum, 2-hydroxypropyl ether or tamarind seed gum, 2-hydroxypropyl ether polymers with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) of 10,000 (CAS Reg. No. 68551-04-2) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    6. PP IN-10814. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0376). BASF Corp., 100 Park Ave., Florham Park, NJ 07932, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic acid, polymer with ethenylbenzene and (1-methylethenyl)benzene with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) of 2,000 (CAS Reg. No. 52831-04-6) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    7. PP IN-10821. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0482). Lamberti USA, Inc., 161 Washington St., Suite 1000, Conshohocken, PA 19428, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of cellulose carboxymethyl ether, potassium salt with a number-average molecular weight (in amu) from 1,000 to 10,000 (CAS Reg. No. 54848-04-3) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    8. PP IN-10826. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0442). BYK USA, Inc., 524 South Cherry St., Wallingford, CT 06492-4453, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of poly[oxy(methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)], α-[(9Z)-1-oxo-9-octadecen-1-yl]- ω-[[(9Z)-1-oxo-9-octadecen-1-yl]oxy] with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) of 2,300 (CAS Reg. No. 26571-49-3) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    9. PP IN-10830. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0465). Spring Trading Co., 203 Dogwood Trl., Magnolia, TX 77354 (on behalf of Croda, Inc., 315 Cherry Ln., New Castle, DE 19720), requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of polyester polyol polymers with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) greater than 1,000 (CAS Reg. Nos. 68562-93-6, 943440-33-3, 1681043-28-6, 1681043-31-1, 1681043-33-3, 1685270-83-0, 1685270-84-1, 1685270-99-8, 1685271-01-5, 1685271-02-6, and 1685271-04-8) when used as inert ingredients in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    10. PP IN-10834. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0451). Spring Trading Co., 203 Dogwood Trl., Magnolia, TX 77354 (on behalf of Croda, Inc., 315 Cherry Ln., New Castle, DE 19720), requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of polyamide ester polymers with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) greater than 1,000 (CAS Reg. Nos. 678991-29-2, 363162-42-9, 951153-32-5, 1699751-19-3, 1699751-23-9, 1699751-24-0, 1699751-25-1, 1699751-28-4, 1699751-29-5, 1699751-31-9, and 1685271-04-8) when used as inert ingredients in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    11. PP IN-10837. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0485). Stepan Co., 22 West Frontage Rd., Northfield, IL 60093, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of α-[2,4,6-tris[1-(phenyl)ethyl]phenyl]- ω-hydroxy poly(oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) copolymer, the poly(oxypropylene) content averages 2-8 moles, the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 16-30 moles, with a minimum number-average molecular weight (in amu) of 1,500 (CAS Reg. No. 70880-56-7) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations under 40 CFR 180.960. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.

    Amended Tolerance Exemption

    1. PP 4F8266. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0918). Valent BioSciences Corp., 870 Technology Way, Libertyville, IL 60048, requests to amend an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.1156 for residues of the fungicide, insecticide, algaecide, and nematocide cinnamaldehyde in or on all food commodities. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because residues of cinnamaldehyde have previously been granted an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in the Federal Register of February 17, 1999 (64 FR 7804) (FRL-6049-9) (corrected in the Federal Register of March 24, 1999 (64 FR 14099) (FRL-6069-2)). Contact: BPPD.

    Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 346a.

    Dated: August 11, 2015. R. McNally, Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21188 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 [Docket No. 120425024-5724-05] RIN 0648-XB089 Endangered and Threatened Species; Identification and Proposed Listing of Eleven Distinct Population Segments of Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia mydas) as Endangered or Threatened and Revision of Current Listings; Third Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce; United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On March 23, 2015, NMFS and USFWS (or the Services) published a proposed rule to revise the listings of the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas; hereafter referred to as the green turtle) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We opened a public comment period that lasted through June 22, 2015. On June 17, 2015, we published a document extending the public comment period through July 27, 2015. On July 27, 2015, we published a document again extending the public comment period to August 26, 2015. Having received a request to further extend the comment period, with this document we further extend the comment period to September 25, 2015.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking published on March 23, 2015 (80 FR 15271), is extended. Comments and information regarding this proposed rule must be received by close of business on September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2012-0154, by any of the following methods:

    • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal.

    1. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2012-0154,

    2. Click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and

    3. Enter or attach your comments.

    OR

    • Mail: Submit written comments to Green Turtle Proposed Listing Rule, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13535, Silver Spring, MD 20910; or Green Turtle Proposed Listing Rule, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, North Florida Ecological Services Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256.

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by the Services. All comments received will be 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. The Services will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). The proposed rule is available electronically at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/turtles/green.htm and http://www.fws.gov/northflorida/seaturtles/turtle%20factsheets/green-sea-turtle.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Schultz, NMFS (ph. 301-427-8443, email [email protected]), or Ann Marie Lauritsen, USFWS (ph. 904-731-3032, email [email protected]). Persons who use a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, and 7 days a week.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The green turtle is currently listed under the ESA as a threatened species globally, with the exception of the Florida and Mexican Pacific coast breeding populations, which are listed as endangered. On March 23, 2015 (80 FR 15271), the Services published a proposed rule to revise these listings because we found that the green turtle is composed of 11 distinct population segments (DPSs) that qualify for listing under the ESA. We proposed to remove the current listings and, in their place, list eight DPSs as threatened and three as endangered. We also proposed to apply existing protective regulations to the DPSs and to continue the existing critical habitat designation (i.e., waters surrounding Culebra Island, Puerto Rico) in effect for the North Atlantic DPS. We solicited comments on these proposed actions and indicated that comments must be received by June 22, 2015. On June 7, 2015 (80 FR 34594), we announced additional public hearings and extended the public comment period through July 27, 2015. On July 27, 2015 (80 FR 44322), we extended the public comment period through August 26, 2015, due to a typhoon and the loss of internet in Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). On August 17, 2015, we received a request to further extend the public comment period due to another typhoon and the loss of electricity in CNMI. We concur with this request and hereby extend the public comment period by an additional 30 days, until September 25, 2015. Previously submitted comments do not need to be resubmitted.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. Dated: August 18, 2015. James W. Kurth, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21150 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 165 Wednesday, August 26, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request August 21, 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.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by September 25, 2015 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. 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.

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Importation of Small Lots of Seeds Without Phytosanitary Certificates.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0285.

    Summary of Collection: Under the Plant Protection Act (PPA) (7 U.S.C. 7701-7772), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, or movement of plants and plant pests to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. The regulations contained in “Subpart-Nursery Stock, Plants, Roots, Bulbs, Seed, and Other Plant Products” (7 CFR 319.37 through 319.37-14), prohibit or restrict, among other things, the importation of living plants, plant parts, and seed for propagation. These regulations allow small lots of seed to be imported into the United States under an import permit with specific conditions, including seed packet labeling, as an alternative to a phytosanitary certificate requirement.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS' Plant Protection and Quarantine Program will collect information using PPQ form 587 from person wishing to import regulated articles such as small lots of seed to request a permit from APHIS. On the form the requestor provides contact information as well as specifics about the regulated article such as the country of origin, the quantity and names of articles, means of importation, and their port of entry arrival. APHIS uses this information to determine if a permit should be issued and, if so, uses the information to issue said permit. A certificate of inspection in the form of a label is required to be attached to each carton of the articles and to an airway bill of lading or delivery tick accompanying the articles. Each seed packet must be clearly labeled with the name of the collector/shipper, the country or origin, and the scientific name at least to the genus level, and preferably to the species level. Without the information APHIS could not verify that imported nursery stock does not present significant risk of introducing plant pests and plant disease into the United States.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 400.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 400.

    Title: Citrus Greening and Asian Citrus Psyllid; Quarantine and Interstate Movement Regulations.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0363.

    Summary of Collection: The Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture either independently or in cooperation with the States, to carry out operations or measures to detect, eradicate, suppress, control, prevent, or retard the spread of plant pests (such as citrus canker) new or widely distributed throughout the United States. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) amended the “Domestic Quarantine Notices” in 7 CFR part 301 by adding a new subpart, “Citrus Greening and Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP)” (§§ 301.76 through 301.76-11). Citrus greening, also known as Huanglonghing disease of citrus, is considered to be one of the most serious citrus diseases in the world.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect information using the following activity to address the risk associated with the interstate movement of citrus nursery stock and other regulated articles from areas quarantined for citrus greening: Limit Permit (PPO Form 530), Federal Certificate (PPO Form 540), Compliance Agreement (PPO Form 519), Label Statement, Recordkeeping, Attaching Tag to Bill of Lading, Cancellation of Certificates, Permits, and Compliance Agreements and 72 Hour Notification of Inspection. Failing to collect this information could cause a severe economic loss to the citrus industry.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 621.

    Frequency of Responses:

    Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 1.790.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21121 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Boundary and Annexation Survey AGENCY:

    Census Bureau, 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, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, submit written comments, on or before October 26, 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:

    Direct requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions to Laura Waggoner, U.S. Census Bureau, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The Census Bureau conducts the Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS) to collect and maintain information about the inventory of legal boundaries and legal actions affecting the boundaries of counties and equivalent entities, incorporated places, minor civil divisions (MCDs), and federally recognized legal American Indian and Alaska Native areas. This information provides an accurate identification of geographic areas for the Census Bureau to use in conducting the Decennial and Economic Censuses and ongoing surveys, preparing population estimates, and supporting other statistical programs of the Census Bureau and the legislative programs of the Federal government.

    Through the BAS, the Census Bureau asks each government to review materials for its jurisdiction to verify the correctness of the information portrayed. The Census Bureau requests that each government update the boundaries, supply information documenting each legal boundary change, and provide changes in the inventory of governments. The Census Bureau has a national implementation of the BAS, but each state's laws are reviewed for inclusion in the processing procedures. In addition, if it comes to the Census Bureau's attention that an area of non-tribal land is in dispute between two or more jurisdictions, the Census Bureau will not make annexations or boundary corrections until the parties come to a written agreement, or there is a documented final court decision regarding the matter and/or dispute. If there is a dispute over an area of tribal land, the Census Bureau will not make additions or boundary corrections until supporting documents are provided, or the U.S. Department of the Interior issues a comment. If necessary, the Census Bureau will request clarification regarding current boundaries, particularly if supporting documentation pre-dates 1990, from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor.

    The BAS universe and mailing materials vary depending both upon the needs of the Census Bureau in fulfilling its censuses and household surveys, and upon budget constraints. Counties or equivalent entities, federally recognized American Indian reservations (AIRs), Off-Reservation Trust Lands (ORTLs), and Tribal Subdivisions are included in every survey.

    In the years ending in 8, 9 and 0, the BAS includes all governmentally active counties and equivalent entities, incorporated places, legally defined MCDs, and legally defined federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native areas (including the Alaska Native Regional Corporations). Each governmental entity surveyed will receive materials covering its jurisdiction and one or more forms. These three years coincide with the Census Bureau's preparation for the Decennial Census. There are fewer than 40,000 governments in the universe each year.

    In all other years, the BAS reporting universe includes all legally defined federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native areas, all governmental counties and equivalent entities, MCDs in the six New England States and those incorporated places that have a population of 2,500 or greater. The reporting universe is approximately 14,000 governments due to budget constraints. The Census Bureau only follows up on a subset of governments designated as the reporting universe.

    In the years ending in 1 through 7, the Census Bureau may enter into agreements with individual states to modify the universe of MCDs and/or incorporated places to include additional entities that are known by that state to have had boundary changes, without regard to population size. Each year, the BAS will also include a single respondent request for municipio, barrio, barrio-pueblo, and subbarrio boundary and status information in Puerto Rico and Hawaiian Homeland boundary and status information in Hawaii.

    In the years ending in 6 through 9, state participants in the Redistricting Data Program (RDP) may request coordination between the BAS and RDP submissions for the Block Boundary Suggestion Project (BBSP) and Voting District Project (VTDP). The alignment of the BAS with the BBSP and VTDP will facilitate increased cooperation between state and local governments and provide the opportunity to align their effort with updates from state and local government officials participating in the BAS.

    No other Federal agency collects these data nor is there a standard collection of this information at the state level. BAS is a unique survey providing a standard result for use by federal, state, local, and tribal governments and by commercial, private, and public organizations.

    II. Method of Collection

    The Census Bureau has developed and continues to use several methods to collect information on status and updates for legal boundaries. These methods are:

    • State Certification

    • Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

    • Consolidation Agreements

    • Annual Response

    • Paper BAS

    • Digital BAS

    • Boundary Quality Assessment Reconciliation Project (BQARP)

    • Research Projects

    State Certification

    Through the BAS State Certification program, the Census Bureau invites the Governor-appointed State Certifying Official (SCO) from each state, to review the boundary and governmental unit information collected during the previous BAS cycle. The purpose of the State Certification program is to verify the accuracy and validate the BAS information with state governments for incorporated places received from the previous BAS cycle. The Census Bureau requests the SCOs review data files, including the attribute data, legal boundary changes, as well as the legal names and functional statuses of incorporated places and MCDs, and any new incorporations or disincorporations reported through the BAS. A SCO may request that the Census Bureau edit the attribute data, add missing records, or remove invalid records if their state government maintains an official record of all effective changes to legal boundaries and governmental units as mandated by state law. State Certification packages contain a letter to the Governor, a State Certifying Official Letter, a Discrepancy Letter, and a State Certification Respondent Guide.

    MOU

    In states with legislation requiring local governments to report all legal boundary updates to a state agency, state officials may enter into a MOU with the Census Bureau. States have the option to report to the Census Bureau the list of governments with known legal boundary changes and the Census Bureau will include in the BAS only those governments with known boundary changes or the state may report the legal boundary changes directly to the Census Bureau on behalf of the governments. The Census Bureau will not survey the local governments if the state reports for them. The Census Bureau will send a reminder email notification to the governments requesting them to report to the state contact, per MOU. The MOU, as agreed upon by the state and the Census Bureau, will outline the terms of the survey and reporting for governments.

    Consolidation Agreements

    Consolidation agreements allow state and county government officials, in states where there are no legislative requirements for local governments to report their legal updates to the state or county, the opportunity to reduce the response burden for their local governments. Under a consolidation agreement, a state or county responds to the BAS for the local governments that agree to allow the state or county to respond on their behalf. The Census Bureau sends the BAS materials to the state or county, as appropriate, and sends a reminder notification to the local government to report their updates to their BAS consolidator.

    Annual Response

    Annual Response involves an announcement email letter and a one-page form for the state and county governments that do not have a consolidation agreement. Through Annual Response, county, tribal, and local governments indicate whether they have boundary changes to report and provide a current contact person. The Census Bureau requests governments to reply online or through email. The Annual Response method reduces cost and respondent burden through savings on materials and effort. All governments receive this notification regardless of population size. The Census Bureau will conduct telephone follow-up only to governments in the reporting universe due to budget constraints.

    If a government requests materials through Annual Response, they may choose to download digital materials or have the materials shipped as a traditional paper package or digital media types.

    Paper BAS

    For the traditional paper package, the respondent completes the BAS form and draws the boundary updates on the maps using pencils provided in the package. The package contains large format maps, printed forms and supplies to complete the survey.

    The typical BAS package contains:

    1. Introductory letter from the Director of the Census Bureau;

    2. Appropriate BAS Form(s) that contains entity-specific identification information;

    a. BAS-1: incorporated places and consolidated cities;

    b. BAS-2: counties, parishes, and boroughs;

    c. BAS-3: MCDs;

    d. BAS-5: American Indian and Alaska Native Areas.

    3. BAS Respondent Guide;

    4. Set of maps;

    5. Return postage-paid envelope to submit boundary changes;

    6. Postcard to notify the Census Bureau of no changes to the boundary; and

    7. Supplies for updating paper maps.

    Digital BAS

    Digital BAS includes options to receive software and spatial data to make boundary updates or to make boundary updates electronically by submitting a digital file. A local contact from each government verifies the legal boundary, and then provides boundary changes and updated contact information. An official signs the materials, verifies the forms, and returns the information to the Census Bureau.

    The typical Digital BAS package contains:

    1. Introductory letter from the Director of the Census Bureau;

    2. Appropriate BAS Form(s) that contains entity-specific identification information;

    a. BAS-1: incorporated places and consolidated cities;

    b. BAS-2: counties, parishes, and boroughs;

    c. BAS-3: MCDs; and

    d. BAS-5: American Indian and Alaska Native Areas.

    3. CD or DVD and software CD for Geographic Update Partnership Software (GUPS); and

    4. Postcard to notify the Census Bureau of no changes to the boundary.

    The key dates for governments are as follows:

    1. Annual Response emailed or mailed to the local contact in December of each year.

    2. BAS package/materials shipped during the months of December, January, February, March, and April of each year.

    3. Requests to change the method of participation (i.e., paper to digital submission and vice versa) are due by April 15th of each year.

    4. Responses for inclusion in the American Community Survey (ACS) and Population Estimates Program (PEP) are due by March 1st of each year, with an effective date of January 1st of the year in question or earlier.

    5. Responses for inclusion in the following year's BAS materials are due by May 31st of each year and will include any annexation received from the previous or current year.

    6. In year 2020, all legal documentation for inclusion in the 2020 Census must be effective as of January 1, 2020 or earlier. All legal boundary changes will be placed on hold and updated during the 2021 BAS if effective January 2, 2020 or later.

    BQARP

    To improve boundary quality in the Census Bureau's Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) System, the Census Bureau is introducing the Boundary Quality Assessment Reconciliation Project (BQARP) to support the BAS program. BQARP is a project to assess, analyze, and improve the spatial quality of legal and administrative boundaries within MAF/TIGER. Ensuring quality boundaries is a critical component of the geographic preparations for the 2020 Census and the Census Bureau's ongoing Geographic Partnership Programs (GPPs) and surveys. In addition, the improvement of boundary quality is an essential element of the Census Bureau's commitment as the responsible agency for legal boundaries under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-16. The goal of BQARP is to establish a new, accurate baseline for boundaries within an entire state or county, which the BAS would then continue the collection of annexations and de-annexations on a transaction basis as they occur over time. The estimated work burden for participation is 25 hours per participant.

    Research Projects

    BAS continues to work to improve the survey based on feedback received from local governments. The Census Bureau plans to conduct two research projects during 2016. The first research project is for BAS form redesign for potential use for the 2017 BAS Forms. The second research project is to test an option for local governments to provide a list of addresses associated with an annexation to continue to improve data quality in MAF/TIGER. Participation is voluntary for these research projects. The estimated work burden for participation is 3 hours per participant.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0151.

    Form Number: BAS 1, BAS 2, BAS 3, BAS 5, BAS 6, BASSC-1, BASSC-2, BASSC-3, and BASSC-4.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: All active, functioning counties or statistically equivalent entities, incorporated places (including consolidated cities), MCDs, all federally recognized AIRs and ORTLs entities in the United States, and municipios, barrios and subbarrios in Puerto Rico.

    Estimated Number of Respondents:

    Annual Response Notification: 39,400.

    No Change Response: 25,000.

    Telephone Follow-up: 14,000.

    Packages with Changes: 5,000.

    State Certification Review: 49.

    State Certification Local Review: 1,000.

    Boundary Quality Assessment Reconciliation Project: 16.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation State Review: 50.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation Local Review: 2,000.

    Research Projects: 40.

    Estimated Total Number of Respondents: 86,555.

    Estimated Time per Response:

    Annual Response Notification: 30 minutes.

    No Change Response: 4 hours.

    Telephone Follow-up: 30 minutes.

    Packages with Changes: 8 hours.

    State Certification Review: 10 hours.

    State Certification Local Review: 2 hours.

    Boundary Quality Assessment Reconciliation Project: 25 hours.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation State Review: 20 hours.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation Local Review: 2 hours.

    Research Projects: 3 hours.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours per Year:

    Annual Response Notification: 19,700.

    No Change Response: 100,000.

    Telephone Follow-up: 7,000.

    Packages with Changes: 40,000.

    State Certification Review: 490.

    State Certification Local Review: 2,000.

    Boundary Quality Assessment Reconciliation Project: 400.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation State Review: 1,000.

    Redistricting Data Program Reconciliation Local Review: 4,000.

    Research Projects: 120.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 174,710.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. Section 6.

    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.

    Summarization of comments submitted in response to this notice will be included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection. Comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Glenna Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21106 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-022] Certain Uncoated Paper From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) preliminarily determines that certain uncoated paper (uncoated paper) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephanie Moore or Paul Stolz, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3692 or (202) 482-4474, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department published a notice of initiation of this investigation on February 18, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 8608 (February 18, 2015) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Uncoated Paper from Indonesia” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is uncoated paper from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I of this notice.

    Scope Comments

    Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For discussion of those comments, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

    3See also Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination of the Above-Captioned Investigations,” dated concurrently with this notice.

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determination

    On May 15, 2015, the petitioners 4 made timely requests for a 50-day postponement of the preliminary determination in this investigation pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e).5 On June 1, 2015, we postponed the preliminary determination by 50 days, to August 19, 2015.6

    4 The petitioners in this proceeding are United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; Domtar Corporation; Finch Paper LLC; P.H. Glatfelter Company; and Packaging Corporation of America.

    5See the petitioners' letters to the Department dated May 15, 2015 and May 18, 2015.

    6See Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Postponment of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 31017 (June 1, 2015).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. There is one mandatory respondent participating in this investigation, Asia Symbol (Guangdong) Paper Co., Ltd., (AS Guangdong), Greenpoint Global Trading (Macao Commercial Offshore) Ltd., (Greenpoint), and Asia Symbol (Shandong) Pulp & Paper Co., Ltd. (AS Shandong (collectively, Asia Symbol). Export price for this company is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a nonmarket economy within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, normal value (NV) has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c). Specifically, the Department preliminarily selected South Africa as the surrogate country, which is at the same level of economic development as the PRC and is a significant producer of comparable merchandise. Thus, we calculated NV using South African prices, when available, to value the respondent's factors of production (FOPs). For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Because mandatory respondents Shandong Sun Paper Industry Joint Stock Co., Inc. (Sun Paper), and UPM (China) Co., Ltd. (UPM) failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire, we preliminarily determine to apply adverse facts available (AFA) to these respondents, in accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308. As a part of the application of AFA, we are treating these mandatory respondents as part of the PRC-wide entity. Further, because the PRC-wide entity also failed to cooperate to the best of its ability in complying with our requests for information,7 we determined an estimated weighted-average dumping margin based on adverse facts available for the PRC-wide entity, which includes the mandatory respondents. For further discussion, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    7 Specifically, the Department did not receive responses to its quantity and value questionnaire (Q&V) from the following companies: Shandong Tralin Paper Group (Shandong Tralin); MCC Paper Group (MCC Paper); Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings (Shandong Chenming); Shandong Huatai Paper Industry Shareholding Co., Ltd. (Shandong Huatai); and Shandong Taishan Paper Group (Shandong Taishan). See Memorandum to the File, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Uncoated Paper from the People's Republic of China: FedEx-UPS Delivery Confirmations (Updated),” dated March 25, 2015.

    Combination Rates

    In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it would calculate combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter Producer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Greenpoint Global Trading (Macao Commercial Offshore) Ltd Asia Symbol (Guangdong) Paper Co., Ltd.; and Asia Symbol (Shandong) Pulp & Paper Co., Ltd 97.48 PRC-Wide Entity 193.30

    As detailed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, Sun Paper and UPM did not demonstrate that they are entitled to a separate rate. Accordingly, we consider Sun Paper and UPM to be part of the PRC-Wide Entity. Further, because the Department did not receive a Q&V response from the following companies, the PRC-wide entity also includes: (1) Shandong Tralin; (2) MCC Paper; (3) Shandong Chenming; (4) Shandong Huatai; and (5) Shandong Taishan.

    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of uncoated paper from the PRC, as described in Appendix I of this notice, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(d), we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above, adjusted for export subsidies found in the preliminary determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation.8 Therefore, for cash deposit purposes, we are subtracting from the applicable cash deposit rate that portion of the countervailing duty rate attributable to the export subsidies found in the preliminary affirmative countervailing duty determination. Accordingly, the export subsidy offsets are as follows: 0.13 percent for Asia Symbol, and 0.13 percent for PRC-wide entity.9 After this adjustment, the resulting cash deposit rates will be 97.35 percent for Asia Symbol,and 193.17 percent for the PRC-wide entity.

    8See Certain Uncoated Paper From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Determination, 80 FR 36968 (June 29, 2015), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    9See Memorandum to the File from Stephanie Moore, Case Analyst, entitled, “Placing Information on the Record: Export Subsidies Calculated in the Preliminary Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Uncoated Paper from the People's Republic of China,”dated concurrently with this notice.

    Further, pursuant to section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), we will instruct CBP to require cash deposits10 equal to the weighted-average amount by which NV exceeds U.S. price, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies, as follows: (1) The cash-deposit rate for the exporter/producer combination listed above will be the dumping margin that the Department determined in this preliminary determination; (2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise under consideration that have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin established for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    10See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.11 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    11See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must normally be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 12

    12See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    Asia Symbol requested that, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final determination by 60 days (i.e., to 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination), and agreed to extend the application of the provisional measures prescribed under section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), from a four-month period to a period not to exceed six months.13 In addition, the petitioners also requested that, in the event of a negative preliminary determination, the Department postpone its final determination to 135 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination.14

    13See letter from Asia Symbol titled, “Certain Uncoated Paper From the People's Republic of China: Request to Postpone Final Determination,” dated July 31, 2015.

    14See letter from the petitioners entitled, “Certain Uncoated Paper From the People's Republic of China: Request For Postponement of The Final Determination,” dated July 31, 2015.

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.15

    15See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes uncoated paper in sheet form; weighing at least 40 grams per square meter but not more than 150 grams per square meter; that either is a white paper with a GE brightness level 1 of 85 or higher or is a colored paper; whether or not surface-decorated, printed (except as described below), embossed, perforated, or punched; irrespective of the smoothness of the surface; and irrespective of dimensions (Certain Uncoated Paper).

    1 One of the key measurements of any grade of paper is brightness. Generally speaking, the brighter the paper the better the contrast between the paper and the ink. Brightness is measured using a GE Reflectance Scale, which measures the reflection of light off a grade of paper. One is the lowest reflection, or what would be given to a totally black grade, and 100 is the brightest measured grade. “Colored paper” as used in this scope definition means a paper with a hue other than white that reflects one of the primary colors of magenta, yellow, and cyan (red, yellow, and blue) or a combination of such primary colors.

    Certain Uncoated Paper includes (a) uncoated free sheet paper that meets this scope definition; (b) uncoated ground wood paper produced from bleached chemi-thermo-mechanical pulp (BCTMP) that meets this scope definition; and (c) any other uncoated paper that meets this scope definition regardless of the type of pulp used to produce the paper.

    Specifically excluded from the scope are (1) paper printed with final content of printed text or graphics and (2) lined paper products, typically school supplies, composed of paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines that would make the paper unsuitable for copying or printing purposes.

    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 4802.56.1000, 4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000, 4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000, 4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040, 4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000, 4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some imports of subject merchandise may also be classified under 4802.62.1000, 4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000, 4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020, 4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000, 4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000, 4811.90.8050 and 4811.90.9080. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.

    Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Selection of Respondents IV. Period of Investigation V. Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures VI. Scope Comments VII. Scope of the Investigation VIII. Affiliation Determination IX. Discussion of Methodology A. Non-Market Economy B. Separate Rates C. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value Data D. Surrogate Country E. Economic Compatibility F. Significant Producer of Comparable Merchandise G. Data Availability H. Date of Sale I. Fair Value Comparisons a. Determination of the Comparison Method b. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis J. Export Price K. Value-Added Tax L. Normal Value M. Factor Valuation Methodology X. Currency Conversion XI. Application Of Facts Available And Adverse Inferences A. Use of Facts Available B. Application of Facts Available with an Adverse Inference C. Corroboration of the AFA Rate XII. Adjustment Under Section 777a(F) Of The Act XIII. Verification XIV. U.S. International Trade Commission Notification XV. Disclosure And Public Comment XVI. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-21173 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-560-828] Certain Uncoated Paper From Indonesia: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) preliminarily determines that certain uncoated paper from Indonesia is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Blaine Wiltse or Shannon Morrison, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6345 or (202) 482-6274, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department initiated this investigation on February 10, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 8608 (February 18, 2015) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Uncoated Paper from Indonesia” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is uncoated paper from Indonesia. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I of this notice.

    Scope Comments

    Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For discussion of those comments, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

    3See also Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated August 3, 2015.

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determinations

    On May 15, 2015, the petitioners 4 made a timely request for a 50-day postponement of the preliminary determination in this investigation pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e).5 On June 1, 2015, we postponed the preliminary determination by 50 days, to August 19, 2015.6

    4 The petitioners in this proceeding are United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; Domtar Corporation; Finch Paper LLC; P.H. Glatfelter Company; and Packaging Corporation of America.

    5See The petitioners' Letter to the Department, “Certain Uncoated Paper From Indonesia: Request For Postponement Of The Preliminary Determination, dated May 15, 2015.

    6See Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 31017 (June 1, 2015).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. There is one mandatory respondent participating in this investigation, April Fine Paper Macao Limited/PT Anugerah Kertas Utama/PT Riau Andalan Kertas (collectively, APRIL). Export price for this company is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value (NV) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Adverse Facts Available

    Because mandatory respondents Great Champ Trading Limited (Great Champ), Indah Kiat Pulp & Paper TBK (IK), and Pabrik Kertas Tjiwi Kimia (TK) failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire, we preliminarily determine to apply adverse facts available (AFA) to these respondents, in accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308. Moreover, the Department is collapsing IK and TK, along with an additional affiliated paper producer PT. Pindo Deli Pulp and Paper Mills because we find that these companies meet the criteria set forth in 19 CFR 351.401(f). Therefore, we are assigning these companies a single AFA rate—under the name APP/SMG—for purposes of the preliminary determination. For further discussion, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Consistent with sections 733(d)(1)(A)(ii) and 735(c)(5) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated all-others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that where all rates are zero, de minimis or based on total facts available, the Department may use “any reasonable method” to establish the rate for non-selected respondents.

    In this investigation, we calculated a company-specific rate for the only cooperative mandatory respondent, APRIL, that is zero. Therefore, and pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, we preliminary determine that it is reasonable to calculate the all-others rate based on a simple average of the zero margin and the margins based on AFA.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/manufacturer Weighted-
  • average dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Great Champ Trading Limited 51.75 Indah Kiat Pulp & Paper TBK/Pabrik Kertas Tjiwi Kimia/PT 51.75 Pindo Deli Pulp and Paper Mills (APP/SMG) April Fine Paper Macao Limited/PT Anugerah Kertas Utama/PT Riau Andalan Kertas (APRIL) 0.00 All Others 34.50
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of certain uncoated paper from Indonesia, as described in Appendix I of this notice, for all companies other than APRIL which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. For APRIL, because its estimated weighted-average preliminary dumping margin is zero, we are not directing CBP to suspend liquidation of APRIL's entries.

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(d), we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above, adjusted for export subsidies found in the preliminary determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation.7 Specifically, consistent with our longstanding practice, where the product under investigation is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the amount by which the NV exceeds the U.S. price, as indicated below, less the amount of the countervailing duty determined to constitute an export subsidy.8 Therefore, for cash deposit purposes, we are subtracting from the applicable cash deposit rate that portion of the countervailing duty rate attributable to the export subsidies found in the preliminary affirmative countervailing duty determination. Accordingly, the export subsidy offsets are as follows: 29.36 percent for Great Champ and APP/SMG; and 0.00 percent for all others.9 After this adjustment, the resulting cash deposit rates will be 22.39 percent for Great Champ and APP/SMG.

    7See Certain Uncoated Paper from Indonesia: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Determination, 80 FR 36971 (June 29, 2015), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (CVD Investigation Uncoated Paper from Indonesia).

    8See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR 67306, 67307 (November 17, 2004); and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances Determination: Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 17413 (March 26, 2012).

    9See CVD Investigation Uncoated Paper from Indonesia.

    Further, pursuant to section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), we will instruct CBP to require cash deposits 10 equal to the above-noted rates, adjusted as appropriate for export subsidies, as follows: (1) The rate for the mandatory respondents listed above will be the respondent-specific rate we determined in this preliminary determination; (2) if the exporter is not a mandatory respondent identified above, but the producer is, the rate will be the specific rate established for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the rate for all other producers or exporters will be the all others rate. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    10See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.11 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    11See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.12 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    APRIL requested that, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final determination by 60 days (i.e., to 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination), and agreed to extend the application of the provisional measures prescribed under section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), from a four-month period to a period not to exceed six months.13 In addition, the petitioners also requested that, in the event of a negative preliminary determination, the Department postpone its final determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.210(b)(c)(i).14

    13Id.

    14See Letter from the petitioners, entitled, “Certain Uncoated Paper from Indonesia—Petitioners' Comments on the Extension of the Final Determination,” dated July 31, 2015.

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporter accounts for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.15

    15See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes uncoated paper in sheet form; weighing at least 40 grams per square meter but not more than 150 grams per square meter; that either is a white paper with a GE brightness level 1 of 85 or higher or is a colored paper; whether or not surface-decorated, printed (except as described below), embossed, perforated, or punched; irrespective of the smoothness of the surface; and irrespective of dimensions (Certain Uncoated Paper).

    1 One of the key measurements of any grade of paper is brightness. Generally speaking, the brighter the paper the better the contrast between the paper and the ink. Brightness is measured using a GE Reflectance Scale, which measures the reflection of light off a grade of paper. One is the lowest reflection, or what would be given to a totally black grade, and 100 is the brightest measured grade. “Colored paper” as used in this scope definition means a paper with a hue other than white that reflects one of the primary colors of magenta, yellow, and cyan (red, yellow, and blue) or a combination of such primary colors.

    Certain Uncoated Paper includes (a) uncoated free sheet paper that meets this scope definition; (b) uncoated ground wood paper produced from bleached chemi-thermo-mechanical pulp (BCTMP) that meets this scope definition; and (c) any other uncoated paper that meets this scope definition regardless of the type of pulp used to produce the paper.

    Specifically excluded from the scope are (1) paper printed with final content of printed text or graphics and (2) lined paper products, typically school supplies, composed of paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines that would make the paper unsuitable for copying or printing purposes.

    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 4802.56.1000, 4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000, 4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000, 4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040, 4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000, 4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some imports of subject merchandise may also be classified under 4802.62.1000, 4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000, 4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020, 4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000, 4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000, 4811.90.8050 and 4811.90.9080. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures V. Scope Comments VI. Affiliation Determinations VII. Discussion of Methodology a. Determination of the Comparison Method b. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis VIII. Date of Sale IX. Product Comparisons X. Export Price XI. Duty Drawback XII. Normal Value a. Home Market Viability b. Level of Trade c. Cost of Production (COP) Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test d. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison Market Prices XIII. Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference a. Use of Facts Available b. Application of Facts Available with an Adverse Inference c. Selection and Corroboration of Adverse Facts Available (AFA) Rate XIV. Critical Circumstances XV. Currency Conversion
    [FR Doc. 2015-21180 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-008] Calcium Hypochlorite 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.

    DATES:

    Effective date August 26, 2015.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) has received a timely request for a new shipper review (“NSR”) of the antidumping duty (“AD”) order on calcium hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). The Department has determined that the request meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for initiation. The period of review (“POR”) for this NSR is July 25, 2014, through June 30, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Irene Gorelik, 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: 202-482-6905.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The AD order on calcium hypochlorite was published in the Federal Register on January 30, 2015.1 On July 20, 2015, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.214(b), the Department received a NSR request from Haixing Jingmei Chemical Products Sales Co., Ltd. (“Haixing Jingmei”).2 Haixing Jingmei certified that it is the exporter of the subject merchandise upon which the request is based and that its affiliate, Haixing Eno Chemical Co., Ltd., is the producer of the subject merchandise.3

    1See Calcium Hypochlorite From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 80 FR 5085 (January 30, 2015) (“Order”).

    2See Letter from Haixing Jingmei, “Entry of Appearance and Corrected Request for New Shipper Review: Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China,” dated July 20, 2015 (“NSR Request”).

    3Id., at 2-3 and Exhibit 1.

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(ii), Haixing Jingmei certified that it did not export subject merchandise to the United States during the period of investigation (“POI”).4 Further, Haixing Eno Chemical Co., Ltd. certified that it is the producer of the subject merchandise upon which the request is based. In addition, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Haixing Jingmei certified that, since the initiation of the investigation, it has never been affiliated with any PRC exporter or producer who exported subject merchandise to the United States during the POI, including those respondents not individually examined during the investigation.5 As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), Haixing Jingmei also certified that its export activities were not controlled by the government of the PRC.6

    4Id.

    5Id.

    6Id.

    In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Haixing Jingmei submitted documentation establishing the following: (1) The date on which it first shipped subject merchandise for export to the United States; (2) the volume of its first shipment and subsequent shipments; and (3) the date of its first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United States.7

    7Id., at 3 and Exhibit 2; see also Letter from Haixing Jingmei, “Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China: Response to Pre-Initiation Question,” dated July 24, 2015.

    Finally, the Department conducted a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) database query and confirmed the price, quantity, date of sale, and date of entry of Haixing Jingmei's sales.8

    8 The Department will place the results of the completed CBP database query along with Haixing Jingmei's entry documents on the record after the publication of this notice.

    Initiation of New Shipper Review

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.214(b), and 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1), and based on the evidence provided by Haixing Jingmei, we find that its request meets the threshold requirements for initiation of the NSR for shipments of calcium hypochlorite from the PRC produced by Haixing Eno Chemical Co., Ltd. and exported by Haixing Jingmei.9 The POR is July 25, 2014, through June 30, 2015.10 If the information supplied by Haixing Jingmei is found to be incorrect or insufficient during the course of this proceeding, the Department may rescind the review for Haixing Jingmei or apply facts available pursuant to section 776 of the Act, depending on the facts on record.

    9See “Memorandum to the File, from Irene Gorelik, Senior Analyst, “Calcium Hypochlorite from the People's Republic of China: New Shipper Initiation Checklist,” dated concurrently with this notice and herein incorporated by reference.

    10See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(ii)(B).

    Absent a determination that the new shipper review is extraordinarily complicated, the Department intends to issue the preliminary results of this NSR within 180 days from the date of initiation and the final results within 90 days after the date on which the preliminary results are issued.11

    11See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(i).

    It is the Department's usual practice, in cases involving non-market economies (“NMEs”), to require that a company seeking to establish eligibility for an antidumping duty rate separate from the NME entity-wide rate provide evidence of de jure and de facto absence of government control over the company's export activities. Accordingly, we will issue questionnaires to Haixing Jingmei that will include a section requesting information concerning its eligibility for a separate rate. The NSR will proceed if the responses provide sufficient indication that Haixing Jingmei is not subject to either de jure or de facto government control with respect to its exports of subject merchandise.

    We will instruct CBP to allow, at the option of the importer, the posting, until the completion of this review, of a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for each entry of the subject merchandise from the requesting companies in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e). Because Haixing Jingmei certified that its affiliate Haixing Eno Chemical Co., Ltd. produced the subject merchandise which Haixing Jingmei exported, the sales of which are the basis for the NSR request, we will instruct CBP to permit the use of a bond only for subject merchandise which Haixing Eno Chemical Co., Ltd produced and Haixing Jingmei exported.

    Interested parties requiring access to proprietary information in this NSR should submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective order, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 19 CFR 351.306.

    This initiation and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.214, and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i).

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21185 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-019] Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“Department”) published the Preliminary Determination of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigation of boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale (“boltless steel shelves”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) on January 30, 2015.1 The Department determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of boltless steel shelves from the PRC. For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the “Final Determination” section of this notice. The period of investigation is January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013.

    1See Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 80 FR 5089 (January 30, 2015) (“Preliminary Determination”).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susan Pulongbarit (Topsun) or Paul Walker (ETDZ), 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 202.482.4031, or 202.482.0413, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On January 30, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Determination. 2 Between May 6 and June 6, 2015, we conducted verifications of the questionnaire responses of Nanjing ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd. (“ETDZ”), Nanjing Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (“Topsun”), and a customer.3 On May 21, 2015, the Department issued the Post-preliminary Determination.4 Between June 24 and June 29, 2015, interested parties submitted case and rebuttal briefs. A full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination may be found in the I&D Memo, which is hereby adopted by this notice.5 The I&D Memo is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). 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 I&D Memo can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed I&D Memo and the electronic versions are identical in content.

    2See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 80 FR 5089 (January 30, 2015) (“Preliminary Determination”) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (“PDM”).

    3See Memorandum to Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, from Susan S. Pulongbarit, Senior International Trade Analyst, “Countervailing Duty Investigation: Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Verification Report: Nanjing Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (“Topsun”) and Nanjing Great Wall Co., Ltd. (“Great Wall”),” dated June 16, 2015; Memorandum to Scot T. Fullerton, Program Manager, from Paul Walker, Case Analyst, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Verification Report for Ningbo ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd.,” dated June 16, 2015; and Memorandum to Paul Walker, Acting Program Manager, from Susan Pulongbarit, Case Analyst, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Verification Report,” dated June 17, 2015.

    4See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary, Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Post-Preliminary Determination Decision Memorandum,” dated May 29, 2015 (“Post-preliminary Determination”).

    5See Memorandum to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary, Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination,” dated concurrently with this notice (“I&D Memo”).

    Scope of the Investigation and Scope Comments

    The scope of this investigation covers boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale, with or without decks (“boltless steel shelving”). The term “prepackaged for sale” means that, at a minimum, the steel vertical supports (i.e., uprights and posts) and steel horizontal supports (i.e., beams, braces) necessary to assemble a completed shelving unit (with or without decks) are packaged together for ultimate purchase by the end-user. The scope also includes add-on kits. Add-on kits include, but are not limited to, kits that allow the end-user to add an extension shelving unit onto an existing boltless steel shelving unit such that the extension and the original unit will share common frame elements (e.g., two posts). The term “boltless” refers to steel shelving in which the vertical and horizontal supports forming the frame are assembled primarily without the use of nuts and bolts, or screws. The vertical and horizontal support members for boltless steel shelving are assembled by methods such as, but not limited to, fitting a rivet, punched or cut tab, or other similar connector on one support into a hole, slot or similar receptacle on another support. The supports lock together to form the frame for the shelving unit, and provide the structural integrity of the shelving unit separate from the inclusion of any decking. The incidental use of nuts and bolts, or screws to add accessories, wall anchors, tie-bars or shelf supports does not remove the product from scope. Boltless steel shelving units may also come packaged as partially assembled, such as when two upright supports are welded together with front-to-back supports, or are otherwise connected, to form an end unit for the frame. The boltless steel shelving covered by this investigation may be commonly described as rivet shelving, welded frame shelving, slot and tab shelving, and punched rivet (quasi-rivet) shelving as well as by other trade names. The term “deck” refers to the shelf that sits on or fits into the horizontal supports (beams or braces) to provide the horizontal storage surface of the shelving unit.

    The scope includes all boltless steel shelving meeting the description above, regardless of (1) vertical support or post type (including but not limited to open post, closed post and tubing); (2) horizontal support or beam/brace profile (including but not limited to Z-beam, C-beam, L-beam, step beam and cargo rack); (3) number of supports; (4) surface coating (including but not limited to paint, epoxy, powder coating, zinc and other metallic coating); (5) number of levels; (6) weight capacity; (7) shape (including but not limited to rectangular, square, and corner units); (8) decking material (including but not limited to wire decking, particle board, laminated board or no deck at all); or (9) the boltless method by which vertical and horizontal supports connect (including but not limited to keyhole and rivet, slot and tab, welded frame, punched rivet and clip).

    Specifically excluded from the scope are:

    • Wall-mounted shelving, defined as shelving that is hung on the wall and does not stand on, or transfer load to, the floor; 6

    6 The addition of a wall bracket or other device to attach otherwise freestanding subject merchandise to a wall does not meet the terms of this exclusion.

    • wire shelving units, which consist of shelves made from wire that incorporates both a wire deck and wire horizontal supports (taking the place of the horizontal beams and braces) into a single piece with tubular collars that slide over the posts and onto plastic sleeves snapped on the posts to create the finished shelving unit;

    • bulk-packed parts or components of boltless steel shelving units; and

    • made-to-order shelving systems.

    Subject boltless steel shelving enters the United States through Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) statistical subheadings 9403.20.0018, 9403.20.0020, 9403.20.0025, and 9403.20.0026, but may also enter through HTSUS 9403.10.0040. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    The Department received comments regarding the scope of this investigation from numerous interested parties, which we have summarized and addressed in the accompanying I&D Memo.7

    7See I&D Memo at Comments XIII.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the I&D Memo. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the I&D Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix.

    Use of Adverse Facts Available

    For purposes of this final determination, we relied on facts available, and have drawn an adverse inference, in accordance with sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”), in determining the countervailability of the GOC's provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration (“LTAR”), the GOC's provision of hot-rolled coiled steel for LTAR, and for certain companies which did not respond to the Department's quantity and value questionnaire. The Department also relied on facts available in determining the countervailability of the following programs: Exhibition Subsidy, Foreign Trade Bureau Award, Export Credit Insurance and Export Subsidy for High-tech Merchandise, and the Innovative Growth Subsidy. The Department notes that because one or more respondents did not act to the best of their ability to respond to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.8 For further information, see “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the I&D Memo.

    8See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from parties, and minor corrections presented at verification, we made certain changes to the subsidy rate calculations since the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the I&D Memo.

    Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated an estimated individual countervailable subsidy rate for each producer/exporter of the subject merchandise individually investigated.9 We determine the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rates to be:

    9 Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that, for companies not individually investigated, we will determine an “all others” rate equal to the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. Notwithstanding the language of section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we have not calculated the “all others” rate by weight averaging the rates of ETDZ and Topsun because doing so risks disclosure of proprietary information. Therefore, we calculated a simple average of ETDZ's and Topsun's rates.

    Company Subsidy rate (percent) Ningbo ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd 12.40 Nanjing Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd 15.05 All Others 13.73 Dalian Huameilong Metal Products Co., Ltd * 80.45 Dongguan Yuan Er Sheng Machinery Source Hardware Co., Ltd * 80.45 Dong Rong Metal Products Co., Ltd * 80.45 Global Storage Equipment Manufacturer Limited * 80.45 Intradin (Shanghai) Import & Export Co., Ltd * 80.45 Jinhua Development District Hongfa Tool, Ltd * 80.45 Kunshan Jisheng Metal & Plastic Co., Ltd * 80.45 Nanjing Huade Warehousing Equipment Manufacturing Co. Ltd * 80.45 Nanjing Whitney Metal Products Co., Ltd * 80.45 Nanjing Yodoly Logistics Equipments Manufacturing Co., Ltd * 80.45 Ningbo Decko Metal Products Trade Co., Ltd * 80.45 Ningbo Haifa Metal Works Co., Ltd * 80.45 Ningbo HaiFa Office Equipment Co., Ltd * 80.45 Ningbo TLT Metal Products Co., Ltd * 80.45 * Non-cooperative company to which an adverse facts available rate is being applied. See “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” section in the I&D Memo. Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of the public announcement of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise from the PRC that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 30, 2015, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after May 30, 2015, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from January 30, 2015, through May 29, 2015.

    If the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act, and we will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

    ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (“APO”), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: August 14, 2015. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the I&D Memo Comment I: Whether State Ownership Makes an Entity a Government Authority Comment II: Whether Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) Affiliations/Activities by Company Officials Make the Company a Government Authority Comment III: Whether the GOC Responded to the Best of its Ability Regarding Ownership and CCP Affiliation for HRCS Suppliers and Provided Sufficient Evidence to Find that Some Producers Were not Government Authorities Comment IV: Whether the Provision of HRCS Is Specific Comment V: Use of a Tier-One Price for the Provision of HRCS Comment VI: Cold-Rolled for LTAR Comment VII: Whether to Adjust the HRCS Benchmark Values Comment VIII: Whether the Provision of Electricity is Countervailable Comment IX: Topsun's Denominator Comment X: Export Seller's Credits and Export Buyer's Credits from China ExIm Comment XI: Two Free Three Half Program Comment XII: Other Programs Comment XIII: Whether Whirlpool's Products are Within the Scope
    [FR Doc. 2015-20785 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-471-807] Certain Uncoated Paper From Portugal: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that certain uncoated paper from Portugal is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The period of investigation (“POI”) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kabir Archuletta, 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) 482-2593.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on February 18, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 8608 (February 18, 2015) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Uncoated Paper from Portugal” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is uncoated paper from Portugal. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For discussion of those comments, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

    3See also Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations” (August 3, 2015).

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determination

    On May 18, 2015, Petitioners 4 submitted a timely request for a 50-day postponement of the preliminary determination in this investigation pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e).5 On June 1, 2015, we postponed the preliminary determination by 50 days.6 As a result of the postponement, the revised deadline for the preliminary determination of this investigation is now August 19, 2015.

    4 Petitioners are United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; Domtar Corporation; Finch Paper LLC; P.H. Glatfelter Company; and Packaging Corporation of America (collectively “Petitioners”).

    5See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Petitioners “Request For Postponement Of The Preliminary Determination” (May 18, 2015).

    6See Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 31017 (June 1, 2015).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. There is one mandatory respondent participating in this investigation, Portucel S.A. (“Portucel”). Export price for this company is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value (“NV”) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Consistent with sections 733(d)(1)(A)(ii) and 735(c)(5) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated all-others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.

    Portucel is the only respondent for which the Department calculated a company-specific rate. Therefore, for purposes of determining the “all others” rate and pursuant to section 735(d)(5)(A) of the Act, we are using the dumping margin calculated for Portucel, as referenced in the “Preliminary Determination” section below.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Portucel S.A. 29.53 All Others 29.53
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of uncoated paper from Portugal, as described in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the preliminary weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above.7 These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    7See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.8 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    8See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.9 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    9See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by Petitioners. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On July 30, 2015, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(b) and (e), Portucel requested that, contingent upon an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV for Portucel, the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.10 In addition, Petitioners requested that the Department postpone its final determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(i).11

    10See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Portucel “Request for Postponement of Final Determination” (July 30, 2015).

    11See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Petitioners “Petitioners' Comments on the Extension of the Final Determination” (July 31, 2015).

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.12

    12See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (“ITC”) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I

    The merchandise covered by this investigation includes uncoated paper in sheet form; weighing at least 40 grams per square meter but not more than 150 grams per square meter; that either is a white paper with a GE brightness level 13 of 85 or higher or is a colored paper; whether or not surface-decorated, printed (except as described below), embossed, perforated, or punched; irrespective of the smoothness of the surface; and irrespective of dimensions (Certain Uncoated Paper).

    13 One of the key measurements of any grade of paper is brightness. Generally speaking, the brighter the paper the better the contrast between the paper and the ink. Brightness is measured using a GE Reflectance Scale, which measures the reflection of light off a grade of paper. One is the lowest reflection, or what would be given to a totally black grade, and 100 is the brightest measured grade. “Colored paper” as used in this scope definition means a paper with a hue other than white that reflects one of the primary colors of magenta, yellow, and cyan (red, yellow, and blue) or a combination of such primary colors.

    Certain Uncoated Paper includes (a) uncoated free sheet paper that meets this scope definition; (b) uncoated ground wood paper produced from bleached chemi-thermo-mechanical pulp (BCTMP) that meets this scope definition; and (c) any other uncoated paper that meets this scope definition regardless of the type of pulp used to produce the paper.

    Specifically excluded from the scope are (1) paper printed with final content of printed text or graphics and (2) lined paper products, typically school supplies, composed of paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines that would make the paper unsuitable for copying or printing purposes.

    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 4802.56.1000, 4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000, 4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000, 4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040, 4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000, 4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some imports of subject merchandise may also be classified under 4802.62.1000, 4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000, 4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020, 4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000, 4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000, 4811.90.8050 and 4811.90.9080. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Period of Investigation 4. Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures 5. Scope Comments 6. Affiliation and Collapsing 7. Discussion of Methodology A. Determination of the Comparison Method B. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis 8. Date of Sale 9. Product Comparisons 10. Constructed Export Price 11. Excluded U.S. Sales 12. Normal Value A. Home Market Viability B. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test C. Level of Trade D. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test E. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison-Market Prices 13. Facts Available A. Use of Facts Available B. Application of Facts Available with an Adverse Inference 14. Currency Conversion
    [FR Doc. 2015-21183 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-018] Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“Department”) determines that boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 735 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The final weighted-average dumping margins for the investigation on boltless steel shelving units from the PRC are listed in the “Final Determination Margins” section, infra.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kabir Archuletta or Irene Gorelik, 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) 482-2593 or (202) 482-6905, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On April 1, 2015, the Department published its Preliminary Determination. 1 On April 17, 2015, we published an Amended Preliminary Determination and postponement of the final determination.2 We invited interested parties to comment on our Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV and Amended Preliminary Determination. For a list of the parties that filed case and rebuttal briefs, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.3

    1See Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 80 FR 17409 (April 1, 2015) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 80 FR 21207 (April 17, 2015) (Amended Preliminary Determination).

    3See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China,” dated concurrently with this notice (“Issues and Decision Memorandum”).

    Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (“POI”) is January 1, 2014, through June 30, 2014. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which was August 2014.4

    4See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale, with or without decks (“boltless steel shelving”). The term “prepackaged for sale” means that, at a minimum, the steel vertical supports (i.e., uprights and posts) and steel horizontal supports (i.e., beams, braces) necessary to assemble a completed shelving unit (with or without decks) are packaged together for ultimate purchase by the end-user.

    Subject boltless steel shelving enters the United States through Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) statistical subheadings 9403.20.0018, 9403.20.0020, 9403.20.0025, and 9403.20.0026, but may also enter through HTSUS 9403.10.0040. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. Several interested parties commented on the scope of this investigation, which we have summarized in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, between May 4 and May 15, 2014, the Department conducted verification of the information submitted by Nanjing Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (“Topsun”) and Zhongda United Holding Group Co., Ltd. (“Zhongda United”) 5 for use in the final determination. We issued our verification reports on June 4, 2014, and June 5, 2015.6 The Department used standard verification procedures, including examination of relevant accounting and production records and original source documents provided by respondents.7

    5 Zhongda United, Zhongda IE and Jiaxing Zhongda Metalwork Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Zhongda”) submitted questionnaire responses on behalf of both companies based on the contention that the entities are affiliated. See Memorandum to the File from through Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Office V, from Kabir Archuletta, Senior International Trade Analyst, Office V “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Affiliation/Single Entity Treatment for Zhongda United Holding Group Co., Ltd., Jiaxing Zhongda Import & Export Co., Ltd., and Jiaxing Zhongda Metalwork Co., Ltd.” (March 24, 2015) (“Zhongda Affiliation Memo”).

    6See the Department's two memoranda regarding: “Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (“Topsun”) in the Antidumping Duty Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China,” dated June 4, 2015; and “Verification of the Sales and Factors Responses of Zhongda United Holding Group Co., Ltd., in the Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China,” dated June 5, 2015. See also the Department Memorandum, “Revised Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (“Topsun”) in the Antidumping Duty Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China.” (August 3, 2015) (“Topsun Revised Verification Report”); see also, Department's Letter to Topsun, “Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Public Treatment of Information Previously Bracketed as Proprietary.” (July 27, 2015); Department's Letter to Topsun, “Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Public Treatment of Information Previously Bracketed as Proprietary.” (July 30, 2015).

    6See Letter from Topsun, “Case Brief of Petitioner's Bracketing Concerns.” (June 17, 2015).

    7Id.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    We addressed all issues raised by parties in case and rebuttal briefs in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.8 Appendix II to this notice includes a list of the issues which the parties raised and to which the Department responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov. The Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum is available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    8See Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Changes Since the Amended Preliminary Determination

    Based on the Department's analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to Zhongda United's and Topsun's margin calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Furthermore, we find that Topsun failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability in this proceeding and, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(a), we have based Topsun's dumping margin on total adverse facts available (“AFA”). For further discussion, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Combination Rates

    In the Initiation Notice, 9 the Department stated that it would calculate combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.10

    9See Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 79 FR 56562, 56566 (September 22, 2014) (“Initiation Notice”).

    10See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1, regarding, “Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries,” (April 5, 2005) (“Policy Bulletin 05.1”), available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.

    Separate Rate

    Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely on the basis of facts available. Accordingly, when only one weighted-average dumping margin for an individually investigated respondent is above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, the separate rate will be equal to that single, above de minimis rate.

    In this final determination, the Department has calculated a rate for Zhongda that is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available. With respect to the other mandatory respondent, we have determined to apply a rate that is based entirely on facts available, thus it is excluded from separate rate consideration. Therefore, the Department has assigned to the companies that have not been individually examined but have demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate a margin of 17.55 percent, which is the rate calculated for Zhongda.

    PRC-Wide Rate

    For the final determination, we have determined to use, as the AFA rate applied to the PRC-wide entity, 112.68 percent, the highest CONNUM-specific dumping margin calculated in the Preliminary Determination. Consistent with our practice, the Department selected Topsun's highest CONNUM-specific margin, as AFA, because this rate is higher than the other rates in this investigation and therefore, sufficiently adverse to serve the purposes of facts available.11 Furthermore, there is no need to corroborate the selected margin because it is based on information submitted by Topsun in the course of this investigation, i.e., it is not secondary information.12

    11See Issues and Decision Memorandum for a detailed discussion.

    12See 19 CFR 351.308(c) and (d) and section 776(c) of the Act.

    Final Determination

    The Department determines that the estimated final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter Producer Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Zhongda United Holding Group Co., Ltd Jiaxing Zhongda Metalwork Co., Ltd 17.55 Jiaxing Zhongda Import & Export Co., Ltd Jiaxing Zhongda Metalwork Co., Ltd 17.55 Ningbo ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd Haifa (Ningbo) Office Equipment Co., Ltd 17.55 Ningbo ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd Ningbo Decko Metal Products Trade Co., Ltd 17.55 Ningbo ETDZ Huixing Trade Co., Ltd Lianfa Metal Product Co., Ltd 17.55 Meridian International Co., Ltd Zhejiang Limai Metal Products Co., Ltd 17.55 Zhejiang Limai Metal Products Co., Ltd Zhejiang Limai Metal Products Co., Ltd 17.55 HoiFat (NingBo) Office Facilities Co., Ltd HoiFat (NingBo) Office Facilities Co., Ltd 17.55 PRC-Wide Entity (including Nanjing Topsun Racking Manufacturing Co., Ltd.) 112.68
    Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from the PRC as described in the “Scope of the Investigation” section, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 1, 2015, the date of publication in the Federal Register of the affirmative Preliminary Determination. Further, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit 13 equal to the weighted-average amount by which the normal value exceeds U.S. price, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies and estimated domestic subsidy pass-through, as follows: (1) For the exporter/producer combination listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin which the Department determined in this final determination; (2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the dumping margin established for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter.

    13See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    As we stated in the Preliminary Determination, consistent with our practice, where the product under investigation is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the amount by which the normal value exceeds the export price or constructed export price, less the amount of the countervailing duty determined to constitute an export subsidy.14 In this LTFV investigation, export subsidies constitute 16.06 percent 15 of the final calculated countervailing duty rate in the concurrent countervailing duty investigation, and, thus, we will offset the calculated rates for Zhongda, the companies receiving a separate rate, and the PRC-wide rate of 112.68 percent by the countervailing duty rate attributable to export subsidies (i.e., 16.06 percent) to calculate the cash deposit rate for this LTFV investigation. Furthermore, as previously stated, the Department did not adjust the preliminary determination AD margins for estimated domestic subsidy pass-through because respondents provided no information to support an adjustment pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act.16

    14See Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 17411.

    15 The following subsidy programs in the final determination of the concurrent countervailing duty investigation are export subsidies: Export Seller's Credits and Export Buyer's Credits from the Export-Import Bank of China (14.79 percent), GOC and Sub-Central Government Subsidies for the Development of Famous Brands and World Top Brands (0.58 percent), International Market Exploration (SME) Fund (0.58 percent), Export Assistance/Outward Expansion Grants in Guangdong Province (0.08 percent), Export Credit Insurance (0.01 percent), Export Subsidy for High-Tech Merchandise (0.02 percent). See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination (“CVD Final”) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. The final determination in this companion CVD proceeding is being concurrently released on the same day as this final determination.

    16See Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 17411.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we notified the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. As the Department's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from the PRC, or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from the PRC. If the ITC determines that such injury does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of propriety information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of return or 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 sanctionable violation.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 14, 2015. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale, with or without decks (“boltless steel shelving”). The term “prepackaged for sale” means that, at a minimum, the steel vertical supports (i.e., uprights and posts) and steel horizontal supports (i.e., beams, braces) necessary to assemble a completed shelving unit (with or without decks) are packaged together for ultimate purchase by the end-user. The scope also includes add-on kits. Add-on kits include, but are not limited to, kits that allow the end-user to add an extension shelving unit onto an existing boltless steel shelving unit such that the extension and the original unit will share common frame elements (e.g., two posts). The term “boltless” refers to steel shelving in which the vertical and horizontal supports forming the frame are assembled primarily without the use of nuts and bolts or screws. The vertical and horizontal support members for boltless steel shelving are assembled by methods such as, but not limited to, fitting a rivet, punched or cut tab or other similar connector on one support into a hole, slot or similar receptacle on another support. The supports lock together to form the frame for the shelving unit, and provide the structural integrity of the shelving unit separate from the inclusion of any decking. The incidental use of nuts and bolts or screws to add accessories, wall anchors, tie-bars or shelf supports does not remove the product from scope. Boltless steel shelving units may also come packaged as partially assembled, such as when two upright supports are welded together with front-to-back supports, or are otherwise connected, to form an end unit for the frame. The boltless steel shelving covered by this investigation may be commonly described as rivet shelving, welded frame shelving, slot and tab shelving, and punched rivet (quasi-rivet) shelving as well as by other trade names. The term “deck” refers to the shelf that sits on or fits into the horizontal supports (beams or braces) to provide the horizontal storage surface of the shelving unit.

    The scope includes all boltless steel shelving meeting the description above, regardless of (1) vertical support or post type (including but not limited to open post, closed post and tubing); (2) horizontal support or beam/brace profile (including but not limited to Z-beam, C-beam, L-beam, step beam and cargo rack); (3) number of supports; (4) surface coating (including but not limited to paint, epoxy, powder coating, zinc and other metallic coating); (5) number of levels; (6) weight capacity; (7) shape (including but not limited to rectangular, square, and corner units); (8) decking material (including but not limited to wire decking, particle board, laminated board or no deck at all); or (9) the boltless method by which vertical and horizontal supports connect (including but not limited to keyhole and rivet, slot and tab, welded frame, punched rivet and clip).

    Specifically excluded from the scope are:

    • Wall-mounted shelving, defined as shelving that is hung on the wall and does not stand on, or transfer load to, the floor; 17

    17 The addition of a wall bracket or other device to attach otherwise freestanding subject merchandise to a wall does not meet the terms of this exclusion.

    • wire shelving units, which consist of shelves made from wire that incorporates both a wire deck and wire horizontal supports (taking the place of the horizontal beams and braces) into a single piece with tubular collars that slide over the posts and onto plastic sleeves snapped on the posts to create the finished shelving unit;

    • bulk-packed parts or components of boltless steel shelving units; and

    • made-to-order shelving systems.

    Subject boltless steel shelving enters the United States through Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) statistical subheadings 9403.20.0018, 9403.20.0020, 9403.20.0025, and 9403.20.0026, but may also enter through HTSUS 9403.10.0040. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II—Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination V. Use of Adverse Facts Available VI. Discussion of the Issues General Issues Comment 1: Surrogate Country Comment 2: Whether Whirlpool's Products Are Within the Scope A. Whirlpool's Incomplete Units B. Whirlpool's Pre-Wrapped Bundles Comment 3: Whether Costco's Products Are Within the Scope Surrogate Value Issues Comment 4: Freight Weight Basis Comment 5: Steel Strip Surrogate Value Comment 6: Wire Deck Surrogate Value Comment 7: Carton Surrogate Value Comment 8: Surrogate Financial Ratios A. Other Income/Expense B. Commission/Advertisement Company-Specific Issues Topsun Comment 9: Standards for Department Determinations A. Consistent Disposition of New Factual Information Submissions B. Rejection of New Information Comment 10: Whether Topsun's Due Process Was Violated Comment 11: Whether To Assign an Adverse Inference to Topsun's Cost of Goods Sold Comment 12: Differential Pricing Comment 13: Treatment of Topsun's Wire Decks Zhongda Comment 14: Byproduct Offset Comment 15: Value-Added Tax (“VAT”) Adjustment Comment 16: Whether AD/CVD Remedies Are Duplicative JS Products Comment 17: Separate Rate
    [FR Doc. 2015-20794 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-405-803] Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Revocation of the Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On July 8, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published its initiation and preliminary results 1 of a changed circumstances review (CCR), preliminarily determining to revoke the antidumping duty (AD) Order2 on purified carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from Finland. We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received no comments. Thus, we make no changes to our preliminary determination in these final results of changed circumstances review and hereby revoke the Order in toto.

    1See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland: Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Consideration of Revocation of the Antidumping Duty Order, 80 FR 39058 (July 8, 2015) (Preliminary Results).

    2See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005) (the Order).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Victoria Cho, or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5075 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On May 15, 2015, in accordance with sections 751(b) and 751(d)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), 19 CFR 351.216(b), 19 CFR 351.222(g)(1), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii), Ashland Specialty Ingredients, G.P. (Ashland), the petitioner and sole domestic producer of CMC, requested revocation of the Order with respect to Finland as part of an expedited CCR. On June 8, 2015, CP Kelco Oy and its U.S. affiliate, CP Kelco U.S. Inc., (collectively, CP Kelco), the sole manufacturer of CMC in Finland and its affiliated U.S. importer, requested that the Department grant Ashland's CCR request and revoke the AD order on CMC from Finland, due to the lack of interest in continuation of the Order. On July 8, 2015, the Department preliminarily determined to revoke the Order and invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results

    We received no further comments from interested parties.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by these orders is all purified CMC, sometimes also referred to as purified sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or cellulose gum, which is a white to off-white, non-toxic, odorless, biodegradable powder, comprising sodium CMC that has been refined and purified to a minimum assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does not include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and CMC that is cross-linked through heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC that has undergone one or more purification operations which, at a minimum, reduce the remaining salt and other by-product portion of the product to less than ten percent.

    The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review

    Section 782(h)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(g)(1)(i) & (vi), provide that the Department may revoke an order (in whole or in part) on an expedited basis if it determines that producers accounting for substantially all of the production of the domestic like product have no further interest in the order, in whole or in part. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(g)(1), we find that the petitioner's affirmative statement of no interest constitutes good cause to conduct this review. On June 8, 2015, CP Kelco also filed a letter in support of Ashland's CCR request.

    Ashland stated that, as the sole U.S. producer of CMC, it accounts for substantially all of the production of the domestic like product. Ashland also stated that it has no interest in the continuation of the Order. 3 Therefore, at the request of Ashland and in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 751(d)(1) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.216, 19 CFR 351.222(g)(1)(i) & (vi), we are revoking the Order on CMC from Finland. As stated in the Preliminary Results, the revocation will be effective July 1, 2014, which is the first day of the most recent period not subject to administrative review.

    3See Ashland's May 15, 2015 submission to the Department.

    Termination of Suspension of Liquidation

    Because we determine that there are changed circumstances that warrant the revocation of the Order, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to terminate the suspension of liquidation of the merchandise subject to this order entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after July 1, 2014 and to release any cash deposit or bond on all unliquidated entries of the merchandise covered by the revocation that are not covered by the final results of an administrative review or automatic liquidation. Entries of subject merchandise prior to the effective date of revocation will continue to be subject to suspension of liquidation and AD deposit requirements.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these final results and notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216, 351.221(c)(3), and 351.222(g)(vii).

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21046 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-602-807] Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) preliminarily determines that certain uncoated paper from Australia is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Eve Wang or George McMahon, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6231 or (202) 482-1167, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on February 18, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Uncoated Paper From Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 8608 (February 18, 2015) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is uncoated paper from Australia. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I of this notice.

    Scope Comments

    Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For discussion of those comments, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

    3See also Memorandum from Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled “Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated August 3, 2015.

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determination

    On May 15, 2015, the Petitioners 4 made a timely request for a 50-day postponement of the preliminary determination in this investigation pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e).5 On June 1, 2015, we postponed the preliminary determination by 50 days, to August 19, 2015.6

    4 The Petitioners in this proceeding are United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union; Domtar Corporation; Finch Paper LLC; P.H. Glatfelter Company; and Packaging Corporation of America (collectively, the Petitioners).

    5See the Petitioners' letter to the Department dated May 15, 2015.

    6See Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Portugal: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 31017 (June 1, 2015).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. There is one respondent in this investigation, Paper Australia Pty. Ltd. (Australian Paper). Constructed export price and export price for this company are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value (NV) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Consistent with sections 733(d)(1)(A)(ii) and 735(c)(5) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated all-others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.

    Australian Paper is the only respondent for which the Department has calculated a company-specific rate. Therefore, for purposes of determining the “all others” rate and pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we are using the dumping margin calculated for Australian Paper, as referenced in the “Preliminary Determination” section below.

    Negative Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances

    On July 15, 2015, the Petitioners filed timely a critical circumstances allegation, pursuant to section 733(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c), alleging that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of the merchandise under consideration from Australia.7 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(i), when a critical circumstances allegation is submitted more than 20 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination, the Department must issue a preliminary finding whether there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist no later than the date of the preliminary determination. We conducted analyses of critical circumstances for Australian Paper in accordance with section 733(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206, and preliminarily determined that: (1) Importers of uncoated paper from Australian Paper knew or should have known that the exporter was selling the merchandise under consideration at LTFV and that there was likely to be material injury in accordance with section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act; and (2) imports of the subject merchandise from these companies have not been massive over a relatively short period in accordance with section 733(e)(1)(B) of the Act. Further, for the companies subject to the “all others” rate, it is the Department's normal practice to conduct its critical circumstances analysis for these companies based on the experience of investigated companies.8 Accordingly, we find that the critical circumstances determination for Australian Paper should also be applied to all others, given that Australian Paper is the only known, identified producer in the petition and the initiation.9 For a full description of the methodology and results of our analysis, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    7See the letter from the petitioners entitled, “Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia—Allegation of Critical Circumstances,” dated July 15, 2015.

    8See, e.g., Sodium Metal from France: Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 62252, 62254 (October 20, 2008); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances Determination: Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 17413, 17415-416 (March 26, 2012).

    9See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 8614; see also Volume II of the Petitions, at II-1—II-2 at footnote 1, and Exhibit II-3;Volume V of the Petitions, at V-1 through V-2 and Exhibit V-1; Volume VI of the Petitions, at Exhibits VI-1 and VI-2.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Paper Australia Pty. Ltd. 40.65 All Others 40.65
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of certain uncoated paper from Australia, as described in Appendix I of this notice, for Australian Paper and the companies covered by the all others rate which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. However, because we have preliminarily found that critical circumstances do not exist with regard to Australia, we will not instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of covered entries from those companies entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption up to 90 days prior to the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.10

    10See section 733(e)(2) of the Act.

    Pursuant to section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), we will instruct CBP to require cash deposits 11 equal to the dumping margins, as indicated in the chart above, as follows: (1) The rate for the mandatory respondents listed above will be the respondent-specific rate we determined in this preliminary determination; (2) if the exporter is not a mandatory respondent identified above, but the producer is, the rate will be the specific rate established for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the rate for all other producers or exporters will be the all others rate. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    11See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.12 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    12See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.13 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    13See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    Australian Paper requested that, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final determination by 60 days (i.e., to 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination) pursuant to section 735(a)(2)(A) and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), and agreed to extend the application of the provisional measures prescribed under section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), from a four-month period to a period not to exceed six months.14

    14See letter from Australian Paper entitled, “Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia: Respondents' Comments on the Extension of Final Determination,” dated August 11, 2015.

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii) and (e)(2), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.15

    15See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. Because the preliminary determination in this proceeding is affirmative, section 735(b)(2) of the Act requires that the ITC make its final determination whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of uncoated paper from Australia before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination. Because we are postponing the deadline for our final determination to 135 days from the date of publication of this preliminary determination, as discussed above, the ITC will make its final determination no later than 45 days after our final determination.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by the investigation includes uncoated paper in sheet form; weighing at least 40 grams per square meter but not more than 150 grams per square meter; that either is a white paper with a GE brightness level 1 of 85 or higher or is a colored paper; whether or not surface-decorated, printed (except as described below), embossed, perforated, or punched; irrespective of the smoothness of the surface; and irrespective of dimensions (Certain Uncoated Paper).

    1 One of the key measurements of any grade of paper is brightness. Generally speaking, the brighter the paper the better the contrast between the paper and the ink. Brightness is measured using a GE Reflectance Scale, which measures the reflection of light off a grade of paper. One is the lowest reflection, or what would be given to a totally black grade, and 100 is the brightest measured grade. “Colored paper” as used in this scope definition means a paper with a hue other than white that reflects one of the primary colors of magenta, yellow, and cyan (red, yellow, and blue) or a combination of such primary colors.

    Certain Uncoated Paper includes (a) uncoated free sheet paper that meets this scope definition; (b) uncoated ground wood paper produced from bleached chemi-thermo-mechanical pulp (BCTMP) that meets this scope definition; and (c) any other uncoated paper that meets this scope definition regardless of the type of pulp used to produce the paper.

    Specifically excluded from the scope are (1) paper printed with final content of printed text or graphics and (2) lined paper products, typically school supplies, composed of paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines that would make the paper unsuitable for copying or printing purposes.

    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 4802.56.1000, 4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000, 4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000, 4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040, 4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000, 4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some imports of subject merchandise may also be classified under 4802.62.1000, 4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000, 4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020, 4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000, 4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000, 4811.90.8050 and 4811.90.9080. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures V. Scope Comments VI. Discussion of the Methodology a. Determination of the Comparison Method b. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis VII. Date of Sale VIII. Product Comparisons IX. Constructed Export Price X. Normal Value a. Home Market Viability b. Level of Trade c. Cost of Production (COP) Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test d. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison Market Prices XI. Currency Conversion XII. Critical Circumstances
    [FR Doc. 2015-21170 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE142 NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is releasing the final NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy (Strategy). The full Strategy, a Strategy Highlights document and additional information may be found at: http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/ecosystems/climate/.

    ADDRESSES:

    To obtain copies of the Strategy please go to: http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/ecosystems/climate/ or contact Roger Griffis, Climate Change Coordinator, NMFS Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (phone: 301-427-8134, email: [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Additional information may be found at http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/ecosystems/climate or contacting Roger Griffis, Climate Change Coordinator, NMFS Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 301-427-8134 or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Summary of Report

    Climate-related changes in ocean and coastal ecosystems such as warming oceans, rising seas, loss of sea ice, ocean acidification and coastal droughts are impacting the nation's valuable living marine resources and the many people, businesses and communities that depend on them. These changes are expected to increase with continued changes in the planet's climate and ocean system affecting jobs, impacting economies and disrupting traditional ways of life. There is much at risk. For example, in the United States ocean related commercial and recreational fisheries generate approximately $200 billion in sales and support 1.7 million jobs each year.1 These current and future climate-related changes also affect the information, tools and actions needed to fulfill the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) stewardship mandates for marine resources and the communities that depend on them.

    1 “Fisheries Economics of the U.S.” NOAA Office of Science and Technology, http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/economics/publications/feus/fisheries_economics_2012.

    The NOAA Fisheries Climate Science Strategy (Strategy) is part of a proactive approach to increase the production, delivery, and use of climate-related information needed to fulfill the agency's mandates in a changing climate, including the Magnuson-Stevens Act, Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, National Environmental Policy Act and others. The Strategy responds to growing demands and directives for information and tools to prepare for and respond to climate impacts on marine and coastal resources, including the National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy (http://wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/). It provides a nationally consistent blueprint to address the following seven science objectives:

    1. Identify appropriate, climate-informed reference points for managing living marine resources.

    2. Identify robust strategies for managing living marine resources under changing climate conditions.

    3. Design adaptive decision processes that can incorporate and respond to changing climate conditions.

    4. Identify future states of marine and coastal ecosystems, living marine resources, and resource-dependent human communities in a changing climate.

    5. Identify the mechanisms of climate impacts on ecosystems, living marine resources and resource-dependent human communities.

    6. Track trends in living marine resources and resource-dependent human communities and provide early warning of change.

    7. Build and maintain the science infrastructure needed to fulfill NOAA Fisheries mandates with changing climate conditions.

    Implementing the Strategy is crucial for fulfilling NOAA Fisheries mandates, reducing climate-related impacts and increasing the resilience of living marine resources and resource-dependent communities in a changing climate. The Strategy recommends specific near- and medium-term actions that address common information needs across NOAA Fisheries mandates and regions.

    The draft Climate Science Strategy underwent public review from January thru March 2015 (80 FR 3558, January 23, 2015) and received approximately 35 stakeholder comments from fishery management councils, states, tribes, academics, Non-Governmental Organizations and members of the public. The comments were generally positive with agreement on the need for action and support for both the content of the strategy and its implementation.

    The Strategy is designed to be customized and implemented through Regional Action Plans that focus on building regional capacity and partnerships to address the Strategy's seven objectives. In 2015-2016, NOAA Fisheries Science Centers and Regional Offices will develop Regional Action Plans to identify strengths, weaknesses, priorities, and actions to address the Strategy over the next 5 years. Development of the Regional Action Plans will include opportunity for input from science and management partners and others. The Strategy is a key part of NOAA Fisheries efforts to respond to growing demands for information to help reduce impacts and increase the resilience of living marine resources and the communities that depend on them in a changing climate.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Ned Cyr, Director, Office of Science and Technology, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21172 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project; Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Scoping Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement; Scoping meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    A permit application has been submitted by California American Water Company (CalAm) to Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) to construct and operate a seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalination facility project (Project) in Monterey County, California. The permit review process will be conducted concurrently with a public process conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). NOAA is soliciting information and comments on the range of issues and the significant issues to be analyzed in depth related to the Project proposed within MBNMS boundaries.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 2, 2015. A public meeting will be held as detailed below:

    Date: September 10, 2015.

    Location: Sally Griffin Active Living Center.

    Address: 700 Jewell Avenue, Pacific Grove 93950.

    Time: The meeting will begin at 2:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NOS-2015-0105, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: MBNMS Project Lead for CalAm Desalination Project, 99 Pacific Ave., Bldg. 455a, Monterey, CA 93940.

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NOAA. 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. ONMS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karen Grimmer at 99 Pacific Ave., Bldg. 455a, Monterey, CA 93940 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Information I. Background

    A permit application has been submitted by CalAm for construction and operation of its proposed Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP or Project). The purpose of the MPWSP is to replace existing water supplies for CalAm's Monterey District service area.

    The MPWSP comprises various facilities and improvements, including: A sub-surface seawater intake system; a 9.6-million-gallons-per-day (mgd) seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalination plant; desalinated water storage and conveyance facilities; and expanded Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) facilities.

    The desalination facility would be capable of producing 10,627 acre-feet per year (AFY) of potable water on a 46-acre site located north of the City of Marina on unincorporated Monterey County property. The MPWSP proposes ten subsurface slant wells to draw seawater from beneath the ocean floor in Monterey Bay to produce the source water for the desalination plant. The subsurface slant wells would be located primarily within the City of Marina, in the active mining area of the CEMEX sand mining facility. The slant wells would be approximately 700 to 1000 feet in length, with well tips located at approximately 200 to 220 feet below mean sea level. Up to 24.1 mgd of source water would be needed to produce 9.6 mgd of desalinated product water.

    The desalination plant would generate approximately 13.98 mgd of brine, including 0.4 mgd of decanted backwash water. The brine would be discharged into Monterey Bay via a 36-inch diameter pipeline to a new connection with the existing Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency's (MRWPCA) outfall and diffuser located at the wastewater facility.

    II. Need for Action

    This notice of intent (NOI) to prepare a draft environmental impact statement and conduct scoping is published in accordance with: Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended; and the White House Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (CEQ NEPA Regulations).

    The Project was subject to a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), published by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in April 2015. The NEPA environmental documentation will include an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which may be issued as a stand-alone document or as a joint draft CEQA/NEPA (EIR/EIS) document with the CPUC.

    The environmental document will identify and assess potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project and a range of alternatives. Federal agencies would use the EIS to consider related permits or other approvals for the Project as proposed. Possible alternatives could include not approving the Project, approving a reduced size Project, or approving the Project with additional modifications identified as part of the terms and conditions of a permit or other approval.

    Publication of this notice initiates the public scoping process to solicit public and agency comment, in writing or at the public meeting, regarding the full spectrum of environmental issues and concerns relating to the scope and content of the EIS, including:

    • Analyses of the human and marine resources that could be affected;

    • the nature and extent of the potential significant impacts on those resources;

    • a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed action; and

    • mitigation measures.

    III. Process

    This NOI is published by NOAA/MBNMS, the lead federal agency. MBNMS has requested CPUC to re-issue the Project EIR as part of a joint draft CEQA/NEPA document. If the CPUC, as CEQA lead agency, determines that a joint CEQA/NEPA document is appropriate, the two agencies will prepare a joint draft EIR/EIS after completion of the federal scoping process. The NEPA scoping session begins at 2:00 p.m., on Thursday, September 10, 2015 at Sally Griffin Active Living Center in Pacific Grove, CA.

    IV. Federal Consultations

    This notice also advises the public that NOAA will coordinate its consultation responsibilities under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA, 16 U.S.C. 470), and Federal Consistency review under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), along with its ongoing NEPA process including the use of NEPA documents and public and stakeholder meetings to also meet the requirements of other federal laws.

    In fulfilling its consultation responsibility under the ESA, MSA, NHPA, CZMA and NEPA, NOAA intends to identify consulting parties and involve the public in accordance with NOAA's NEPA procedures, and develop in consultation with identified consulting parties alternatives and proposed measures that might avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on endangered species, essential fish habitat, historic properties, or coastal zone management issues, and describe them in any environmental assessment or draft environmental impact statement.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. John Armor, Acting Director for the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21133 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0088] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 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 by October 26, 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Military Community and Family Policy, ATTN: Casualty Affairs, 4000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Questionnaire of Local Inhabitants, DD Form 1074; Disposition of Civilian Remains, DD Form 3004; OMB Control Number 0704-XXXX.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to obtain and document information from local inhabitants on the location and circumstances surrounding the death of U.S. personnel for whom the Department has responsibility to recover and provide mortuary services and to obtain and document the election of the person authorized to effect disposition of civilian remains for whom the Department provides mortuary services. If the person authorized to effect disposition does not sign this form, then the Department cannot provide mortuary and transportation services in accordance with their elections or instructions to the extent allowed by statute or DoD policy. This collection is authorized by 10 U.S. Code sections 1481 through 1488. In addition, the Secretary of Defense directed the addition of these forms to ensure transparency and standardization of the mortuary procedures as defined in the Final Report of the Dover Port Mortuary Independent Review Subcommittee Implementation Plan and 180-day study. Currently there is a lack of standardization across the Military Services, as each Service currently utilizes different forms for this election and they do not all capture the same information even on similar forms. Standardizing the information collected is essential in maintaining the transparency and integrity of the mortuary affairs process.

    Affected Public: Business or other for profit; Person Authorized to Effect Disposition (PAED); family members of the deceased; local inhabitants.

    Annual Burden Hours: 60.

    Number of Respondents: 120.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    The respondents are the person authorized to effect disposition of the civilian decedent for whom mortuary services as described on DD Form 3004 is recommended or required, and the DoD witness to that election. The person authorized to effect disposition documents their election on DD Form 3004, and signs the form. The election and signature are witnessed by a military service member or DoD civilian to formalize this process and document the election. This form becomes a part of the Official Individual Deceased Personnel File. If the person authorized to effect disposition does not sign this form, then the Department cannot provide the authorized mortuary and transportation services.

    The respondents for DD Form 1074 are the Military Service Member and the local inhabitant being interviewed. The Service Member is the individual completing the form, however in the process information is collected on the person interviewed. This form becomes a part of the Official Individual Deceased Personnel File. This form documents the location and circumstances surrounding a deceased individual as applicable.

    Currently there is a lack of standardization across the Military Services, as each Service currently utilizes different forms for these elections and documentation and they do not all capture the same information even on similar forms. Standardizing the information collected is essential in maintaining the transparency and integrity of the mortuary affairs process.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21129 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary TRICARE; Fiscal Year 2016 Continued Health Care Benefit Program Premium Update AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Continued Health Care Benefit Program Premiums for Fiscal Year 2016.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice provides the Continued Health Care Benefit Program (CHCBP) premiums for Fiscal Year 2016.

    DATES:

    The Fiscal Year 2016 rates contained in this notice are effective for services on or after October 1, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Defense Health Agency, TRICARE Health Plan, 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 5101, Falls Church, Virginia 22042-5101.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark A. Ellis, telephone (703) 681-0039.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The final rule published in the Federal Register on September 30, 1994 (59 FR 49818) sets forth rules to implement the CHCBP required by 10 U.S.C. 1078a. Included in this final rule were provisions for updating the CHCBP premiums for each federal fiscal year. As stated in the final rule, the premiums are based on Federal Employee Health Benefit Program employee and agency contributions required for a comparable health benefits plan, plus an administrative fee. Premiums may be revised annually and shall be published annually.

    The Defense Health Agency has updated the quarterly premiums for Fiscal Year 2016 as shown below:

    Quarterly CHCBP Premiums for Fiscal Year 2016 Individual $1,300 Family $2,925

    The above premiums are effective for services rendered on or after October 1, 2015.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21116 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project, City of Woodland, Yolo County, California (CA) AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Intent.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Sacramento District, intends to prepare an integrated Feasibility Report/Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (FR/SDEIS) for the Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Feasibility Study (feasibility study). The Corps will serve as the lead agency for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The feasibility study is evaluating opportunities to reduce flood damages to the city of Woodland and improve the conveyance of the hydraulic system in the lower Cache Creek Basin, in Yolo County, CA.

    A Draft EIS was originally submitted for public review on March 21, 2003 (68 FR 13907). Following an assessment of public comments received as well as a determination of additional technical, environmental, and economic evaluation needs, the local sponsors, the City of Woodland and the Reclamation Board of the State of California, decided to pause the feasibility study. The 2003 Draft EIS/EIR was never finalized and no Record of Decision was prepared. The local sponsor reinitiated the study with the Corps in 2011 after further coordination with stakeholders and interested parties. Because of significant new circumstances and information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts, a supplement to the 2003 draft EIS is being prepared.

    DATES:

    Written comments regarding the scope of the feasibility study and SDEIS should be received by the Corps on or before September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments and suggestions concerning this feasibility study and SDEIS to Mr. Tyler Stalker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, Attn: Public Affairs Office (CESPK-PAO), 1325 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 or telephone at (916) 557-5107. Requests to be placed on the mailing list should also be sent to this address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Mario Parker, email at [email protected], telephone (916) 557-6701, or fax (916) 557-7856.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    1. Proposed Action. The Corps in cooperation with the non-Federal sponsors (The Central Valley Flood Protection Board and the City of Woodland) is conducting a cost-shared feasibility study on alternative flood risk reduction measures to the city of Woodland, Yolo County, CA, adjacent unincorporated areas, and agricultural lands. The study is authorized by section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (Pub. L. 87-874). A reconnaissance study of flooding problems in the westside tributaries, including Putah and Cache Creeks, and the Yolo Bypass was conducted in 1993-1994 under the authorization of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 1993. Recommendations from the reconnaissance study resulted in the pursuit of the present feasibility study.

    2. Alternatives. The feasibility study's SDEIS will evaluate a combination of one or more flood control measures including setback levee along Cache Creek, stream channel improvements, a north Woodland floodway, a northern bypass into the Colusa Drain, and a no-action alternative. Mitigation measures for any significant adverse effects on environmental resources will be identified and incorporated into the alternatives in compliance with various Federal and State statutes.

    3. Scoping Process.

    a. A public scoping meeting will be held on September 3, 2015, from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Woodland Community Center at 2001 East Street in Woodland, CA. An overview of the study and the NEPA process will be presented, and an opportunity will be afforded to all interested parties to provide comments regarding the scope of the SDEIS analysis as well as potential alternatives.

    b. The study plan provides for public scoping, meetings, and comment. The Corps has initiated a process of involving concerned Federal, State, and local agencies and individuals. The City of Woodland has held periodic public meetings to discuss issues and solicit public comment. Also, an initial public scoping meeting was held by the Corps on May 30, 2000. Comments received focused on flooding along Cache Creek, land subsidence, gravel mining, and effects of alternatives on the Cache Creek Settling Basin. In addition, comments received on the draft EIS submitted for review on March 21, 2003 are also being considered in the SDEIS. Finally, public awareness of the development of a proposed array of alternatives is being pursued through individual meetings between sponsors and key stakeholders. An initial public information meeting was held in November 2013.

    c. Issues that will be analyzed in depth in the SDEIS include effects on vegetation and wildlife, special-status species, water quality, air quality, socio-economic conditions, and cultural resources. Other issues may include geology, soils, topography, noise, esthetics, climate and recreation. Also to be considered is the city ordinance adopted by the City of Woodland restricting any flood solution that would similarly produce deep floodplains north of the city (City Code Section 10.1, Flood Control Policy).

    d. The Corps will consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to comply with the Endangered Species and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Acts. The Corps will also consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer to comply with the National Historic Preservation Act and coordinate with the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs to establish consultation requirements with tribes having trust assets and tribal interests that could be affected by the feasibility study's outcome.

    e. A 45-day review period will be allowed for all interested agencies and individuals to review and comment on the draft FR/SDEIS. All interested persons are encouraged to respond to this notice and provide a current address if they wish to be contacted about the draft FR/SDEIS.

    4. Availability. The FR/SDEIS is scheduled to be available for public review and comment in May 2016.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21165 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 15-97-LNG] Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year Period AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice of receipt of an application (Application), filed on June 1, 2015, by Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC (CCL), requesting long-term, multi-contract authorization to export domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) in a volume equivalent to approximately 514 billion cubic feet per year (Bcf/yr) of natural gas (1.41 Bcf per day). CCL seeks to export the LNG by vessel from its natural gas liquefaction project, which is currently under construction in San Patricio and Nueces Counties, Texas (the Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project, or CCL Project). CCL and/or its affiliate, Cheniere Marketing, LLC, already have received authorizations from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and DOE/FE, respectively, to construct and develop three liquefaction trains (Trains 1, 2, and 3) to liquefy natural gas at the CCL Project for export to foreign markets.1 In this Application, CCL seeks authorization from DOE/FE to export an additional volume of domestically produced LNG from two new liquefaction trains—Trains 4 and 5, which are part of a proposed expansion of the CCL Project (Stage 3 Project).2 CCL requests authorization to export this LNG to any country with which the United States does not have a free trade agreement (FTA) requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (non-FTA countries).3 CCL requests the authorization for a 20-year term to commence on the earlier of the date of first export or eight years from the date the requested authorization is granted. CCL seeks to export this LNG on its own behalf and as agent for other entities who will hold title to the LNG at the time of export. The Application was filed under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional details can be found in CCL's Application, posted on the DOE/FE Web site at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/07/f24/15_97_lng_nfta.pdf. Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited.

    1See, e.g., App. at 2 n.5; Cheniere Marketing, LLC & Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3638, FE Docket No. 12-97-LNG, Final Opinion and Order Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel from the Proposed Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project to be Located in Corpus Christi, Texas, to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations (May 12, 2015); Cheniere Marketing, LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3164, FE Docket No. 12-99-LNG, Order Granting Long-Term Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel from the Proposed Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project to Free Trade Agreement Nations (Oct. 16, 2012).

    2 App. at 3.

    3 In the Application, CCL also requests authorization to export the same volume of LNG from the CCL Project to any nation that currently has, or in the future enters into, a FTA requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (FTA countries). DOE/FE will review that request separately pursuant to NGA § 3(c), 15 U.S.C. 717b(c).

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene or notices of intervention, as applicable, requests for additional procedures, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic Filing by Email

    [email protected].

    Regular Mail

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Larine Moore or Marc Talbert, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478; (202) 586-7991.

    Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DOE/FE Evaluation

    The Application will be reviewed pursuant to section 3(a) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a), and DOE will consider any issues required by law or policy. To the extent determined to be relevant, these issues will include the domestic need for the natural gas proposed to be exported, the adequacy of domestic natural gas supply, U.S. energy security, and the cumulative impact of the requested authorization and any other LNG export application(s) previously approved on domestic natural gas supply and demand fundamentals. DOE may also consider other factors bearing on the public interest, including the impact of the proposed exports on the U.S. economy (including GDP, consumers, and industry), job creation, the U.S. balance of trade, and international considerations; and whether the authorization is consistent with DOE's policy of promoting competition in the marketplace by allowing commercial parties to freely negotiate their own trade arrangements. Additionally, DOE will consider the following environmental documents:

    Addendum to Environmental Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48132 (Aug. 15, 2014); 4 and

    4 The Addendum and related documents are available at: http://energy.gov/fe/draft-addendum-environmental-review-documents-concerning-exports-natural-gas-united-states.

    Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014).5

    5 The Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Report is available at: http://energy.gov/fe/life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-perspective-exporting-liquefied-natural-gas-united-states.

    Parties that may oppose this Application should address these issues in their comments and/or protests, as well as other issues deemed relevant to the Application.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires DOE to give appropriate consideration to the environmental effects of its proposed decisions. No final decision will be issued in this proceeding until DOE has met its environmental responsibilities.

    Public Comment Procedures

    In response to this Notice, any person may file a protest, comments, or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention, as applicable. Due to the complexity of the issues raised by the Applicant, interested persons will be provided 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice in which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention.

    Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. The filing of comments or a protest with respect to the Application will not serve to make the commenter or protestant a party to the proceeding, although protests and comments received from persons who are not parties will be considered in determining the appropriate action to be taken on the Application. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by the regulations in 10 CFR part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) Emailing the filing to [email protected], with FE Docket No. 15-97-LNG in the title line; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to FE Docket No. 15-97-LNG. Please Note: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    A decisional record on the Application will be developed through responses to this notice by parties, including the parties' written comments and replies thereto. Additional procedures will be used as necessary to achieve a complete understanding of the facts and issues. If an additional procedure is scheduled, notice will be provided to all parties. If no party requests additional procedures, a final Opinion and Order may be issued based on the official record, including the Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this notice, in accordance with 10 CFR 590.316.

    The Application is available for inspection and copying in the Division of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Application and any filed protests, motions to intervene or notice of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 2015. John A. Anderson, Director, Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Oil and Natural Gas.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21126 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 15-63-LNG] Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year Period AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice of receipt of an application (Application), filed on April 20, 2015, by Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC (SPL), requesting long-term, multi-contract authorization to export domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) in a volume equivalent to approximately 203 billion cubic feet per year (Bcf/yr) of natural gas (0.56 Bcf per day). SPL seeks to export the LNG by vessel from Trains 1 through 4 of the Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project (Liquefaction Project), which SPL and its affiliate, Sabine Pass LNG, L.P., are currently constructing at the existing Sabine Pass LNG Terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana.1 SPL requests authorization to export this LNG to any country with which the United States does not have a free trade agreement (FTA) requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (non-FTA countries).2 DOE/FE notes that the requested export volume (203 Bcf/yr) is incremental and therefore additive to the volumes of LNG previously authorized for export from the Liquefaction Project to non-FTA countries. Specifically, SPL states that the grant of this Application will align the volumes of LNG authorized for export to non-FTA countries with the maximum liquefaction production capacity of the Liquefaction Project, as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.3 SPL requests the authorization for a 20-year term to commence on the date of first commercial export from the Liquefaction Project. SPL seeks to export this LNG on its own behalf and as agent for other entities who will hold title to the LNG at the time of export. The Application was filed under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional details can be found in SPL's Application, posted on the DOE/FE Web site at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/15_63_lng.pdf

    1 SPL states that the requested authorization would require no new construction or modification of authorized facilities. App. at 2 n.4.

    2 In a prior application filed in FE Docket No. 14-92-LNG on July 11, 2014, SPL requested authorization to export the same volume of LNG from the Liquefaction Project (Trains 1-4) to any nation that currently has, or may enter into, a FTA requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (FTA countries). On February 12, 2015, DOE/FE granted that request in Order No. 3595 pursuant to NGA § 3(c), 15 U.S.C. 717b(c). See Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3595, FE Docket No. 14-92-LNG, Order Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel from the Sabine Pass LNG Terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, to Free Trade Agreement Nations (Feb. 12, 2015); Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, Errata to DOE/FE Order Nos. 3595 & 3384, FE Docket Nos. 14-92-LNG & 13-121-LNG (Feb. 24, 2015). For additional procedural history, see Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3669, FE Docket Nos. 13-30-LNG, 13-42-LNG, & 13-121-LNG, Final Opinion and Order Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel from the Sabine Pass LNG Terminal Located in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations, at 18-21 (June 26, 2015).

    3 App. at 2 n.5.

    Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited.

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene or notices of intervention, as applicable, requests for additional procedures, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic Filing by Email

    [email protected].

    Regular Mail

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Larine Moore or Benjamin Nussdorf, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478; (202) 586-7991.

    Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DOE/FE Evaluation

    The Application will be reviewed pursuant to section 3(a) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a), and DOE will consider any issues required by law or policy. To the extent determined to be relevant, these issues will include the domestic need for the natural gas proposed to be exported, the adequacy of domestic natural gas supply, U.S. energy security, and the cumulative impact of the requested authorization and any other LNG export application(s) previously approved on domestic natural gas supply and demand fundamentals. DOE may also consider other factors bearing on the public interest, including the impact of the proposed exports on the U.S. economy (including GDP, consumers, and industry), job creation, the U.S. balance of trade, and international considerations; and whether the authorization is consistent with DOE's policy of promoting competition in the marketplace by allowing commercial parties to freely negotiate their own trade arrangements. Additionally, DOE will consider the following environmental documents:

    Addendum to Environmental Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48132 (Aug. 15, 2014); 4 and

    4 The Addendum and related documents are available at: http://energy.gov/fe/draft-addendum-environmental-review-documents-concerning-exports-natural-gas-united-states.

    Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014).5

    5 The Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Report is available at: http://energy.gov/fe/life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-perspective-exporting-liquefied-natural-gas-united-states.

    Parties that may oppose this Application should address these issues in their comments and/or protests, as well as other issues deemed relevant to the Application.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires DOE to give appropriate consideration to the environmental effects of its proposed decisions. No final decision will be issued in this proceeding until DOE has met its environmental responsibilities.

    Public Comment Procedures

    In response to this Notice, any person may file a protest, comments, or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention, as applicable. Due to the complexity of the issues raised by the Applicant, interested persons will be provided 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice in which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention.

    Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. The filing of comments or a protest with respect to the Application will not serve to make the commenter or protestant a party to the proceeding, although protests and comments received from persons who are not parties will be considered in determining the appropriate action to be taken on the Application. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by the regulations in 10 CFR part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) emailing the filing to [email protected], with FE Docket No. 15-63-LNG in the title line; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to FE Docket No. 15-63-LNG. Please Note: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    A decisional record on the Application will be developed through responses to this notice by parties, including the parties' written comments and replies thereto. Additional procedures will be used as necessary to achieve a complete understanding of the facts and issues. If an additional procedure is scheduled, notice will be provided to all parties. If no party requests additional procedures, a final Opinion and Order may be issued based on the official record, including the Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this notice, in accordance with 10 CFR 590.316.

    The Application is available for inspection and copying in the Division of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Application and any filed protests, motions to intervene or notice of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 2015. John A. Anderson, Director, Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Oil and Natural Gas.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21125 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 15-78-LNG] Strom, Inc.; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 25-Year Period AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice of receipt of an application (Application), filed on May 6, 2015, by Strom, Inc. (Strom), requesting long-term, multi-contract authorization to export domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) in a volume equivalent to approximately 56.42 billion cubic feet per year (Bcf/yr) of natural gas (0.15 Bcf/day).1 Strom seeks to export the LNG from its proposed natural gas liquefaction project in Crystal River, Florida (Facility). According to Strom, the LNG will be liquefied in modular, scalable, and portable LNG systems at the Facility.2 The LNG will be loaded into approved ISO IMO7/TVAC-ASME LNG (ISO) containers, and sent by highway or rail to Port Tampa Bay or other ports that will require little or no modification to export by ocean-going vessel.3 Strom requests authorization to export this LNG to any country with which the United States does not have a free trade agreement (FTA) requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (non-FTA countries).4 Strom requests the authorization for a 25-year term to commence on the earlier of the date of first export or five years from the date the authorization is granted. Strom seeks to export this LNG on its own behalf and as agent for other entities who hold title to the LNG at the time of export. The Application was filed under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional details can be found in Strom's Application, posted on the DOE/FE Web site at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/15_78_lng.pdf.

    1 Strom states that this Application replaces the applications it previously filed in FE Docket Nos. 14-57-LNG and 14-58-LNG, which it has withdrawn.

    2 In its Application, Strom provides additional information about these modular LNG systems, and how it intends to begin and eventually to increase LNG production to the requested export level. App. at 2.

    3See id. at 3, 5.

    4 On October 21, 2014, in Order No. 3537, DOE/FE authorized Strom to export domestically produced LNG in a volume equivalent to 28.21 Bcf/yr of natural gas from the proposed Facility to any country with which the United States has a FTA requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. or policy (FTA countries). Strom, Inc., DOE/FE Order No. 3537, FE Docket No. 14-56-LNG, Order Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas in ISO Containers Loaded at the Proposed Strom LNG Terminal in Crystal River, Florida, and Exported by Vessel to Free Trade Agreement Nations (Oct. 21, 2014). The volume sought in this Application is not additive to the volume approved for export in that order.

    Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited.

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene or notices of intervention, as applicable, requests for additional procedures, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic Filing by Email

    [email protected].

    Regular Mail

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375,Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Larine Moore or Benjamin Nussdorf, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478; (202) 586-7991.

    Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE/FE Evaluation

    The Application will be reviewed pursuant to section 3(a) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a), and DOE will consider any issues required by law or policy. To the extent determined to be relevant, these issues will include the domestic need for the natural gas proposed to be exported, the adequacy of domestic natural gas supply, U.S. energy security, and the cumulative impact of the requested authorization and any other LNG export application(s) previously approved on domestic natural gas supply and demand fundamentals. DOE may also consider other factors bearing on the public interest, including the impact of the proposed exports on the U.S. economy (including GDP, consumers, and industry), job creation, the U.S. balance of trade, and international considerations; and whether the authorization is consistent with DOE's policy of promoting competition in the marketplace by allowing commercial parties to freely negotiate their own trade arrangements. Additionally, DOE will consider the following environmental document: Addendum to Environmental Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48132 (Aug. 15, 2014).5 Parties that may oppose this Application should address these issues in their comments and/or protests, as well as other issues deemed relevant to the Application.

    5 The Addendum and related documents are available at: http://energy.gov/fe/draft-addendum-environmental-review-documents-concerning-exports-natural-gas-united-states.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires DOE to give appropriate consideration to the environmental effects of its proposed decisions. No final decision will be issued in this proceeding until DOE has met its environmental responsibilities.

    Public Comment Procedures

    In response to this Notice, any person may file a protest, comments, or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention, as applicable. Due to the complexity of the issues raised by the Applicant, interested persons will be provided 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice in which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention.

    Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. The filing of comments or a protest with respect to the Application will not serve to make the commenter or protestant a party to the proceeding, although protests and comments received from persons who are not parties will be considered in determining the appropriate action to be taken on the Application. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by the regulations in 10 CFR Part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) emailing the filing to [email protected], with FE Docket No. 15-78-LNG in the title line; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to FE Docket No. 15-78-LNG. Please Note: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    A decisional record on the Application will be developed through responses to this notice by parties, including the parties' written comments and replies thereto. Additional procedures will be used as necessary to achieve a complete understanding of the facts and issues. If an additional procedure is scheduled, notice will be provided to all parties. If no party requests additional procedures, a final Opinion and Order may be issued based on the official record, including the Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this notice, in accordance with 10 CFR 590.316.

    The Application is available for inspection and copying in the Division of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Application and any filed protests, motions to intervene or notice of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 2015. John A. Anderson, Director, Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Oil and Natural Gas.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21127 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology AGENCY:

    Office of Science, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of partially-closed meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the schedule and summary agenda for a partially-closed meeting of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), and describes the functions of the Council. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    September 18, 2015—9:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the National Academy of Sciences, 2101 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC in the Lecture Room.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information regarding the meeting agenda, time, location, and how to register for the meeting is available on the PCAST Web site at: http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. A live video webcast and an archive of the webcast after the event are expected to be available at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. The archived video will be available within one week of the meeting. Questions about the meeting should be directed to Dr. Ashley Predith at [email protected], (202) 456-4444. Please note that public seating for this meeting is limited and is available on a first-come, first-served basis.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is an advisory group of the nation's leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice available to him from inside the White House, cabinet departments, and other Federal agencies. See the Executive Order at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. PCAST is consulted about and provides analyses and recommendations concerning a wide range of issues where understandings from the domains of science, technology, and innovation may bear on the policy choices before the President. PCAST is co-chaired by Dr. John P. Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, The White House; and Dr. Eric S. Lander, President, Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard.

    Type of Meeting: Open and Closed.

    Proposed Schedule and Agenda: The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is scheduled to meet in open session on September 18, 2015 from 9:30 a.m. to 12 p.m.

    Open Portion of Meeting: During this open meeting, PCAST is scheduled to discuss its studies on the future of cities and on technology for older Americans. They will also hear from speakers who will remark on science, technology, and standards. Additional information and the agenda, including any changes that arise, will be posted at the PCAST Web site at: http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast.

    Closed Portion of the Meeting: PCAST may hold a closed meeting of approximately one hour with the President on September 18, 2015, which must take place in the White House for the President's scheduling convenience and to maintain Secret Service protection. This meeting will be closed to the public because such portion of the meeting is likely to disclose matters that are to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1).

    Public Comments: It is the policy of the PCAST to accept written public comments of any length, and to accommodate oral public comments whenever possible. The PCAST expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written statements.

    The public comment period for this meeting will take place on September 18, 2015 at a time specified in the meeting agenda posted on the PCAST Web site at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. This public comment period is designed only for substantive commentary on PCAST's work, not for business marketing purposes.

    Oral Comments: To be considered for the public speaker list at the meeting, interested parties should register to speak at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast, no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 10, 2015. Phone or email reservations will not be accepted. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per person, with a total public comment period of up to 15 minutes. If more speakers register than there is space available on the agenda, PCAST will randomly select speakers from among those who applied. Those not selected to present oral comments may always file written comments with the committee. Speakers are requested to bring at least 25 copies of their oral comments for distribution to the PCAST members.

    Written Comments: Although written comments are accepted continuously, written comments should be submitted to PCAST no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 10, 2015 so that the comments may be made available to the PCAST members prior to this meeting for their consideration. Information regarding how to submit comments and documents to PCAST is available at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast in the section entitled “Connect with PCAST.”

    Please note that because PCAST operates under the provisions of FACA, all public comments and/or presentations will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection, including being posted on the PCAST Web site.

    Meeting Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodation to access this public meeting should contact Dr. Ashley Predith at least ten business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 2015. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21130 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 15-96-LNG] Port Arthur LNG, LLC; Application for Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations for a 20-Year Period AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice of receipt of an application (Application), filed on June 15, 2015, by Port Arthur LNG, LLC (Port Arthur LNG), requesting long-term, multi-contract authorization to export domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) in a volume equivalent to approximately 517 billion cubic feet per year (Bcf/yr) of natural gas (1.42 Bcf/day). Port Arthur LNG seeks to export the LNG from a proposed natural gas processing, liquefaction, and export project it intends to construct, own, and operate in Port Arthur, Texas (Port Arthur LNG Project). Port Arthur LNG requests authorization to export this LNG to any country with which the United States does not have a free trade agreement (FTA) requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas, and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy (non-FTA countries). Port Arthur LNG requests the authorization for a 20-year term to commence on the earlier of the date of first commercial export or seven years from the date the requested authorization is granted. Port Arthur LNG seeks to export this LNG on its own behalf and as agent for other entities who will hold title to the LNG at the time of export. The Application was filed under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional details can be found in Port Arthur LNG's Application, posted on the DOE/FE Web site at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/06/f23/15_96_lng_nfta.pdf.

    Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited.

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene or notices of intervention, as applicable, requests for additional procedures, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES: Electronic Filing by email

    [email protected].

    Regular Mail

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)

    U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larine Moore or Benjamin Nussdorf, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478; (202) 586-7991. Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE/FE Evaluation

    The Application will be reviewed pursuant to section 3(a) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a), and DOE will consider any issues required by law or policy. To the extent determined to be relevant, these issues will include the domestic need for the natural gas proposed to be exported, the adequacy of domestic natural gas supply, U.S. energy security, and the cumulative impact of the requested authorization and any other LNG export application(s) previously approved on domestic natural gas supply and demand fundamentals. DOE may also consider other factors bearing on the public interest, including the impact of the proposed exports on the U.S. economy (including GDP, consumers, and industry), job creation, the U.S. balance of trade, and international considerations; and whether the authorization is consistent with DOE's policy of promoting competition in the marketplace by allowing commercial parties to freely negotiate their own trade arrangements. Additionally, DOE will consider the following environmental documents:

    Addendum to Environmental Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48132 (Aug. 15, 2014); 1 and

    1 The Addendum and related documents are available at: http://energy.gov/fe/draft-addendum-environmental-review-documents-concerning-exports-natural-gas-united-states.

    Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014).2

    2 The Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Report is available at: http://energy.gov/fe/life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-perspective-exporting-liquefied-natural-gas-united-states.

    Parties that may oppose this Application should address these issues in their comments and/or protests, as well as other issues deemed relevant to the Application.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires DOE to give appropriate consideration to the environmental effects of its proposed decisions. No final decision will be issued in this proceeding until DOE has met its environmental responsibilities.

    Public Comment Procedures

    In response to this Notice, any person may file a protest, comments, or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention, as applicable. Due to the complexity of the issues raised by the Applicant, interested persons will be provided 60 days from the date of publication of this Notice in which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention.

    Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. The filing of comments or a protest with respect to the Application will not serve to make the commenter or protestant a party to the proceeding, although protests and comments received from persons who are not parties will be considered in determining the appropriate action to be taken on the Application. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by the regulations in 10 CFR part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) emailing the filing to [email protected], with FE Docket No. 15-96-LNG in the title line; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Oil and Gas Global Supply at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to FE Docket No. 15-96-LNG. Please Note: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    A decisional record on the Application will be developed through responses to this notice by parties, including the parties' written comments and replies thereto. Additional procedures will be used as necessary to achieve a complete understanding of the facts and issues. If an additional procedure is scheduled, notice will be provided to all parties. If no party requests additional procedures, a final Opinion and Order may be issued based on the official record, including the Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this notice, in accordance with 10 CFR 590.316.

    The Application is available for inspection and copying in the Division of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Application and any filed protests, motions to intervene or notice of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, 2015. John A. Anderson, Director, Office of Oil and Gas Global Security and Supply, Office of Oil and Natural Gas.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21128 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report Filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1199-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Modifications to Reservation Charge Adjustment Provisions to be effective 10/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5109.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1200-000.

    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Clean Up of Summary of Non-Conforming and Negotiated Rate Agreements to be effective 9/21/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5155.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1201-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.403(d)(2): EPNG FL&U Filing to be effective 9/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5191.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1202-000.

    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Fuel Retention Rates—Winter 2015 to be effective 10/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5045.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/15.

    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: August 20, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21112 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 a.m.] 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: EC15-191-000.

    Applicants: TerraForm Private LLC, Meadow Creek Project Company LLC, Goshen Phase II LLC, Wolverine Creek Goshen Interconnection LLC, Canadian Hills Wind, LLC, Rockland Wind Farm LLC, Burley Butte Wind Park, LLC, Golden Valley Wind Park, LLC, Milner Dam Wind Park, LLC, Oregon Trail Wind Park, LLC, Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park, LLC, Thousand Springs Wind Park, LLC, Tuana Gulch Wind Park, LLC, Camp Reed Wind Park, LLC, Payne's Ferry Wind Park, LLC, Salmon Falls Wind Park, LLC, Yahoo Creek Wind Park, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, Requests for Expedited Action, Waivers of Filing Requirements and Confidential Treatment of Transaction Document of TerraForm Private LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 8/18/15.

    Accession Number: 20150818-5200.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2477-000.

    Applicants: Golden Hills Wind, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Golden Hills Wind, LLC Application for MBR Authority to be effective 10/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/18/15.

    Accession Number: 20150818-5171.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2478-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-19_SA 2795 ATC-City of Hartford CFA to be effective 10/18/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5050.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2479-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-19_SA 2800 ATC-City of Stoughton CFA to be effective 10/18/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5051.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2480-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-19_SA 2802 ATC-City of Two Rivers CFA to be effective 10/18/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5052.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2481-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-19_SA 2803 ATC-Badger Power Marketing Authority CFA to be effective 10/18/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5053.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2482-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Ameren Illinois Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2015-08-19_Ameren Services Compliance Att O-AIC (AC11-46) to be effective 1/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5057.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2483-000.

    Applicants: LRI Renewable Energy LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Initial Baseline Filing—LRI Renewable Energy LLC to be effective 8/19/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5071.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR15-15-000.

    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corp.

    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation for Approval of Amendments to the Bylaws of Texas Reliability Entity, Inc. and Request for Expedited Action.

    Filed Date: 8/18/15.

    Accession Number: 20150818-5198.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/15.

    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: August 19, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21109 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR15-35-000] Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Company LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on August 17, 2015, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2)(2015), Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Company LLC (Enterprise TE) filed a petition requesting a declaratory order approving the proposed rate structure and terms of service associated with an expansion of Enterprise TE's Aegis pipeline system (Aegis Expansion Project), all as more fully explained in the petition.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. 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. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.

    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 St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for 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 September 17, 2015.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21113 Filed 8-25-15; 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: EC15-192-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Electric Marketing, LLC, California Electric Marketing, LLC, New Mexico Electric Marketing, LLC, Texas Electric Marketing, LLC.

    Description: Application of Alabama Electric Marketing, LLC, et al. for Approval under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-861-003.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2019-08-19 EIM Available Balancing Capacity Compliance to be effective 11/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5190.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2057-000.

    Applicants: Tanner Street Generation, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 29, 2015 Tanner Street Generation, LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5140.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2132-001.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Wisconsin Electric Formula Rate Tariff Amended August 2015 to be effective 9/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5180.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2133-001.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Wisconsin Electric Rate Schedule 90 Amended August 2015 to be effective 9/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5184.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2494-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 1883R4 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5048.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2495-000.

    Applicants: Calpine New Jersey Generation, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Revised FERC Electric Tariff, Volume No. 3 to be effective 5/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5093.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2496-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 1894R4 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5159.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2497-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2066R4 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5162.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2498-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2491R3 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5177.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH15-18-000.

    Applicants: arGo Partners GP LLC.

    Description: arGo Partners GP LLC submits FERC 65-B Waiver Notification.

    Filed Date: 8/20/15.

    Accession Number: 20150820-5157.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/15.

    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: August 20, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21111 Filed 8-25-15; 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 electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER14-108-000.

    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C., Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, Inc., Entergy Texas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC.

    Description: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.19a(b): Refund Report [Corrected] to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5064.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2484-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 4218; Queue No. AA1-065 (ICSA) to be effective 7/20/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5092.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2485-000.

    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: FPL on Behalf of Cedar Bay Generating Company, Limited Partnership PPA (Tolling) to be effective 12/31/9998.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5105.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2486-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-19_SA 743 ATC-WPSC 2nd Rev. G-TIA to be effective 8/20/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5113.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2487-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Duke Energy Renewables Solar SGIA Filing to be effective 8/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5115.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2488-000.

    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence—TCEA to be effective 10/17/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5168.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2489-000.

    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence—CMA to be effective 8/12/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5169.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2490-000.

    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Port of Seattle NITSA Amendment No 2 SA No 484 to be effective 2/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5165.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2491-000.

    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence—EF TCEA to be effective 10/17/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5167.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2492-000.

    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 10/17/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5172.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2493-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement No. 4244; Queue Position #Z1-081 to be effective 7/20/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/19/15.

    Accession Number: 20150819-5174.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    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: August 19, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21110 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Western Area Power Administration Record of Decision for Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0408) AGENCY:

    Western Area Power Administration, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Record of Decision.

    SUMMARY:

    The Western Area Power Administration (Western) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), as joint lead agencies, issued the Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Final PEIS) (DOE/EIS-0408) on May 1, 2015. Western has decided to implement Alternative 1 as described in the Final PEIS and summarized in this Record of Decision (ROD). Alternative 1 was identified as both the agency preferred alternative and the environmentally preferred alternative.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on Western's proposed programmatic environmental evaluation procedures for wind energy project interconnections and general information about interconnections with Western's transmission system, contact Matt Marsh, Regional Environmental Manager, Upper Great Plains Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box 35800, Billings, MT 59107-5800, telephone (406) 255-2810, email [email protected] The Final PEIS, this ROD, and other project documents are available for review on Western's Web site at https://www.wapa.gov/regions/UGP/Environment/Pages/ugp-nepa.aspx and the project Web site at http://plainswindeis.anl.gov.

    For general information on the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, please contact Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone (202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Western and the Service, as joint lead agencies, prepared the Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Draft and Final PEIS (DOE/EIS-0408), the Final PEIS being issued May 1, 2015 (80 FR 24915), in response to an increase in wind energy development and interconnection requests. Western and the Service have interests in streamlining their procedures for conducting environmental reviews of wind energy applications by implementing standardized evaluation procedures and identifying measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with wind energy projects in the Upper Great Plains Region (UGP Region), which encompasses all or parts of the states of Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Since formalizing the process and procedures for environmental reviews would be Federal actions, Western and the Service prepared the PEIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), as amended, and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508). The Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Rural Utilities Service have participated in the development of the PEIS as cooperating agencies.

    Western and the Service have cooperatively prepared the PEIS to: (1) Assess the potential environmental impacts associated with wind energy projects within the UGP Region that may interconnect to Western's transmission system, or that may propose placement of project elements on grassland or wetland easements managed by the Service; and (2) evaluate how environmental impacts would differ under alternative sets of environmental evaluation procedures, best management practices, avoidance strategies, and mitigation measures that the agencies would request project developers to implement, as appropriate, for specific wind energy projects.

    The objective of the PEIS is to proactively strengthen and streamline the environmental review process by having already analyzed and addressed general environmental concerns while specifically providing for Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) compliance for wind development projects that incorporate design elements to reduce impacts. The PEIS analyzes, to the extent practicable, the impacts resulting from development of wind energy projects and the effectiveness of best management practices, avoidance of sensitive areas, and mitigation measures in reducing potential impacts. Impacts and mitigation have been analyzed for each environmental resource, and all components of wind energy projects have been addressed, including turbines, transformers, collector lines, overhead lines, access roads, substation installations, and operational and maintenance activities. Many of the potential impacts resulting from constructing and operating these types of wind energy infrastructure are well known from existing wind energy generation projects. The environmental procedures and mitigation strategies developed have been structured to be consistent with Western's Open Access Transmission Service Tariff and Southwest Power Pool, Inc.'s (SPP) Open Access Transmission Tariff, both of which include environmental review provisions.1

    1 Western's UGP Region has signed a membership agreement with SPP with a target date of transferring the functional control of its facilities in the eastern interconnection to SPP on October 1, 2015. Thereafter interconnection requests would be pursuant to the SPP tariff. Revisions to the SPP tariff incorporate Western's requirement that it will still perform NEPA reviews on interconnections associated with its facilities.

    In addition to the PEIS, Western and the Service engaged in informal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1536, in support of the PEIS process. A programmatic biological assessment (Programmatic BA) was prepared for listed and candidate species occurring in the UGP Region. Development of the Programmatic BA was closely coordinated with the Service's North Dakota Ecological Services Field Office. That office issued a letter of concurrence with the Programmatic BA on July 7, 2015, as a result of this consultation.

    The agencies also investigated a programmatic approach to Section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 54 U.S.C. 306108. Since Section 106 consultation is highly site-specific, it was determined that effective consultation could only be accomplished once an individual project location was defined. However, general avoidance and protection measures for cultural resources and historic properties that would be implemented were identified and included in the analysis.

    Purpose and Need

    Western's purpose and need for Federal action was presented in the Draft and Final PEIS: Western needs to streamline the environmental review process for wind energy project interconnection requests to help expedite wind energy resource development in the UGP Region while maintaining environmental protections.

    Description of Alternatives

    Four alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, were analyzed in the PEIS and are briefly described below. More detailed information on the alternatives may be found in the Final PEIS, which can be accessed from the Web site provided above.

    No Action Alternative: Under the No Action Alternative, Western would continue to consider wind energy project interconnection requests under the procedures currently used to evaluate and address the environmental impacts associated with wind energy projects. Requests would be processed, reviewed, and evaluated on a case-by-case basis, including separate NEPA, ESA Section 7, and NHPA Section 106 reviews performed for each specific project.

    Alternative 1—Preferred Alternative: Under Alternative 1, Western would adopt a standardized process for collecting information and evaluating and reviewing environmental impacts of wind energy interconnection requests. Best management practices and mitigation measures developed in the PEIS programmatic process would be employed to minimize the potential environmental impacts of wind energy interconnection projects. Project-specific NEPA analyses, either environmental assessments (EAs) or streamlined EISs, would tier off (eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues) the analyses in the Final PEIS as long as the appropriate identified conservation measures were implemented as part of proposed projects. In accordance with 40 CFR 1502.20, these project-specific NEPA documents would summarize the information and issues covered in the Final PEIS or incorporate relevant discussions by reference. This approach would allow for more efficient NEPA documents that would properly focus on local or site-specific issues. The decision to pursue a tiered EA or EIS would be made similar to any other proposal. If the potential for new significant impact appeared low, then an EA process could be initiated, with the understanding that the identification of any potentially new significant impact would require transition to an EIS process. It is anticipated that the tiered NEPA document in most instances will be an EA. If there appeared to be a potential for new significant environmental impact, based on the project description and site location, then a tiered EIS process would be initiated. Western may minimize the risk of project and schedule impacts from such a transition by conducting public scoping—informing the public about a federal action and soliciting public comments—when using a tiered EA process.

    Project-specific ESA Section 7 consultations would utilize the Programmatic BA so long as the applicable best management practices, minimization measures, mitigation measures, and monitoring requirements established in the Programmatic BA were implemented. Project proponents who could not agree to the requirements in the Programmatic BA would be required to conduct a separate ESA Section 7 consultation with the Service. NHPA Section 106 and related tribal consultation would continue unchanged from the present practices; since cultural resources issues are very site-specific, it was not possible to address them programmatically beyond including general avoidance and protection measures and committing to the established processes and procedures.

    The primary objective of Alternative 1 was to collect relevant natural resources information; evaluate the typical impacts of wind energy projects and associated facilities on those resources; identify effective best management practices, minimization measures, and mitigation measures that could reduce impacts; provide information about areas that would be more sensitive to development impacts and encourage avoidance of siting projects in these areas; and have all this material available to support site-specific tiered environmental reviews. The parallel Programmatic BA would similarly expedite the ESA Section 7 consultation by having previously established minimization measures, mitigation measures, and monitoring requirements, by species, that if committed to and implemented would constitute compliance with ESA Section 7 without a separate consultation.

    Alternative 2: Alternative 2 would be exactly the same as Alternative 1 for Western. However, under Alternative 2 the Service would not allow easement exchanges to accommodate the development of wind energy facilities. By comparison, Alternative 1 would provide a standardized process for the Service to allow easement exchanges, and facilitate wind energy development while retaining or enhancing the habitat and wildlife values the easement program was designed to provide. The differences in the Service's approach to siting on easements do not affect Western's decision, and Western's actions would be the same under both alternatives.

    Alternative 3: Under Alternative 3, separate project-specific NEPA evaluations would be required for each interconnection request. Western would not request additional best management practices or mitigation measures of wind energy developers beyond those mandated under applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. More effort would be required to produce site-specific NEPA documents because of the reduced scope of the PEIS, and time frames for the site-specific documents would be extended accordingly. In essence Alternative 3 is a minimalist programmatic approach that would incorporate all mandated environmental review requirements, but would not extend beyond them. Any mandated or required provisions included in either Alternative 1 or 2 are also incorporated in Alternative 3.

    Since the proposed action is programmatic in nature and did not include on-the-ground activities, no direct impacts to the human environment would occur under any of the PEIS alternatives. However, the PEIS analysis identified generic wind energy development impacts and evaluated a large number of best management practices and avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. Alternative 1 is the environmentally preferred alternative because it develops comprehensive procedures and mitigation measures, results in consistency of the application and authorization process, and supports wind energy development by facilitating the understanding of the requirements for approval by potential wind energy project developers. The development of renewable energy resources is a priority national policy, and Alternative 1 supports that objective. One of the objectives of the proposed action was to avoid or minimize environmental harm from future wind energy projects, and that objective is best met byAlternative 1.

    Decision

    Western has determined that Alternative 1, the agency preferred alternative, best meets the agency's needs. Alternative 1 is also the environmentally preferred alternative, and would afford the greatest protection for environmental resources that would be impacted by future wind energy projects. Therefore, it is Western's decision to implement Alternative 1, and use the program defined by that alternative for all applicable future wind energy project interconnection requests in the UGP Region.2

    2 On November 16, 2011, DOE's Acting General Counsel restated the delegation to Western's Administrator of all the authorities of the General Counsel with respect to environmental impact statements.

    This decision is based on the information contained in the Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Final PEIS. This ROD was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the CEQ Regulations for Implementing NEPA § 1505.2 and DOE's NEPA implementing procedures, 10 CFR 1021 et seq.

    Dated: August 17, 2015. Mark A. Gabriel, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21131 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9933-10-ORD] Office of Research and Development; Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of a Two New Equivalent Methods AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of designation of two new equivalent methods for monitoring ambient air quality.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated, in accordance with 40 CFR part 53, two new equivalent methods: one for measuring concentrations of PM2.5 and one for measuring concentrations of ozone (O3) in the ambient air.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Vanderpool, Human Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD-D205-03), National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with regulations at 40 CFR part 53, the EPA evaluates various methods for monitoring the concentrations of those ambient air pollutants for which EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs), as set forth in 40 CFR part 50. Monitoring methods that are determined to meet specific requirements for adequacy are designated by the EPA as either reference methods or equivalent methods (as applicable), thereby permitting their use under 40 CFR part 58 by States and other agencies for determining compliance with the NAAQSs.

    The EPA hereby announces the designation of two new equivalent methods for measuring pollutant concentrations in the ambient air: One for PM2.5 and one for ozone. These designations are made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as amended on August 31, 2011 (76 FR 54326-54341).

    The new PM2.5 Class III equivalent method is nearly identical to a corresponding Met One sampler (EQPM-1013-209) that had been previously designated by EPA as an equivalent method sampler for PM2.5. The significant difference is that the newly designated PM2.5 equivalent method sampler is configured to use an URG-2000-30EGN PM2.5 as the principle size separator (fractionator) for the sampler rather than the WINS impactor or the BGI VSCCTM used in the corresponding PM2.5 equivalent method sampler. The newly designated Class III equivalent method is identified as follows:

    EQPM-0715-266, Met One Instruments, Inc. BAM-1020 Beta Attenuation Mass Monitor—PM2.5 FEM Configuration,” configured for 24 1-hour average measurements of PM2.5 by beta attenuation, using a glass fiber filter tape roll (460130 or 460180) and a sample flow rate of 16.67 liters/min and with the standard (BX-802) EPA PM10 inlet (meeting 40 CFR 50 Appendix L specifications) and with an URG-2000-30EGN PM2.5 (BX-809) cyclonic separator, BX-596 combo T/RH sensor, BX-827(110V) or BX-830(230V). Instrument must be operated in accordance with the BAM 1020 Particulate Monitor operation manual, revision k or later. This PM2.5 equivalent method designation only applies to the BAM-1020 configured with the URG-2000-30EGN cyclone.

    In the particular case of the new Met One Class III PM2.5 equivalent method, a corresponding Met One PM2.5 equivalent method sampler (RFPS-1013-209) may be converted to the equivalent method configuration by replacement of the WINS impactor or the VSCCTM cyclone with the URG-2000-30EGN cyclone specified in the equivalent method description. The URG-2000-30EGN cyclone should be purchased from the sampler manufacturer, who will also furnish installation, conversion, operation, and maintenance instructions for the URG-2000-30EGN cyclone, as well as a new equivalent method identification label to be placed on the sampler. If the conversion is to be permanent, the original designation equivalent method label should be removed from the sampler and replaced with the new designated equivalent method label.

    The application for equivalent method determination for the PM2.5 method was received by the Office of Research and Development on June 18, 2015. This monitor is commercially available from the applicant, Met One Instruments, Inc., 1600 Washington Blvd., Grants Pass, OR 97526.

    The new Ozone equivalent method is an automated monitoring method (analyzer) utilizing a measurement principle based on based on non-dispersive ultraviolet absorption photometry. The newly designated equivalent method is identified as follows:

    EQOA-0815-227, “2B Technologies Model Personal Ozone Monitor (POM),” operated in a range of 0-0.5 ppm in an environment of 20-30 °C, temperature and pressure compensation, using a 10 second averaging time, with a 12V DC source supplied by a 100-240V AC power adapter, operated according to the POM Operation Manual and with or without the following: Cigarette lighter adapter or a 12V DC battery or a 7-24 V battery for portable operation, USB data port with computer cable.

    The application for equivalent method determination for the ozone method was received by the Office of Research and Development on September 18, 2013. This analyzer is commercially available from the applicant, 2B Technology, Inc., 2100 Central Ave., Suite 105, Boulder, CO 80303.

    Test monitors representative of these methods have been tested in accordance with the applicable test procedures specified in 40 CFR part 53, as amended on August 31, 2011. After reviewing the results of those tests and other information submitted in the application, EPA has determined, in accordance with part 53, that these methods should be designated as equivalent methods.

    As designated equivalent methods, these methods are acceptable for use by states and other air monitoring agencies under the requirements of 40 CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For such purposes, the method must be used in strict accordance with the operation or instruction manual associated with the method and subject to any specifications and limitations (e.g., configuration or operational settings) specified in the applicable designated method descriptions (see the identification of the methods above).

    Use of the methods also should be in general accordance with the guidance and recommendations of applicable sections of the “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume I,” EPA/600/R-94/038a and “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume II, Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Program” EPA-454/B-08-003, December, 2008. Provisions concerning modification of such methods by users are specified under Section 2.8 (Modifications of Methods by Users) of Appendix C to 40 CFR part 58.

    Consistent or repeated noncompliance should be reported to: Director, Human Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD-E205-01), National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.

    Designation of this new equivalent method is intended to assist the States in establishing and operating their air quality surveillance systems under 40 CFR part 58. Questions concerning the commercial availability or technical aspects of the method should be directed to the applicant.

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, Director, National Exposure Research Laboratory.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21203 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [9933-12-Region 1] Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Town Of Bennington, Vermont, Former Kocher Drive Dump Site, Bennington, Vermont AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed settlement; request for public comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. Section 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement for recovery of response costs under CERCLA Section 122(h) and 104(e), concerning the Former Kocher Drive Dump Superfund Site in Bennington, Vermont with the following settling party: Town of Bennington, Vermont. The settlement requires the Town of Bennington, Vermont to pay $175,000 to the Hazardous Substance Superfund, consisting of principal and interest, on the following payment schedule: (1) $50,000 within 10 days of the Effective Date of the settlement; (2) $75,000 on or before December 31, 2015; and (3) the balance of $50,000 on or before December 31, 2016. The settlement also requires the Town to comply with any request or order from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources relating to the Site.

    For 30 days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the settlement. The United States will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. The Agency's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA 02109-3912.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted by September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to David Peterson, Senior Enforcement Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OES04-1), Boston, MA 02109-3912 (Telephone No. 617-918-1891) and should refer to: In re: Former Kocher Drive Dump Superfund Site, U.S. EPA Docket No. 01-2014-0007.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A copy of the proposed settlement may be obtained from Cindy Catri, Senior Enforcement Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OES04-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912; (617) 918-1888; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed administrative settlement for recovery of response costs under CERCLA Section 122(h)(1) and 104(e)(6), concerning the Former Kocher Drive Dump Superfund Site in Bennington, Vermont, requires the settling party, the Town of Bennington, Vermont to pay $175,000 to the Hazardous Substance Superfund, consisting of principal and interest, on the following payment schedule: (1) $50,000 within 10 days of the Effective Date of the settlement; (2) $75,000 on or before December 31, 2015; and (3) the balance of $50,000 on or before December 31, 2016. The settlement also requires the Town to comply with any request or order from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources relating to the Site.

    The settlement includes a covenant not to sue pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607, relating to the Site, and protection from contribution actions or claims as provided by Sections 113(f)(2) and 122(h)(4) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9613(f)(2) and 9622(h)(4). The settlement has been approved by the Environmental and Natural Resources Division of the United States Department of Justice.

    Dated: August 13, 2015. Nancy Barmakian, Acting Director, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21211 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9933-08-OECA] National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of Public Meeting and Public Comment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby provides notice that the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) will meet on the dates and times described below. All meetings are open to the public. Members of the public are encouraged to provide comments relevant to the specific issues being considered by the NEJAC. For additional information about registering for public comment, please see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Due to limited space, seating at the NEJAC meeting will be on a first-come, first-served basis.

    DATES:

    The NEJAC meeting will convene Thursday, September 10, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

    One public comment period relevant to the specific issues being considered by the NEJAC (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) is scheduled for Wednesday, September 9, 2015, starting at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Members of the public who wish to participate during the public comment period are highly encouraged to pre-register by Midnight, Eastern Standard Time, on Monday, August 31, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The NEJAC meeting will be held at the EPA Potomac Yard offices located at 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 16202.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions or correspondence concerning the meeting should be directed to Jasmin Muriel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, by mail at 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., (MC1601A), Washington, DC 20460; by telephone at 202-564-4287; via email at [email protected]; or by fax at 202-564-1624. Additional information about the NEJAC is available at: www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/nejac.

    Registration is required for all participants. Pre-registration by Midnight, Eastern Standard Time, on Monday, August 31, 2015, for all attendees is highly recommended. Because this NEJAC meeting will be held in government space, we strongly encourage you to register early. Space limitations may not allow us to accommodate everyone who is interested in attending. Priority admission will be given to pre-registered participants. To register, visit http://nejac-sept-2015-arlington.eventbrite.com. Please state whether you would like to be put on the list to provide oral public comment. Please specify whether you are submitting written comments before the Midnight, Monday, August 31, 2015, deadline. Non-English speaking attendees wishing to arrange for a foreign language interpreter may make appropriate arrangements in writing using the above telephone number.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Charter of the NEJAC states that the advisory committee shall provide independent advice to the EPA Administrator about areas that may include, among other things, “advice about broad, cross-cutting issues related to environmental justice, including environment-related strategic, scientific, technological, regulatory, and economic issues related to environmental justice.”

    The meeting shall be used to discuss and receive comments about the nexus between sustainability and environmental justice. Specifically, the NEJAC will discuss these primary areas: (1) Dialogue about Civil Rights, (2) NEJAC Charge on improving environmental outcomes through monitoring, (3) Update on the Clean Power Plan, (4) NEJAC Charge on Youth Perspectives on Climate Change.

    A. Public Comment: Individuals or groups making oral presentations during the public comment periods will be limited to a total time of seven minutes. To accommodate the large number of people who want to address the NEJAC, only one representative of an organization or group will be allowed to speak. If time permits, multiple representatives from the same organization can provide comment at the end of the session. In addition, those who did not sign up in advance to give public comment can sign up on site. The suggested format for written public comments is as follows: Name of Speaker; Name of Organization/Community; City and State; Email address; and a brief description of the concern and what you want the NEJAC to advise EPA to do. Written comments received by Midnight, Eastern Standard Time, on Monday, August 31, 2015, will be included in the materials distributed to the members of the NEJAC. Written comments received after that date and time will be provided to the NEJAC as time allows. All information should be sent to the mailing address, email address, or fax number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    B. Information about Services for Individuals with Disabilities: For information about access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Jasmin Muriel, at (202) 564-4287 or via email at [email protected] To request special accommodations for a disability, please contact Ms. Muriel at least four working days prior to the meeting, to give EPA sufficient time to process your request. All requests should be sent to the address, email, or phone/fax number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Matthew Tejada, Designated Federal Officer, National Environmental Justice Advisory Council.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21212 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0090; FRL 9932-01-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring in Public Water Systems (UCMR 3) (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring in Public Water Systems (UCMR 3)” (EPA ICR No. 2192.06, OMB Control No. 2040-0270) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through August 31, 2015. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (80 FR 17042) on March 31, 2015, during a 60-day comment period. No public comments were received relating to the UCMR 3 ICR Renewal. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given in this notice, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0090, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda D. Parris, Standards and Risk Management Division (SRMD), Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) (MS 140), Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268; telephone number: (513) 569-7961; or email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, requires EPA to establish criteria for a program to monitor not more than 30 unregulated contaminants every five years. Information collected under the program supports Agency decision making regarding whether or not to regulate particular contaminants in drinking water. UCMR 3 addresses the third group of 30 contaminants and was published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2012.

    UCMR 3 “Assessment Monitoring” began in January 2013 and continues through December 2015 for all large systems (those systems serving 10,001 to 100,000 people) and very large systems (those systems serving more than 100,000 people), and for a nationally representative sample of 800 small public water systems (PWSs) (those serving 10,000 or fewer people). The “Screening Survey” began in January 2013 and continues through December 2015 for all very large systems, 320 randomly-selected large systems, and 480 randomly selected small systems. “Pre-Screen Testing” began in January 2013 and continues through December 2015 for a sample of 800 very small (systems serving 1,000 or fewer people) undisinfected ground water systems.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Public Water Systems (PWSs) and States, territories and tribes with primacy to administer the regulatory program for PWSs under SDWA.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory. The information collection is carried out per Section 1445(a) of SDWA.

    Estimated number of respondents: There are approximately 6,351 respondents to UCMR 3, including approximately 2,098 PWSs that will monitor during the ICR years of 2015-2017, and 56 states and primacy agents.

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 17,902 hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $7,449,927 per year, including $6,546,967 in non-labor costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 22,765 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the existing ICR. This decrease is an adjustment to estimates due to the reduced number of PWSs that have to monitor during the ICR period of 2015-2017.

    Courtney Kerwin, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21136 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0442; FRL 9932-00-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Microbial Rules (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR) for the Microbial Rules (EPA ICR No. 1895.09, OMB Control No. 2040-0205) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through August 31, 2015. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (80 FR 17040) on March 31, 2015, during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is provided in this renewal notice, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0442, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected] or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kevin Roland, Drinking Water Protection Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, (4606M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-4588: fax number: 202-564-3755; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Microbial Rules Renewal ICR examines public water system, air carrier and primacy agency burden and costs for recordkeeping and reporting requirements in support of the microbial drinking water regulations. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142. The following microbial regulations are included: the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), the Total Coliform Rule (TCR), the Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR), the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR), the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR), the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR), the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR), the Ground Water Rule (GWR) and the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule (ADWR). Future microbial-related rulemakings will be added to this consolidated ICR after the regulations are promulgated and the initial, rule-specific, ICRs are due to expire.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are public water systems, air carriers and primacy agencies.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142.

    Estimated number of respondents: 149,864 (total).

    Frequency of response: Varies by requirement (i.e., on occasion, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually and annually).

    Total estimated burden: 14,683,598 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    TTotal estimated cost: $652,507,000 (per year), includes $21,982,000 annualized capital and $88,035,000 operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 913,658 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is a result of inclusion of the RTCR burden (839,526 hours) and expanded implementation requirements for the GWR and LT2ESWTR; updating relevant baseline information for each rule with the most current and accurate information available (e.g., Public Water System inventories); and, updating burden to incorporate the results of consultation with stakeholders. Where appropriate and available, estimated violation, waiver and other associated rates have also been updated to reflect current information on rule compliance.

    Courtney Kerwin, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21135 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION [NV-15-10 (8-18-2015)] Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity AGENCY:

    Farm Credit Administration.

    ACTION:

    Policy statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The Farm Credit Administration (FCA) Board recently updated its Policy Statement on Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity.

    DATES:

    Effective date: August 18, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thais Burlew, Director of Equal Employment Opportunity and Inclusion, Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean Virginia 22102-5090, (703) 883-4290, TTY (703) 883-4352.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    While not required by law, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has determined that reissuance of an agency's EEO policy statement each fiscal year is a symbol of the agency leadership's commitment to EEO and Diversity principles. The FCA conducted its annual review of Policy Statement FCA-PS-62 on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and Diversity and made several minor changes. First, due to the change in FCA leadership, the term “Chair” has been replaced with “Chairman.” Second, a parenthetical has been added to one of the bases of discrimination to read, “sex (including sexual orientation),” to clarify EEOC's jurisdiction after the recent issuance of Baldwin v. Dep't of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 1020133080 (July 16, 2015). Finally, several stylistic, nonsubstantive changes were made.

    The text of the updated Policy Statement is set forth below in its entirety. All FCA Board policy statements may be viewed on FCA's Web site. From www.fca.gov, select “Laws & Regulations,” then select “FCA Handbook,” then select “FCA Board Policy Statements.”

    EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY AND DIVERSITY NV-15-10 FCA-PS-62

    EFFECTIVE DATE: August 18, 2015.

    EFFECT ON PREVIOUS ACTION: Replaces FCA-PS-62 [NV 14-15] dated August 26, 2014 (79 FR 50908, 8/26/14).

    SOURCE OF AUTHORITY: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.); Age Discrimination in Employment Act (29 U.S.C. 621 et seq.); Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 721 et seq.); Equal Pay Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 206(d)); Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 3112); Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No FEAR Act) (5 U.S.C. 2301); Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (42 U.S.C. 2000ff et seq.); section 5.9 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (12 U.S.C. 2243); Executive Order 11478 (Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government), as amended by Executive Orders 13087 and 13152 to include prohibitions on discrimination based on sexual orientation and status as a parent; Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency); 29 CFR part 1614; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Management Directives.

    THE FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION BOARD HEREBY ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING POLICY STATEMENT:

    PURPOSE

    The Farm Credit Administration (FCA or Agency) Board reaffirms its commitment to Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and Diversity (EEOD) and its belief that all FCA employees should be treated with dignity and respect. The Board also provides guidance to Agency management and staff for deciding and taking action in these critical areas.

    IMPORTANCE

    Unquestionably, the employees who comprise the FCA are its most important resource. The Board fully recognizes that the Agency draws its strength from the dedication, experience, and diversity of its employees. The Board is firmly committed to taking whatever steps are needed to protect the rights of its staff and to carrying out programs that foster the development of each employee's potential. We believe an investment in efforts that strongly promote EEOD will prevent the conflict and the high costs of correction for taking no, or inadequate, action in these areas.

    THE FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION (FCA) BOARD ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING POLICY STATEMENT:

    It is the policy of the FCA to prohibit discrimination in Agency policies, program practices, and operations. Employees, applicants for employment, and members of the public who seek to take part in FCA programs, activities, and services will be treated fairly. The FCA Board Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is ultimately responsible for ensuring that FCA meets all EEOD requirements and initiatives in accordance with laws and regulations, to maintain a workplace that is free from discrimination and that values all employees. FCA, under the appropriate laws and regulations, will:

    • Ensure equal employment opportunity based on merit and qualification, without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation), age (40 or older), national origin, disability, status as a parent, genetic information, or filing of a complaint, participation in discrimination or harassment complaint proceedings, or other opposition to discrimination;

    • Provide for the prompt and fair consideration of complaints of discrimination;

    • Make reasonable accommodations for qualified applicants for employment and employees with physical or mental disabilities under law;

    • Make reasonable accommodations based on applicants' and employees' religious beliefs or practices, consistent with Title VII;

    • Provide an environment free from harassment to all employees;

    • Create and maintain an organizational culture that recognizes, values, and supports employee and public diversity and inclusion;

    • Develop objectives within the Agency's operation and strategic planning process to meet the goals of EEOD and this policy;

    • Implement affirmative programs to carry out this policy within the Agency; and

    • To the extent practicable, seek to encourage the Farm Credit System to continue its efforts to promote and increase diversity.

    DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

    The FCA intends to be a model employer. That is, as far as possible, FCA will build and maintain a workforce that reflects the rich diversity of individual differences evident throughout this Nation. The Board views individual differences as complementary and believes these differences enrich our organization. When individual differences are respected, recognized, and valued, diversity becomes a powerful force that can contribute to achieving superior results. Therefore, we will create, maintain, and continuously improve on an organizational culture that fully recognizes, values, and supports employee diversity. The Board is committed to promoting and supporting an inclusive environment that provides to all employees, individually and collectively, the chance to work to their full potential in the pursuit of the Agency's mission. We will provide everyone the opportunity to develop to his or her fullest potential. When a barrier to someone achieving this goal exists, we will strive to remove this barrier.

    AFFIRMATIVE EMPLOYMENT

    The Board reaffirms its commitment to ensuring FCA conducts all of its employment practices in a nondiscriminatory manner. The Board expects full cooperation and support from everyone associated with recruitment, selection, development, and promotion to ensure such actions are free of discrimination. All employees will be evaluated on their EEOD achievements as part of their overall job performance. Though staff commitment is important, the role of supervisors is paramount to success. Agency supervisors must be coaches and are responsible for helping all employees develop their talents and give their best efforts in contributing to the mission of the FCA.

    WORKPLACE HARASSMENT

    It is the policy of the FCA to provide a work environment free from unlawful discrimination in any form, and to protect all employees from any form of harassment, either physical or verbal. The FCA will not tolerate harassment in the workplace for any reason. The FCA also will not tolerate retaliation against any employee for reporting harassment or for aiding in any inquiry about reporting harassment.

    DISABLED VETERANS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM (DVAAP)

    A disabled veteran is defined as someone who is entitled to compensation under the laws administered by the Veterans Administration or someone who was discharged or released from active duty because of a service-connected disability.

    The FCA is committed to increasing the representation of disabled veterans within its organization. Our Nation owes a debt to those veterans who served their country, especially those who were disabled because of service. To honor these disabled veterans, the FCA shall place emphasis on making vacancies known to and providing opportunities for employing disabled veterans.

    Dated this 18th day of August, 2015.

    By Order of the Board.

    Dale L. Aultman, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21175 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of the agreements are available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202) 523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 011383-046.

    Title: Venezuelan Discussion Agreement.

    Parties: Hamburg-Süd; King Ocean Services Limited, Inc.; Seaboard Marine Ltd.; and Seafreight Line.

    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Cozen O'Conner; 1627 I Street NW., Suite 1100; Washington, DC 20006-4007.

    Synopsis: The amendment deletes MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company as a party to the Agreement.

    Agreement No.: 011426-059.

    Title: West Coast of South America Discussion Agreement.

    Parties: CMA CGM S.A.; Hamburg-Süd; Hapag-Lloyd AG; King Ocean Services Limited, Inc.; MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company, SA; Seaboard Marine Ltd.; and Trinity Shipping Line.

    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Cozen O'Conner; 1627 I Street NW., Suite 1100; Washington, DC 20006-4007.

    Synopsis: The amendment deletes Frontier Liner Services, Inc. as a party to the agreement.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21134 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 151 0030] Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed consent agreements.

    SUMMARY:

    The consent agreements in this matter settle alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint and the terms of the two consent orders— embodied in the consent agreements—that would settle these allegations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before September 17, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/concordiaparconsent online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al—Consent Agreements; File No. 151-0030” on your comment and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/concordiaparconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.—Consent Agreements; File No. 151-0030” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bradley S. Albert, Bureau of Competition, (202-326-3670), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 2.34, 16 § CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreements containing consent orders to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, have been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreements, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the each consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for August 18, 2015), on the World Wide Web, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/actions.shtm.

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before September 17, 2015. Write “Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al—Consent Agreements; File No. 151-0030” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact information from comments before placing them on the Commission Web site.

    Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive personal information, like anyone's Social Security number, date of birth, driver's license number or other state identification number or foreign country equivalent, passport number, financial account number, or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, like medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, do not include any “[t]rade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential,” as discussed in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 § CFR 4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    If you want the Commission to give your comment confidential treatment, you must file it in paper form, with a request for confidential treatment, and you have to follow the procedure explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 § CFR 4.9(c).1 Your comment will be kept confidential only if the FTC General Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest.

    1 In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR § 4.9(c).

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/concordiaparconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that Web site.

    If you file your comment on paper, write “Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al—Consent Agreements; File No. 151-0030” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Visit the Commission Web site at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before September 17, 2015. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.

    Analysis of Agreements Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment

    The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, Agreements Containing Consent Orders with Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Par Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc., TPG Partners VI, L.P. (hereinafter “Par”), and with Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Concordia Healthcare Corp. (hereinafter “Concordia”). The proposed orders are designed to settle allegations that Par and Concordia violated Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, by entering into an unlawful agreement not to compete relating to generic versions of Concordia's prescription drug known as Kapvay.

    The proposed orders have been placed on the public record for 30 days in order to receive comments from interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will again review the agreements and the comments received and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make the proposed orders final.

    The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed orders. This Analysis to Aid Public Comment is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the agreement, the complaint, or the proposed consent orders, or to modify their terms in any way. The proposed consent orders have been entered into for settlement purposes only and do not constitute admissions by Par or Concordia that either violated the law or that the facts alleged in the complaint, other than the jurisdictional facts, are true.

    Background and the Challenged Conduct

    The complaint charges that Par and Concordia entered an unlawful agreement that Concordia would refrain from launching an “authorized generic” version of its brand-name drug Kapvay in exchange for a share of the supra-competitive profits Par would earn as the sole seller of generic Kapvay.

    An authorized generic is a prescription drug that has been approved by the FDA as a brand-name drug product, but is marketed by the brand company (or its representative) as a generic drug product, without the trademark of the brand-name drug. An authorized generic can be sold under the approval the FDA granted under a new drug application (NDA) at any time.2 Brand-name drug companies frequently introduce authorized generics upon entry of the first generic to stem large losses resulting from the rapid shift of sales from brand-name drugs to lower-priced generic products. Empirical evidence from the Federal Trade Commission's Authorized Generic Study shows that competition between the first generic entrant and an authorized generic typically drives down both retail and wholesale generic drug prices.3

    2See Teva Pharm. Indus. v. Crawford, 410 F.3d 51 (D.C. Cir. 2005).

    3 Fed. Trade Comm'n, Authorized Generic Drugs: Short-Term Effects and Long-Term Impact (2011) (hereinafter “Authorized Generic Study”) at 41-48, available at https://www.ftc.gov/reports/authorized-generic-drugs-short-term-effects-long-term-impact-report-federal-trade-commission.

    Competition from an authorized generic has significant financial implications for the first generic entrant, for two reasons: (1) The authorized generic typically takes substantial sales from the first entrant; and (2) the competition from an authorized generic means that, on average, sales are made at lower prices. When the first generic entrant is the sole seller of the generic drug product, it enjoys approximately double the revenues that it would otherwise make in the first six months on the market if it faced competition from an authorized generic.4

    4 Authorized Generic Study at iii.

    As alleged in the complaint:

    Concordia owns and markets various brand-name drug products. It acquired the rights to Kapvay in May 2013. Kapvay is a non-stimulant medication for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, approved for sale in the United States in September 2010.

    Par develops and markets generic drugs. Par filed an application seeking FDA approval to sell a generic version of Kapvay in March 2011.

    The timing of FDA approval for an independent generic drug is subject to certain patent and regulatory exclusivity protections. The federal law commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act requires a brand-name drug manufacturer to notify the FDA of patents that could reasonably be asserted against a party making or selling its drug. The FDA publishes patent information in a document known as the “Orange Book.” If a generic drug manufacturer seeks FDA approval to market a generic product prior to the expiration of a listed patent or patents relating to the brand-name drug upon which the generic is based, the applicant must: (1) Certify to the FDA that the patent in question is invalid or is not infringed by the generic product (known as a “paragraph IV certification”); and (2) notify the patent holder of the filing of the certification. If the holder of patent rights files a patent infringement suit within 45 days of the notification, FDA approval to market the generic drug is automatically stayed for 30 months, unless before that time the patent expires or is judicially determined to be invalid or not infringed.

    In the case of Kapvay, the single patent listed in the FDA's Orange Book expired on October 13, 2013 (U.S. Patent No. 5,869,100 (“the '100 patent”)). When Par filed its application for approval of its generic Kapvay product in 2011, it submitted a paragraph IV certification concerning this patent. The company that held the rights to Kapvay at the time did not assert any claim for patent infringement.

    Approximately five weeks before the '100 patent was due to expire, however, Par and Concordia entered into a “License Agreement” relating to Kapvay. The agreement granted Par a license effective one week before expiration of the '100 patent. Under this agreement, Concordia agreed not to market an authorized generic version of Kapvay for five years. Par in turn agreed to pay Concordia at least 35 percent (and as much as 50 percent) of the net profits from the sale of Par's generic Kapvay product.

    Although the License Agreement purports to grant Par rights under the '100 patent and other unspecified current or future intellectual property (and a waiver of unspecified regulatory exclusivities), the parties provided no evidence that Concordia held any rights that might have prevented Par from selling generic Kapvay after expiration of the '100 patent. Aside from the '100 patent, which expired a week after the effective date of the license, no patent claiming Kapvay has ever been listed in the FDA Orange Book.

    Par received final FDA approval for its generic Kapvay ANDA on September 30, 2013. It began selling generic Kapvay on October 7, 2013. Until May 15, 2015, Par was the only generic drug manufacturer to receive FDA approval for a generic Kapvay product.

    Concordia launched an authorized generic Kapvay product in December 2014, after learning that the FTC was investigating its agreement with Par concerning Kapvay.

    Competitive Analysis

    The complaint charges that the challenged agreement between Par and Concordia constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade that was likely to harm competition and consumers by enabling Par to price its generic Kapvay product without facing competition from an authorized generic version of the drug. By agreeing to share a portion of its likely supra-competitive profits with Concordia, Par protected itself from competition from an authorized generic for five years. The agreement was not plausibly related to any efficiency-enhancing joint undertaking. It is therefore appropriate to analyze the challenged conduct here as a straightforward agreement not to compete.

    The evidence in this case indicated that, without a competing generic Kapvay product, consumers and other private and public purchasers were likely forced to pay higher prices for generic Kapvay. In addition, as noted above, empirical evidence from the FTC's Authorized Generic Study confirms what economic theory predicts: when the brand company cedes all generic sales to the first generic entrant by agreeing not to introduce an authorized generic, the generic drug company on average captures substantially more sales and sells at significantly higher prices. Consumers, meanwhile, are forced to pay supra-competitive prices for the generic product.5

    5See Authorized Generic Report at vi, 41-48, 57-59.

    The Proposed Orders

    The proposed orders are designed to remedy the unlawful conduct charged in the complaint and to prevent recurrence of similar conduct. The orders prohibit Par and Concordia from (1) enforcing the relevant provisions of their 2013 License Agreement and (2) entering into similar “no-authorized-generic” agreements in the future.

    In the Par order, Paragraph II.A prohibits Par from seeking to enforce any provision in its 2013 License Agreement with Concordia that restricts Concordia's ability to market an authorized generic Kapvay product. Paragraph II.B provides that Par may not enter into any agreement that (1) limits a brand-name drug manufacturer's ability to market an authorized generic version of a drug product for which Par is seeking FDA approval to sell a generic counterpart; and (2) the limitation extends beyond the expiration of any Orange-Book listed patents for the drug in question.6

    6 This provision applies to actions taken on behalf of Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., and Par Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc., but would not apply to conduct by Respondent TPG Partners VI, L.P. that is not taken on behalf of the Par entities.

    In the Concordia order, Paragraph II requires Concordia to relinquish any and all rights to payment under the License Agreement and to provide written notice to Par and the FTC of that relinquishment. Paragraph III bars Concordia from entering any agreement with a generic applicant for a reference-listed drug for which Concordia holds the NDA, if the agreement (1) limits marketing of an authorized generic version of that drug and (2) the limitation extends beyond the expiration of any Orange-Book listed patents for the drug in question.

    The proposed orders' prohibitions on future agreements limiting an authorized generic cover only agreements in which the restraint extends beyond patent expiration. Agreements to restrict the sale of an authorized generic sometimes appear in patent litigation settlements and can serve as a means of compensating the generic patent challenger for agreeing to stay off the market for a period of time.7 These arrangements can raise the same antitrust concerns that the Supreme Court addressed in FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013).8 That is not this case, however, and the proposed orders are not designed to address that type of conduct. As discussed above, the challenged agreement here did not arise out of pending or threatened patent litigation and nearly the entire five-year term of the agreement covered the period after expiration of the Kapvay patent.

    7See, e.g., Authorized Generic Study at 139-53.

    8See King Drug Co. of Florence Inc.v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., No. 14-1243 (3rd Cir. June 26, 2015). See also Brief of Federal Trade Commission as Amicus Curiae, American Sales Co.v. Warner-Chilcott Co., LLC, Nos. 14-2071 and 15-1250 (1st Cir. June 16, 2015).

    For purposes of these proposed orders, “authorized generic” means a drug product distributed by or on behalf of an NDA holder, but marketed as a generic, regardless of whether it is manufactured pursuant to an NDA, an ANDA, or a 505(b)(2) application.9

    9 A company seeking to market a generic product typically files an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA). In that case, instead of providing independent evidence of safety and effectiveness, the applicant must demonstrate that its drug is bioequivalent to its branded counterpart. In some circumstances, a generic drug manufacturer may need to submit reports of investigations of the safety and effectiveness of its product in addition to relying on existing data, under what is known as a “505(b)(2)” application.

    The proposed orders each include a notice provision designed to assist in monitoring the respondents' future conduct with respect to an agreement to restrict the sale of an authorized generic product—without regard to whether the agreement extends beyond expiration of any listed patent. Par is required to notify the Commission and provide certain specified information if it enters certain agreements with a party that markets a brand-name drug for which Par has filed an application to sell a generic equivalent. Covered agreements are those that (1) limit the sale of an authorized generic and (2) take effect before the expiration of all Orange-Book listed patents for the relevant brand-name drug. A comparable provision in the Concordia order requires Concordia to provide such notice for agreements with a party seeking FDA approval to market a generic version of a brand-name drug for which Concordia holds the NDA. Both notice provisions terminate ten years after issuance of the orders.

    These notice provisions differ from the filing requirements contained in Section 1112 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA). The notice required by the orders must be filed at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the agreement; MMA filings must be made within ten days after execution of the agreement.

    The proposed orders also require that for five years Par and Concordia maintain compliance programs with certain prescribed features. Finally, the proposed orders contain certain reporting and other provisions that are designed to assist the Commission in monitoring compliance and are standard provisions in Commission orders. The proposed orders will expire in 20 years.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21071 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-MA-2015-04; Docket No. 2015-0002; Sequence 22] Federal Management Regulations; Improved Management of Undeliverable-as-Addressed Mail AGENCY:

    Office of Government-Wide Policy, General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of a bulletin.

    SUMMARY:

    The General Services Administration has issued Federal Management Regulation (FMR) Bulletin G-05, which provides guidance to Executive Branch agencies for improving management of undeliverable-as-addressed (UAA) mail. The bulletin provides agencies with information on the tools and best practices associated with UAA mail. The FMR Bulletin G-05 and all other FMR bulletins are located at http://www.gsa.gov/fmrbulletins.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 26, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Cynthia Patterson, Office of Government-wide Policy (MAF), Office of Asset and Transportation Management, General Services Administration, at 703-589-2641 or via email at [email protected] Please cite FMR Bulletin G-05.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FMR Bulletin G-05 consolidates information regarding tools and best practices for management of UAA mail from a number of sources. Better management of UAA mail reduces mailing costs and associated personnel costs, improves community outreach and relations, supports sustainability efforts by reducing printing, paper use, and energy consumption, and is consistent with the goals of Executive Orders 13589 and 13693, and the Federal Management Regulation. The four suggestions described in this bulletin are: (1) Establish internal policies to obtain and verify address correction, (2) prior to mailing, use USPS® certified vendors' address management tools, (3) actively manage returned mail with barcodes and scanning technology, and (4) track, monitor, and report returned mail on an annual basis to help the Federal community avoid UAA mail.

    Dated: August 7, 2015. Christine Harada, Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy, General Services Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21187 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice—CECANF-2015-07; Docket No. 2015-0004; Sequence No. 8] Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Announcement of Meeting AGENCY:

    Commission to Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities, GSA.

    ACTION:

    Meeting Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission to Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities (CECANF), a Federal Advisory Committee established by the Protect Our Kids Act of 2012, will hold conference calls open to the public on the following dates: Wednesday, August 26, 2015; Thursday, September 24, 2015; Friday, October 30, 2015; Thursday, November 12, 2015; and December 3, 2015.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held on the noted dates from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

    ADDRESSES:

    CECANF will convene these meetings via conference call.

    Submit comments identified by “Notice—CECANF-2015-08,” by either of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for “Notice—CECANF-2015-08.” Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Notice—CECANF-2015-08.” Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, organization name (if any), and “Notice—CECANF-2015-08” on your attached document.

    Mail: U.S. General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7003D, Washington DC 20405, Attention: Tom Hodnett (CD) for CECANF.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite “Notice—CECANF-2015-08, Announcement of Meeting” in all correspondence related to this notice. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check http://www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Visit the CECANF Web site at https://eliminatechildabusefatalities.sites.usa.gov/or contact Patricia Brincefield, Communications Director, at 202-818-9596, General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7003D, Washington DC 20405, Attention: Tom Hodnett (CD) for CECANF.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: CECANF was established to develop a national strategy and recommendations for reducing fatalities resulting from child abuse and neglect.

    Agenda: Commission members will continue discussing the work plans of the Commission subcommittees, the information that they have obtained to date, and emerging recommendations.

    Attendance at the Meetings: Individuals interested in participating by teleconference should dial 1-800-870-9004 and then enter *3676137#. Detailed meeting minutes will be posted within 90 days of the meeting. Members of the public will not have the opportunity to ask questions or otherwise participate in the meeting.

    However, members of the public wishing to comment should follow the steps detailed under the heading Addresses in this publication or contact us via the CECANF Web site at https://eliminatechildabusefatalities.sites.usa.gov/contact-us/.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. Karen White, Executive Assistant.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21189 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Reporting of Pregnancy Success Rates From Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Programs AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces the requirements for reporting of pregnancy success rates from assisted reproductive technology (ART) programs as required by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA). This notice describes who shall report to HHS/CDC, the reporting system (National ART Surveillance System (NASS); the process for reporting by each ART program; the data to be reported; and the contents of the published reports. The proposed changes to reporting requirements were published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2014 (79 FR. 42328) and February 18, 2015 (80 FR. 8659) in accordance with requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act; public comments and recommendations were requested. This notice incorporates the comments received from those notices and supersedes the previous notice published in the Federal Register, September 1, 2000 (65 FR. 53310).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeani Chang, Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS-74, Atlanta, Georgia 30341. Phone: (770) 488-6370. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 2(a) of Public Law 102-493 (42 U.S.C.263a-1(a)), the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) requires that each ART program report annually to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1) pregnancy success rates achieved by such ART program and (2) the identity of each embryo laboratory used by such ART program and whether the laboratory is certified or has applied for such certification under the act.

    FCSRCA defines “assisted reproductive technology” (ART) as “all treatments or procedures which include the handling of human oocytes or embryos, including in vitro fertilization, gamete intrafallopian transfer, zygote intrafallopian transfer, and such other specific technologies as the Secretary may include in this definition, after making public any proposed definition in such manner as to facilitate comment from any person (including any federal or other public agency).”

    The Secretary is directed in FCSRCA to define pregnancy success rates and “make public any proposed definition in such a manner as to facilitate comment from any person during its development.”

    Section 2(c) (42 U.S.C. 263a-1(c)) states “the Secretary shall consult with appropriate consumer and professional organizations with expertise in using, providing, and evaluating professional services and embryo laboratories associated with assisted reproductive technologies.”

    Since 1995, HHS/CDC has reported pregnancy success rates of United States ART programs as required by FCSRCA. Changes in ART practice require periodic revision of the National ART Surveillance System in order to maintain accurate reporting of ART success rates. In updating the definitions of success rates, as well as various factors and characteristics required for calculating the success rates or that might influence the success rates, HHS/CDC consulted with representatives of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART, a national professional association of ART clinical programs), the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM, a national society dedicated to the advancement of the science and practice of reproductive medicine), RESOLVE (the National Infertility Association, a national, nonprofit consumer organization), Path2Parenthood (P2P, a national, nonprofit consumer organization), and the American Urological Association (AUA, a national professional association of urologic community) as well as a variety of individuals with expertise and interest in infertility and/or ART.

    Public Comment Summary and Responses

    Seven comments were received in response to the July 21, 2014 (79 FR. 42328) notice that outlined the reporting requirements, changes to NASS data elements, and the associated burden. Comments are summarized by the following topics: burden estimates, proposed NASS data elements, duplicative data collection, and request for additional data elements. Some commenters provide comments on multiple topics. Summaries of these comments, as well as HHS/CDC's responses, are provided below.

    1. Burden estimates: Four commenters expressed concern that implementation of the new NASS system was not included in the total burden estimates, thus the burden to clinics for data reporting was underestimated.

    Response: The estimated annual burden to clinics is calculated using the average time required to answer the number of questions and possible responses to each question when applicable. We acknowledge that there is an additional burden for the first year of this transition associated with making the appropriate software modifications that was not represented in the notice published on July 21, 2014. In order to minimize the impact of this burden on clinic operations, projected implementation of the new data collection system was changed from January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2016. We have also recalculated the burden for the first year to include the fixed burden associated with changes to the data collection systems in each clinic. The following changes were made to the burden estimate: a) increased the average burden to 43 minutes per response and b) added a one-time system implementation for each clinic (40 hours per each response) to update their data collection systems to reflect the new platform and interface of the NASS web-application over a 3-year clearance period.

    2. Proposed NASS data elements: There was concern from one commenter that the proposed data elements went beyond the mandate established by FCSRCA and its implementing regulations. Commenter cited the information related to the quality of any embryo considered for transfer and prior ART cycles that resulted in pregnancy as two examples that appear to go beyond the mandate.

    Response: HHS/CDC thanks the commenter for this comment, but notes that changes to the NASS data elements are essential to keep pace with changes in medical practice, ensure that reported success rates reflect standardized definitions, and provide additional insight into factors that may affect success rates. Regarding the addition of variables such as embryo quality and the number of prior ART cycles, the NASS system collects information on ART outcomes as well as other patient and procedure characteristics that may affect treatment outcomes. The reporting of success rates by patient and procedural factors allows consumers to see success rates for patients similar to themselves and undergoing procedures with similar characteristics. Presenting success rates without taking patient and procedural characteristics into account could produce inaccurate rates.

    3. Duplicative data collection: There was concern from one commenter that the collection of ART outcomes by HHS/CDC duplicates the work SART already does and the resulting cost of a duplicative data collection to the government and taxpayers is not warranted.

    Response: HHS/CDC notes the commenter's concern and reminds the commenter that this data collection is mandated by statute while data collection by a private entity is not required by law. FCSRCA requires that each assisted reproductive technology (ART) program annually report pregnancy success rates achieved by such ART program to the Secretary through HHS/CDC. Changes in ART practice require periodic revision of the National ART Surveillance System in order to maintain accurate reporting of ART success rates.

    4. Request for additional data elements: Three commenters suggested the addition of data elements.

    Commenter 1 suggested that it would be important for the NASS and Assisted Reproductive Technology Team to consider adding variables relating to infant outcomes (as listed below).

    (1) Use of traditional or gestational surrogate carriers: Surrogate age, number of prior pregnancies, number of previous live born infants, and number of prior surrogacy (either gestational carrier or traditional surrogate).

    (2) Maternal variables: occurrence of pregnancy induced hypertension, maternal diabetes and stage, hyperemesis gravidarium, fetal ultrasound results with special focus on fetal echocardiogram at 20-24 weeks.

    (3) Placental examination: placental abnormalities, evidence of single umbilical artery, histologic chorioamnionitis, in twins or multiple gestations presence of twin to twin transfusion syndrome associated with artery-venous shunting in the placenta, placentation (diamniontic-dichorionic, monochorionic-diamniontic, and placentation of greater than twin).

    (4) Neonatal Variables Suggested to be added:

    A. Infant Weight, Length, and Head Circumference

    B. Infant Gestational age as determined by Ballard Physical and Neurodevelopment examination

    C. Admission to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

    D. Specific Neonatal Variables:

    1. Apgar Scores as 1 and 5 minutes, requirement for resuscitation, 2. NICU admission, 3. Length of Hospital Stay, 4. Time (in days) to regain birth weight, 5. Specific Neonatal Morbidities: a. Occurrence of Respiratory Distress Syndrome, b. Presence of patent ductus arterioles, c. Hyperbilirubinemia requiring A) phototherapy and/or B)exchange transfusion and maximum total serum bilirubin, d. Occurrence of intraventricular hemorrhages by grade (Papille)i.e. Grade I to IV, e. Occurrence of periventricular leukomalacia, f. Occurrence of necrotizing enterocolitis using the Bell scoring system, g. Occurrence of electrographic seizures, h. Did the infant pass the newborn hearing screen, i. Abnormalities on the Newborn Metabolic Screen, j. Results of the screen for congenital heart disease (Upper and Lower Sp02 after 24 hours), k. Occurrence of minor and major phenotypic anomalies, occurrence of specific syndromes including imprinting disorders, l. Karyotype results (if performed), results of chromosomal arrays (if performed).

    Response: FCSRCA requires that each assisted reproductive technology (ART) program annually report pregnancy success rates achieved by such ART program to the Secretary through HHS/CDC. Many of the suggested data elements are only available through vital records (i.e. birth certificates, fetal death certificates) and NASS does not collect information from birth certificates. Collection of the additional variables suggested is not feasible as part of this effort. No changes to the data collection were made as a result of this comment.

    Commenter 2 requested clarification if the following male infertility data points are included in the new planned data collection:

    • Medical condition • Genetic or chromosomal abnormality, Specify______ • Abnormal sperm parameters (select all that apply) Azoospermia, obstructive Azoospermia, non-obstructive Oligospermia, severe (<5 million/mL) Oligospermia, moderate (5-15 million/mL) Low motility (<40%) Low morphology (4%) • Other male factor (not included above), Specify______

    Response: The suggested male infertility data points are already in the proposed NASS data elements; thus, no changes were made to the data collection as a result of this comment.

    Commenter 3 recommended adding the method of delivery (Vaginal or C-section): Indication for c-section (if c-section used) (Prior c-section, Overdue delivery, Medical complication, Non-medical indication/Patient preference). This will take less than two additional minutes per cycle with live birth (zero for cycles without birth), as this information is almost always in the documents we routinely obtain.

    Rationale for inclusion of this information includes: Some reports indicate c-section delivery is more common with frozen-thawed embryo transfer. It is also reported that frozen-thawed embryo transfer is associated with larger birthweights. These two variables might be causally related, or might be confounded in assessments of perinatal outcomes. Consider that large infants can motivate a c-section, FET cycles often follow a fresh delivery that might have used a c-section and thus create an indication for c-section, and c-sections abbreviate a pregnancy so that birth by c-section occurs some hours or days earlier than otherwise would have.

    Response: HHS/CDC appreciates the suggestion to add `Method of Delivery' to the data collection and agrees that this information could be reliably reported by the patient. `Method of Delivery (Vaginal or C-section)' was added as a proposed data element. However, `Indication for C-Section' is usually only available through either the birth certificate or from the obstetrical care providers. Collecting information directly from the obstetrician/gynecologists is not feasible as part of this effort.

    Appendix—Notice for the Reporting of Pregnancy Success Rates From Assisted Reproductive Technology Programs Introduction

    This notice includes four sections:

    I. Who Reports: describes who shall report to HHS/CDC. II. When and How to Report: describes the reporting system and process for reporting by each ART program. III. What to Report: describes the data items and definitions to be included in the reporting database. IV. Published Reports and Data Usage: outlines the topics that will be included in the annual published reports and describes how data are collected in the reporting database. I. Who Reports

    The Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) requires that each assisted reproductive technology (ART) program shall annually report pregnancy success rates to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services through HHS/CDC. HHS/CDC began collecting data from ART programs starting with ART cycles performed in 1995. Between 1997 and 2003, HHS/CDC contracted with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) to annually obtain a copy of their clinic-specific database. Since 2004, HHS/CDC has maintained the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based ART data reporting system.

    The following guidelines have been established to define an ART program and the reporting responsibilities of an ART program, including the responsibilities of each ART program's Medical Director.

    A. Criteria to be Considered an ART Program

    An ART program is defined as a practice, program, or clinic if it meets the following criteria:

    (1) It is a legal business entity that practices under State law;

    (2) It is recognizable to the consumer as a stand-alone ART program or clinic, separate and apart from another ART program or clinic with whom that program may share some or all resources or liability;

    (3) It provides ART services to patients who have experienced infertility or are undergoing ART for other reasons.

    B. Reporting Responsibilities of the Medical Director

    The current Medical Director of the ART program at the time of the reporting is responsible for verifying and reporting all ART cycle data for that reporting year. If the Medical Director is not available to verify and approve the reported cycle data due to unforeseen circumstances, the Laboratory Director may assume the reporting responsibilities for the Medical Director. If there is a change in personnel, including the Medical Director's position, between the time the ART cycles occurred and the time the reporting year data are due, the current Medical Director in position at the time of the final reporting deadline is responsible for reporting and verifying all ART cycles performed by that program in that reporting year.

    C. Reporting Responsibilities of ART Program

    There are a variety of ways in which ART programs might be structured. Reporting is based upon ART cycles performed within a program not by an individual physician. Therefore, one or more individual physicians within a single ART program may not report their data separately from the remainder of the physician group. Individual physicians who practice independently may not pool their data and report together as one program.

    The following sections provide guidance on the reporting responsibilities for programs:

    (1) One practice, one site—An ART program with one or more physicians who share resources and/or liability, but not necessarily patients, at one location. In a practice with several physicians, the Medical Director is required to report every ART cycle performed at the ART program under one NASS ID, even when other practitioners in the ART program may have performed most or all of the work for the cycle(s). An ART program cannot report cycles from another program for which one of their current or former practice physicians are responsible except in the case of reorganization. Reorganization of an ART program is defined as a change in ownership or affiliation, or when at least two of the three key staff positions (Practice Director, Medical Director, or Laboratory Director) change because the person(s) in those positions is/are no longer employed with the practice. In the case of reorganization, the clinic Medical Director in position at the time of the final reporting deadline is responsible for reporting and verifying all ART cycles performed by that program in that reporting year.

    (2) One practice, multiple sites—An ART program with one or more physicians who share resources and/or liability, but not necessarily patients, at multiple locations. If any site satisfies the definition of an individual ART program as described above (Section I, A), that site should report separately under a unique NASS ID. Contact the NASS Help Desk at 1-888-650-0822 to discuss other multiple site scenarios. A reporting determination will be made based on the definitions and guidance provided here.

    (3) Multiple ART programs involved in one cycle—Different ART programs responsible for ovarian stimulation, oocyte retrieval, and/or embryo transfer.

    The following guidelines should be used:

    a. The requirement to report cycles lies with the ART program that accepts responsibility for the embryo culture. The ART programs involved must have a method in place to ensure that these cycles can be prospectively reported by the ART program required to report them. In addition, all canceled cycles must be reported by the ART program accepting responsibility for the embryo culture.

    b. Cycles involving previously cryopreserved oocytes/embryos are to be reported by the ART program that accepts responsibility for thawing the oocytes/embryos.

    (4) Multiple ART programs sharing one ART laboratory—Independent ART programs that share an embryology laboratory or use another program's laboratory must report their cycles independently under their own unique NASS IDs.

    II. When and How To Report A. Reporting Activities

    The deadline for reporting ART cycle and pregnancy outcome data to HHS/CDC is December 15 of the year after which cycles were conducted. For example, the deadline to report data on cycles initiated between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013 was December 15, 2014. HHS/CDC will send a letter to all qualifying ART programs to announce each reporting year deadline 90 days before cycle data are due. An ART program is considered to be non-compliant with the federal reporting requirements of the FCSRCA if the program was in operation at any time during the reporting year and performed any ART cycles and (a) fails to submit ART cycle data to HHS/CDC by the reporting deadline, or (b) the program's Medical Director fails to verify the clinic success rates table by the reporting deadline. These programs will be identified as non-reporters in HHS/CDC's annual Assisted Reproductive Technology Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report. ART programs that were in operation at any time during the reporting year but did not perform any ART cycles will not be included in HHS/CDC's annual ART report (either as a reporting or as a non-reporting clinic).

    ART programs that are submitting data to HHS/CDC via the NASS or through an approved alternative (i.e., SART member clinics may report their data to NASS through SART) will be considered to be in compliance with federal reporting requirements of the FCSRCA. Regardless of the method chosen for submitting data to NASS, each clinic must complete the annual submission steps as detailed in the NASS Annual Submission Guide posted on the NASS Web site (www.artreporting.org). A NASS account can be set up by calling the NASS Help Desk at 1-888-650-0822 or by sending an email to [email protected] NASS accounts established previously can be used for data submission by the same clinic, although user passwords may need to be re-established if they have expired since last using NASS. ART programs should also notify the NASS Help Desk of any changes in clinic location, ownership, or key staff (i.e., Practice, Medical, or Laboratory Director) and provide NASS with a list of all practicing physicians in the program.

    All cycle data must be reported prospectively, i.e., reporting of initial cycle intent and select patient details is required within four days of cycle initiation. Each ART patient will be assigned a unique, system-generated patient ID when the program first enters the patient in NASS. The program is responsible for linking each patient's ID to the patient's medical records for reporting any future ART cycles. Each ART cycle for each patient is also assigned a unique cycle code. In NASS, the patient is identified by the NASS ID and the patient ID; the cycle code (cycle IDs) allows identification of all cycles performed on a single patient. Since the patient's name and social security number are not included in the reporting database, each program should maintain personal identifiers in the program's database on site in order to link every cycle reported to CDC to a specific patient.

    B. Updating of Reporting Requirements

    ART is a rapidly developing medical science. To keep current as practices evolve, ART reporting requirements, including data collection instruments, variables, and definitions, will be periodically reviewed and updated as new knowledge concerning ART methods and techniques becomes available. During such a review, professional and consumer groups and individuals will be consulted to confirm the validity of the new or revised reporting requirements and data elements. Clinics will be notified in writing at least 120 days in advance of January 1st of the reporting year of all changes to the reporting requirements.

    ART programs are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their data are mapped accurately into the required NASS format if using third-party electronic medical records or reporting systems to submit their ART data through NASS to HHS/CDC. ART programs must ensure their clinic data can be correctly transmitted to NASS for pre-import NASS quality control reviews and imported into NASS in time for the required NASS annual submission steps by the HHS/CDC deadline. HHS/CDC will continue to inform clinics of all necessary requirements for importing data from other electronic medical record systems into NASS and for checking imported data to ensure that it retains the accuracy and compatibility of the data entry system from which it was extracted.

    Each ART program should be aware that the Paperwork Reduction Act is applicable to this data collection. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a Federal agency shall not conduct or sponsor a collection of information from ten or more persons other than Federal employees, unless the agency has obtained approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the collection of information. A person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HHS/CDC has obtained OMB approval to collect this data under OMB control No. 0920-0556, expiration 07/31/2018.

    C. External Validation of Clinic Data

    As part of the annual routine activities of this surveillance program, all ART programs are subject to external validation of their reporting activities, which will include review by appropriate professionals from CDC staff and CDC contractors. This review may include but is not limited to examination of medical and laboratory records and comparison with data reported in NASS.

    Each year, HHS/CDC selects a random sample of 5-10% of all reporting ART programs, after taking into consideration some clinic characteristics, e.g., size of clinics, number of cancelled cycles, or number of multiple births for an on-site validation visit. The purpose of validation is to evaluate the overall accuracy of data reported in NASS. It also serves to identify any systematic problems that could cause data collection to be inconsistent or incomplete. During validation visits, data submitted to NASS are compared with data recorded in the patient medical records, which allows for the calculation of discrepancy rates. All potential data discrepancies identified during the on-site visit will be discussed with staff of the ART program. If major data discrepancies are identified during data validation (e.g., lack of supporting information for pregnancy outcomes, underreporting cycles, etc.), HHS/CDC may re-select these ART programs for data validation during the following reporting year(s) to assess corrections of identified data errors. Aggregate findings for validated data fields from all ART programs participating in validation will be reported in HHS/CDC's Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report. The HHS/CDC validation process is not an assessment of clinical practice or overall record keeping; however, the results of the validation may be helpful to ART programs.

    Each clinic is responsible for maintaining appropriate medical and laboratory records that contain information reported in NASS. This information must be able to link each patient, cycle, oocyte retrieved, transfer, and pregnancy outcome for the purpose of external validation.

    III. What To Report

    Cycle-specific data for the following patients must be reported: (1) All patients undergoing ART, (2) all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation or monitoring with the intent of undergoing ART but who did not proceed to oocyte retrieval or transfer of embryos for any reason, including patients whose cycles were canceled for any reason, (3) all patients providing donor oocytes, and (4) all patients undergoing monitoring and/or embryo (or oocyte) thawing with the intention of transferring cryopreserved embryos. Only cycles performed in the U.S. may be reported to CDC. ART programs must report the following data items:

    A. Patient Demographic Information Date of Cycle Reporting NASS ID Optional Identifier (as needed) Date of Birth Gender U.S. Residency City of Residence State of Residence Country of Residence (if not United States) B. Cycle Information 1. Intended Cycle Information Intended Type of Cycle (IVF, GIFT, ZIFT, Oocyte or embryo banking) Intended Embryo Source (Patient, Donor) Intended Embryo State (Fresh, Frozen) Intended Oocyte Source (Patient, Donor) Intended Oocyte State (Fresh, Frozen) Intended Sperm Source (Partner, Donor, Patient, Unknown) Pregnancy Carrier (Patient, gestational carrier, none-for oocyte/embryo banking only) 2. Cycle Information Type of Cycle (IVF, GIFT, ZIFT, Oocyte or embryo banking) Embryo Source (Patient, Donor) Embryo State (Fresh, Frozen) Oocyte Source (Patient, Donor) Oocyte State (Fresh, Frozen) 3. Patient Medical Evaluation Reason(s) for ART Male Infertility (Medical condition, Genetic or chromosomal abnormality, abnormal sperm parameters, Obstructive azoospermia, Non-obstructive azoospermia, Severe oligospermia, Moderate oligospermia, Low motility, Low morphology, other) History of Endometriosis Tubal Ligation for Contraception Current or Prior Hydrosalpinx Other Tubal Disease (Not Current or Historic Hydrosalpinx) Ovulatory Disorders (PCO, Other) Diminished Ovarian Reserve Uterine Factor Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis as Primary Reason for ART Oocyte or Embryo Banking As Reason for ART Indication for Use of Gestational Carrier (Absence of uterus, Significant uterine anomaly, Medical contraindication to pregnancy, Recurrent pregnancy loss, Unknown) Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Other Reasons Related to Infertility (Specify) Other Reasons Not Related to Infertility (Specify) Unexplained Infertility C. Patient History Height Weight History of Smoking History of Prior Pregnancy (Number of prior full term, preterm, stillbirth, spontaneous, ectopic pregnancies) Months attempting pregnancy History of Prior ART (Fresh & Frozen) Maximum FSH Level (mIU/mL) Recent AMH Level (ng/mL) Date of Most recent AMH Level D. Oocyte Source and Carrier Information Date of Birth Race (White, Black, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native) Ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic, Refused, Unknown) E. Sperm Source Information Date of Birth Race (White, Black, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native) Ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic, Refused, Unknown) F. Stimulation and Retrieval Stimulation Aromatase Inhibitor/Estrogen Receptor Medication (Clomiphene and Letrozole dosage) FSH Medication LH/HCG Medication GnRH (Gonadotropin-releasing hormone)(None, GnRH agonist suppression, GnRH agonist flare, GnRH Antagonist suppression) Canceled Cycle Date of Canceled Cycle Reason for Canceled Cycle (Low ovarian response, High ovarian response, Inadequate endometrial response, Concurrent illness, Withdrawal for personal reasons, Other) Date of Retrieval Number of Patient Oocytes Retrieved Number of Donor Oocytes Retrieved Use of Oocytes (For this cycle, Oocytes frozen for future use, Oocytes shared with other patients, Embryos frozen for future use) Complications of Stimulation and Retrieval (Infection, Hemorrhage, Ovarian Hyperstimulation requiring intervention or hospitalization, Medication Side Effect, Anesthetic Complication, Thrombosis, Death, Other) Sperm Status (Fresh, Thawed, Mix of fresh and thawed) Sperm Source Utilized (Ejaculated, Epididymal, Testis, Electroejaculation, Retrograde urine, Donor, Unknown) G. Laboratory Information ICSI (Intracytoplasmic sperm injection) (All oocytes, Some oocytes, No oocytes, Unknown) Indication for ICSI (Prior failed fertilization, Poor fertilization, PGD, Abnormal semen parameters, Low oocyte yield, Laboratory routine, Frozen cycle, Rescue ICSI, Other) IVM (In vitro maturation) PGD (Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) PGS (Pre-implantation genetic screening) Reasons for PGD/PGS Technique(s) Used for PGD/PGS Assisted Hatching 2 Pronuclei Research Cycle SART Approval Code for Research Cycle H. Transfer Information Attempted Transfer Reason for No Transfer (Low Ovarian Response, High Ovarian Response, Failure to Survive Thaw, Inadequate Endometrial Response, Concurrent Illness, Patient Withdrawal from Treatment, Unable to Obtain Sperm Specimen, Insufficient Embryos, Other) Date of Transfer Endometrial Thickness 1. Fresh Embryo Transfer Number of Fresh Embryos Available for Transfer Number of Fresh Embryos Transferred eSET Quality of Embryo (Good, Fair, Poor, Unknown) Number of Fresh Embryos Cryopreserved 2. Thawed Embryo Transfer Number of Thawed Embryos Available for Transfer Number of Thawed Embryos Transferred Quality of Embryo Date of Oocyte retrieved for the Thawed Embryos Number of Thawed Embryos Cryopreserved 3. GIFT/ZIFT/TET Transfer (for Non-IVF Cycle) Number of Oocytes/Embryos Transferred to Fallopian Tube I. Outcome Information Outcome of Treatment (Not Pregnant, Biochemical Pregnancy, Ectopic Pregnancy, Clinical Intrauterine Gestation, Heterotopic Pregnancy, Unknown) Maximum Number of Fetal Hearts Ultrasound Date If >2 Fetal Hearts, any Monochorionic Twins/Multiples Outcome of Pregnancy (Live Birth, Stillbirth, Spontaneous Abortion, Induced Abortion, Maternal Death Prior to Birth, Unknown) Date of Pregnancy Outcome Method of delivery (Vaginal, Cesarean section) Source for Outcome of Pregnancy (Verbal Confirmation Patient, Written Confirmation Patient, Verbal Confirmation Physician or Hospital, Written Confirmation Physician or Hospital) Method of Delivery (Vaginal, Cesarean section) Number of Infants Born Birth Status (Live Birth, Stillbirth, Unknown) Gender of Infant (Each Live-born and Stillborn Infant) Birth Weight (Each Live-born and Stillborn Infant) Birth Defect (Each Live-born and Stillborn Infant) (Genetic Defect/Chromosomal Abnormality, Cleft Lip or Palate, Neural Tube Defect, Cardiac Defect, Limb Defect, Other Defect) J. Definitions

    The following definitions provide clarification for the required data items:

    Assisted reproductive technology (ART)—All treatments or procedures that include the handling of human oocytes or embryos for the purpose of establishing a pregnancy. This includes, but is not limited to in vitro fertilization and transcervical embryo transfer, gamete intrafallopian transfer, zygote intrafallopian transfer, tubal embryo transfer, oocyte or embryo cryopreservation, oocyte or embryo donation, and gestational surrogacy. ART does not include assisted insemination using sperm from either a woman's partner or sperm donor.

    ART cycle—ART cycles can be stimulated (use of ovulation induction) or unstimulated (natural cycle). An ART cycle is considered any cycle in which (1) ART has been used, (2) the woman has undergone ovarian stimulation or monitoring (i.e., performance of sonogram, serum estradiol or LH measurements) with the intent of undergoing ART, (3) in the case of donor oocytes, a woman began medication for endometrial preparation with the intent of undergoing ART, or (4) in the case of cryopreserved embryos or oocytes, a woman began medication for endometrial preparation with the intent of undergoing ART and/or embryos were thawed with the intent of transfer.

    Anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) level—A measure of diminished ovarian reserve that predicts the ovaries' response to ovarian stimulation during ART.

    Assisted hatching—A micromanipulation technique that involves making a small opening in the zona wall of the embryo in an effort to enhance implantation.

    Azoospermia, obstructive—Complete absence of sperm from the ejaculate. Obstructive azoospermia may result from epididymal, vasal, or ejaculatory duct pathology.

    Azoospermia, non-obstructive—Complete absence of sperm in the ejaculate due to testicular failure, varicoceles, or chromosomal abnormalities such as Y-chromosome microdeletions or karyotypic abnormalities (e.g., Klinefelter syndrome).

    Birth defect—Anomaly diagnosed prior to or at birth that results in death or causes a serious disability requiring surgical and/or medical therapy. Specific anomalies to be identified include genetic defect/chromosomal abnormality, cleft lip or palate, neural tube defect, cardiac defect, limb defect, or other defect.

    Biochemical pregnancy—A positive serum pregnancy test (Beta-hCG) without ultrasound confirmation of a gestational sac within the uterus, and without diagnosis of an ectopic pregnancy.

    Blastocyst/trophectoderm biopsy—Procedure involving the removal of a small number of trophectoderm cells from a blastocyst stage embryo for genetic testing. A blastocyst is a day 5/6 embryo which contains two cell types—the inner cell mass, which eventually develops into fetal tissues, and the trophectoderm, which gives rise to the developing placenta and other tissues.

    Blastomere biopsy—Procedure involving the removal of one blastomere from a cleavage stage embryo for genetic testing. A cleavage stage embryo is a day 3 embryo when approximately 6-8 cells are present.

    Cancelled cycle—An ART cycle in which ovarian stimulation or monitoring or endometrial preparation has been carried out with the intent of undergoing ART but which did not proceed to oocyte retrieval or to the transfer of embryos. Reasons for cancellation include low ovarian response, high ovarian response, inadequate endometrial response, concurrent illness, patient withdrawal from treatment, failure of oocytes to survive thaw, an inability to obtain sperm specimen, or insufficient embryos.

    Clinical pregnancy/Clinical intrauterine gestation—An ultrasound-confirmed gestational sac within the uterus or the documented occurrence of a birth, spontaneous abortion, or induced abortion in cases of missing ultrasound data. Clinical pregnancies include all gestational sacs regardless of whether or not a heartbeat is observed or a fetal pole is established. This definition excludes ectopic pregnancy but includes pregnancies which end in live birth, stillbirth, spontaneous abortions, and induced abortions.

    Clomiphene citrate—An ovulation induction medication with trade names such as Clomid®, Serophene®, or Milophene®.

    Complication—A medical complication for the woman related to ART procedures. Specific complications to be identified include infection, hemorrhage requiring transfusion, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome requiring intervention or hospitalization, medication side effect, anesthetic complication, thrombosis, death of patient, or other specified complication.

    Cryopreservation—A technique used in ART to preserve sperm, oocytes, and embryos through freezing.

    Cycle start date (cycle initiation date)

    (1) For fresh embryo, (both donor and non-donor): The first day that medication to stimulate follicular development is given in a stimulated cycle or the first day of menses in an unstimulated cycle. For example:

    a. The first day of gonadotropins in a gonadotropin only cycle or in a long suppression GnRH agonist-gonadotropin cycle;

    b. The first day of GnRH agonist in a GnRH agonist flare-gonadotropin cycle;

    c. The first day of clomiphene or letrozole in a clomiphene/gonadotropin cycle or a clomiphene only cycle;

    d. The first day of natural menses or withdrawal bleeding in an unstimulated cycle.

    (2) For fresh embryo donor cycles:

    a. The first day exogenous sex steroids are given to patient to prepare the endometrium;

    b. The first day of natural menses or withdrawal bleeding in an unstimulated cycle.

    (3) For frozen embryo cycles (both donor and non-donor):

    a. The first day exogenous sex steroids are given to prepare the endometrium;

    b. The first day of natural menses or withdrawal bleeding in an unstimulated cycle.

    (4) For oocyte/embryo banking cycles:

    a. The first day of gonadotropins in a gonadotropin only cycle or in a long suppression GnRH agonist-gonadotropin cycle;

    b. The first day of GnRH agonist in a GnRH agonist flare-gonadotropin cycle;

    c. The first day of clomiphene or letrozole in a clomiphene/gonadotropin cycle or a clomiphene only cycle;

    d. The first day of natural menses or withdrawal bleeding in an unstimulated cycle.

    Diminished ovarian reserve—A condition of reduced fecundity related to diminished ovarian function based on clinical assessment; often indicated by FSH>10 mIU/mL or AMH<1.0 ng/mL.

    Donor embryo cycle—A cycle initiated with the intent to transfer donated embryos, that is, embryos derived from oocytes previously fertilized for another couple's ART therapy that were subsequently donated.

    Donor oocyte cycle—A cycle initiated with the intent to transfer oocytes, or embryos derived from oocytes that were retrieved from a woman serving as an oocyte donor (sperm source may be either the patient's partner or a sperm donor selected by the patient).

    Ectopic pregnancy—A pregnancy in which the fertilized egg implants outside the uterine cavity.

    Elective single embryo transfer—A procedure in which one embryo, selected from a larger number of available embryos, is placed in the uterus or fallopian tube. The embryo selected for eSET might be from a previous IVF cycle (i.e.; cryopreserved [frozen] embryos) or from a current fresh IVF cycle that yielded more than one embryo. The remaining embryos may be set aside for future use through cryopreservation.

    Embryo—The normally (2 pronuclei) fertilized egg that has undergone one or more divisions.

    Embryo banking cycle—A cycle initiated with the intent of cryopreserving all embryos for later use. (This does not apply to cycles initiated with the intent to transfer embryos but for which all embryos were subsequently cryopreserved regardless of the reason.) Embryo banking can be short term (<12 months) or long term (≥12 months).

    Embryo quality—Refers to the quality of the embryo as determined by its morphology. Embryo morphology assessment includes two parts: an overall grade and the stage. Overall grading is a subjective assessment of the overall quality of the embryo as good, fair or poor, and is based on assessment of certain characteristics of the embryo, such as fragmentation, symmetry, inner cell mass (ICM) quality or trophectoderm quality. Stage dependent grading involves determining the developmental stage of the embryo.

    —Good: Embryo free of imperfections or with only minor imperfections. —Fair: Embryo lacking exceptional quality but not excessively imperfect either. —Poor: Embryo with numerous imperfections.

    Embryo transfer—Attempt to introduce embryo(s) into a woman's uterus or attempt to introduce embryos or gametes (oocytes and sperm) into a woman's fallopian tubes; a transfer procedure is considered to have been carried out, if attempted, even if no embryos or gametes were successfully transferred.

    Endometriosis—The presence of tissue resembling endometrium in locations outside the uterus such as the ovaries, fallopian tubes, and abdominal cavity; a history of all stages of endometriosis (minimal to severe) whether treated or not may be a reason for ART.

    Endometrium—The lining of the uterus that is shed each month as the menstrual period. As the monthly cycle progresses, the endometrium thickens and thus provides a nourishing site for the implantation of a fertilized egg.

    Fertilization—The penetration of the egg by the sperm and fusion of genetic materials to result in the development of a fertilized egg (or zygote).

    Fetus—The developmental stage during pregnancy from the completion of embryonic development at eight weeks of gestation until delivery.

    Flare protocol—A stimulation protocol in which a GnRH agonist is started on day 2 of the same menstrual cycle during which the eggs will be retrieved.

    Follicle—A fluid-filled sac located just beneath the surface of the ovary that contains an oocyte and cells that produce hormones.

    Fresh embryo—An embryo created during the current cycle (either from the patient or donor), i.e., not a thawed embryo created during a previous cycle. Fresh embryos can be created from either fresh or frozen eggs or sperm.

    Fresh oocyte—An oocyte retrieved during the current cycle (either from the patient or donor), i.e., not a thawed oocyte retrieved during a previous cycle.

    Follicle stimulating hormone (FSH)—A gonadotropin hormone produced and released from the pituitary that stimulates the ovary to ripen a follicle for ovulation. FSH is available in several types of preparations including: Urofollitropin, Follitropin alfa and Follitropin beta, some of which also include luteinizing hormone (LH). Trade names include Gonal-f®, Metrodin®, FertinexTM, BravelleTM, Repronex®, Pergonal®, Humegon®, and FollistimTM.

    Full-term birth—A birth that reached 37 completed weeks of gestation. This includes both live births and stillbirths. For the purpose of reporting prior full-term births, births are counted as birth events (e.g., a triplet birth is counted as one).

    Gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT)—An ART procedure that involves removing oocytes from a woman's ovary, combining them with sperm, and immediately transferring (via a catheter) the eggs and sperm into the fallopian tube. Fertilization takes place inside the fallopian tube.

    Gestational carrier (sometimes referred to as a gestational surrogate)—A woman who gestates an embryo that did not develop from her oocyte, with the expectation of returning the infant to its intended parent(s). NOTE: For female same sex couples, the woman who will carry the pregnancy should be identified as the patient and a separate cycle should be reported if donor oocytes are used, even if the patient's partner is the source of the oocytes. If a gestational carrier is used, one cycle is reported for fresh embryo cycle; two cycles should be reported for frozen embryo cycle (one for the oocyte retrieval and one for the embryo transfer).

    Gonadotropin—Hormones having a stimulating effect on the gonads (ovaries and testes). Two such hormones are secreted by the anterior pituitary: follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH). Gonadotropins (FSH, either alone or with LH) are also included in drug preparations used to stimulate follicular development during an ART cycle.

    Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)—A hormone secreted by the hypothalamus which induces the pituitary gland to release follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) into the bloodstream.

    —GnRH agonists—synthetic hormones that stimulate and then suppress the secretion of FSH and LH —GnRH antagonists—synthetic hormones that suppress the secretion of FSH and LH Gravidity—Total number of prior pregnancies a patient has had. This includes ectopic pregnancies, biochemical pregnancies, and pregnancies that ended in therapeutic abortion, spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, or live birth.

    Heterotopic pregnancy—A clinical intrauterine gestation in combination with an ectopic pregnancy.

    Human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG)—A hormone produced by the placenta after implantation. It is used during ART to cause ovulation.

    Hydrosalpinx (current and prior)—Accumulation of watery fluid in a fallopian tube that usually results from damage to the tube.

    —Communicating: Patent fallopian tube. Non-occluded. —Occluded: Non-communicating fallopian tube. Occlusion may be by means of salpingectomy, tubal ligation, or hysteroscopic occlusion.

    Induced abortion—Operative or medical intervention to electively terminate the entire pregnancy (no gestational age limit).

    Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)—The placement of a single sperm into the ooplasm of an oocyte by micro-operative techniques.

    In vitro fertilization (IVF)—A method of assisted reproduction that involves removing oocytes from a woman's ovaries, combining them with sperm in the laboratory, and after fertilization is confirmed, replacing the resulting embryo into the woman's uterus.

    In vitro maturation (IVM)—Procedure in which eggs are removed from the ovaries and are collected when they are still immature. They are then matured in the laboratory before being fertilized.

    Letrozole— An ovulation induction medication, such as the medication with the trade name Femara ®.

    Live birth—A birth (delivery) in which at least one fetus was live born, i.e., showed signs of life after the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother or gestational carrier. Signs of life include breathing, beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of the voluntary muscles. Any birth event in which an infant shows signs of life should be counted as a live birth, regardless of gestational age at birth. Live births are counted as birth events (e.g., a triplet live birth is counted as one).

    Low sperm motility—Sperm motility less than laboratory norm (varies by method used).

    Low sperm morphology—Sperm morphology less than laboratory norm (varies by method used).

    Luteinizing hormone (LH)—A gonadotropin hormone produced and released from the pituitary that stimulates the ovary to ripen a follicle for ovulation.

    Male infertility—Infertility due to abnormal semen parameters or abnormal sperm function.

    Method of delivery—Method used to deliver infant(s), vaginal or Cesarean section.

    Monochorionic—When two or more embryos or fetuses share the same chorion and the same placenta.

    NASS ID—An identification number assigned to each ART clinical program by the reporting database operator.

    Oligospermia—Semen with a low concentration of sperm. Severe oligospermia is defined by <5 million spermatozoa per mL; moderate is defined by 5-15 million spermatozoa per ml.

    Oocyte—The female reproductive cell, also called an egg.

    Oocyte banking—A cycle initiated with the intent of cryopreserving all un-fertilized oocytes for later use. This does not apply to cycles initiated with the intent to transfer embryos. Oocyte banking can be short term (<12 months) or long term (≥12 months).

    —Autologous oocyte banking—refers to cycles where the patient is banking her own oocytes for later use. —Donor oocyte banking—refers to cycles where a donor is banking oocytes for use by someone else at a later date.

    Oocyte donor—A woman who undergoes an oocyte retrieval procedure with the intent of donating the oocytes retrieved to a couple(s) undergoing an ART donor oocyte cycle (see donor oocyte cycle).

    Oocyte retrieval—A procedure to collect the eggs contained within the ovarian follicles. This definition includes procedures in which oocyte recovery was attempted but not successful.

    Oocyte transfer—In GIFT (see definition), transfer of retrieved eggs into a woman's fallopian tubes. Includes attempted transfers, whether or not the transfer was successful.

    Ovarian monitoring—Monitoring the development of ovarian follicles by ultrasound and/or blood or urine tests.

    Ovarian stimulation—Use of one or more follicle stimulation medications to stimulate the ovary to develop follicles and oocytes.

    Ovarian hyperstimulation requiring intervention or hospitalization— Hyperstimulation may be evidenced by abdominal distension and discomfort; nausea, vomiting, and/or diarrhea; ovaries enlarged 5-12 cm; ultrasonic evidence of ascites; clinical evidence of ascites and/or hydrothorax or breathing difficulties; change in blood volume; increased blood viscosity due to hemoconcentration; coagulation abnormalities; diminished renal perfusion and function, -hematocrit >50%; and requiring intervention such as paracentesis or hospitalization.

    Ovulatory disorder—One or more disorders causing reduced fecundity that is associated with structural, anatomic, or functional impairment of one or both ovaries; includes polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), oligo-ovulation (≤6 cycles per year), and anovulation (of hypothalamic or non-hypothalamic causes) such as functional hypothalamic amenorrhea (FHA).

    Ovulation induction—See stimulated cycle.

    Patient—Generally defined as the female undergoing treatment. More specifically:

    —For heterosexual couples, the patient is always the female partner. —For male same-sex couples, the male providing sperm is the patient. If both male partners or neither male partner is providing sperm, select one male to identify as the patient. —For female same-sex couples, the patient is the female intending to carry the pregnancy. If neither female intends to carry the pregnancy (i.e. a gestational carrier will be used) the patient is the female providing the oocyte. If both females are providing oocytes, the patient is the youngest female providing oocytes. If neither female intends to carry the pregnancy or provide oocytes (i.e. donor oocytes are used with a gestational carrier), select one female to identify as the patient.

    Pituitary—A small gland just beneath the hypothalamus in the brain which controls other hormone producing glands such as the ovaries, thyroid, and adrenal glands. Ovarian function is controlled through the secretion of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) from the pituitary.

    Polar body biopsy—Polar bodies are the by-products of egg division. These cells do not serve any role for the egg or embryo and will naturally degrade; however, they can be removed and tested to determine the genetic status of the egg. Polar body testing only tests for the maternal genetic contribution to the embryo. Polar body biopsy occurs at the day 0 and/or day 1 stage. Both polar bodies must be removed and tested in order to make an accurate diagnosis.

    Pregnancy test—A blood test that determines the level of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), a hormone produced by the placenta; if it is elevated, this confirms a pregnancy, which may be biochemical only, ectopic, or clinical intrauterine gestation (normally developing pregnancy).

    Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)—Characterization of a cell or cells from pre-implanted embryos from IVF cycles to determine the presence or absence of a specific genetic defect.

    Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)—Characterization of a cell or cells from pre-implanted embryos from IVF cycles to identify genetic abnormalities.

    Preterm birth—Birth at least 20 but less than 37 completed weeks of gestation. This includes both live births and stillbirths. For the purposes of reporting prior preterm births, births are counted as birth events (e.g. a triplet birth is counted as one).

    Recipient—In an ART cycle, the woman in whom embryos or oocytes are transferred; includes the female patient or a gestational carrier for the patient.

    Recurrent pregnancy loss—A disease distinct from infertility, defined by two or more failed pregnancies.

    Semen—Fluid discharged at ejaculation in male.

    Sperm—The male reproductive cell that has completed the process of meiosis and morphological differentiation. Sperm used for ART can be obtained using different methods:

    —Ejaculation—Sperm is collected from a semen sample obtained by ejaculation, the release of semen from the penis during orgasm. —Electroejaculation—This procedure is used in men who have a neurologic ejaculatory disorder, such as spinal cord injury or psychogenic anejaculation, without mechanical obstruction of the excurrent ductal system. This procedure involves the use of electricity to directly stimulate the ejaculatory organs. —Epididymal aspiration—A technique in which sperm is aspirated and sampled percutaneously from the epididymis. —Retrograde ejaculation—Ejaculation in which semen travels up the urethra towards the bladder instead of to the outside of the body. Sperm can be collected directly from the bladder or from voided urine. —Testicular biopsy—Sperm are obtained from a biopsy of seminiferous tubules.

    Sperm donor—A man providing sperm for the fertilization of oocytes of a woman other than his sexual partner.

    Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage)—A clinical pregnancy ending in spontaneous loss of the entire pregnancy prior to completion of 20 weeks of gestation (or 18 weeks from the date of transfer if the pregnancy was achieved using ART).

    Stillbirth—Birth (delivery) at 20 weeks of gestation or later (or 18 weeks or later from the date of transfer if the pregnancy was achieved using ART) in which no fetus showed signs of life after the complete expulsion or extraction from the mother. Stillbirths are counted as birth events (e.g. a triplet stillbirth is counted as one).

    Stimulated cycle—An ART cycle in which a woman receives medication to stimulate follicular development including the use of clomiphene citrate, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), or follicle stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone (FSH and LH).

    Surgical sterilization—An operative procedure for the purpose of termination of fertility. Surgical sterilization includes tubal ligation, salpingectomy,vasectomy and hysterectomy.

    Thawed oocyte—Oocyte retrieved during a previous cycle, cryopreserved, and then thawed for use during the current cycle (either from the patient or donor), i.e., not a fresh oocyte retrieved during the current cycle.

    Thawed embryo—Embryo created during a previous cycle, cryopreserved, and then thawed for use during the current cycle (either from the patient or donor), i.e., not a fresh embryo created during the current cycle. Frozen embryos can be created from either fresh or frozen eggs and sperm.

    Thrombosis—Formation of a blood clot in a vessel obstructing the flow of blood through the circulatory system.

    Tubal embryo transfer (TET)—Transfer of an early stage embryo to the fallopian tube.

    Tubal factor—A factor causing reduced fecundity that is associated with structural, anatomic, or functional injury of one or both fallopian tubes; the following are included: (1) Tubal ligation, not reversed, (2) hydrosalpinx (in place), 3 History of hydrosalpinx (treated—by either surgical removal or hysteroscopic occlusion) and (4) any other tubal disease including but not limited to pelvic or peritubal adhesive disease, prior tubal surgery, prior ectopic pregnancy, or tubal occlusion (partial or complete without hydrosalpinx).

    Tubal ligation for contraception—Sterilization of the female by constricting, severing, or crushing the fallopian tubes; constriction may be with an encircling plastic ring or other ligature.

    Ultrasound—A technique for visualizing the follicles in the ovaries and the gestational sac or fetus in the uterus, allowing the estimation of size.

    Unexplained infertility—Infertility in which no etiology (male infertility, endometriosis, tubal factor, ovulatory disorders/PCO, diminished ovarian reserve, uterine factor, or other factors (such as immunologic, chromosomal, cancer chemotherapy or other systemic disease) has been identified.

    Unstimulated cycle—An ART cycle in which the woman does not receive medication to stimulate follicular development such as clomiphene or follicle stimulating hormone. Instead, natural follicular development occurs.

    Uterine factor—A factor causing reduced fecundity that is associated with structural, anatomic, or functional injury to the uterus whether repaired or not; includes septum, myoma, Diethylstilbestrol (DES) exposure, intrauterine adhesions, congenital anomalies.

    Zygote—A normal (2 pronuclei) fertilized egg before cell division begins.

    Zygote intra fallopian transfer (ZIFT)—Eggs are collected and fertilized, and the resulting zygote is then transferred to the fallopian tube.

    2 Pronuclei (2PN)—The earliest stage of embryonic development that occurs just after fertilization but before the nucleus from the sperm and the egg have fused (thus, 2 pronuclei are present). The appearance of two pronuclei indicates normal fertilization and is usually detected 16-20 hours after fertilization or insemination.

    IV. Published Reports and Data Usage A. Annual ART Reports

    ART data are used to produce the annual Assisted Reproductive Technology Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report, a key publication available to Congress, individual clinics, consumers, the states, and the general public. This report has 3 major sections:

    (a) Commonly asked questions—provides background information and an explanation of the data reporting process.

    (b) Fertility clinic table—displays tabulated results of success rates for all reported ART procedures at individual U.S. fertility clinics.

    (c) Appendices—contains summary of data validation; a glossary of technical and medical terms used in the report; the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all reporting and non-reporting clinics; and a list of national consumer organizations offering support to people experiencing infertility.

    In addition, HHS/CDC publishes an annual Assisted Reproductive Technology National Summary Report using pooled data presented as graphs and charts to provide an in-depth picture of the type, number, and outcomes of ART cycles performed in the United States. HHS/CDC also uses the pooled data to publish an annual ART Surveillance Summary in HHS/CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) with state-specific information on ART procedures and their outcomes. These reports are primarily used by states for state-based surveillance and to inform maternal and child health programs.

    B. Data Usage and Data Access

    HHS/CDC retains a copy of each reporting ART program's annual data files. In addition to the annual ART reports, the NASS database is used to evaluate emerging ART research questions and to monitor safety and efficacy issues related to ART treatment for improving maternal and child health outcomes. ART data files are protected under an Assurance of Confidentiality pursuant to Section 308(d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 242[m]). This assurance allows HHS/CDC programs to assure that certain identifiable data collected on individuals and institutions involved in research or non-research projects remain confidential. Starting in 2013, researchers may analyze ART surveillance data using the National Center for Health Statistics' (NCHS) Research Data Center (RDC) under authorization of Sections 304 and 306 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C.242(k) (See http://www.cdc.gov/art/AccessData.html). Researchers requesting access to the NASS data files are subject to all RDC procedures and protocols.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Pamela J. Cox, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat, Office of the Chief of Staff, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21108 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Fees for Sanitation Inspections of Cruise Ships AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    General Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), located within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces fees for vessel sanitation inspections for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016. These inspections are conducted by HHS/CDC's Vessel Sanitation Program (VSP). VSP helps the cruise line industry fulfill its responsibility for developing and implementing comprehensive sanitation programs to minimize the risk for acute gastroenteritis. Every vessel that has a foreign itinerary and carries 13 or more passengers is subject to twice-yearly unannounced inspections and, when necessary, reinspection.

    DATES:

    These fees are effective October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    CAPT Jaret T. Ames, Chief, Vessel Sanitation Program, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway NE., MS F-59, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717; phone: 800-323-2132, 770-488-3141, or 954-356-6650; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose and Background

    HHS/CDC established the Vessel Sanitation Program (VSP) in the 1970s as a cooperative activity with the cruise ship industry. VSP helps the cruise ship industry prevent and control the introduction, transmission, and spread of gastrointestinal illnesses on cruise ships. VSP operates under the authority of the Public Health Service Act (Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act; 42 U.S.C. 264, “Control of Communicable Diseases”). Regulations found at 42 CFR 71.41 (Foreign Quarantine—Requirements Upon Arrival at U.S. Ports: Sanitary Inspection; General Provisions) state that carriers arriving at U.S. ports from foreign areas are subject to sanitary inspections to determine whether rodent, insect, or other vermin infestations exist, contaminated food or water, or other sanitary conditions requiring measures for the prevention of the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases are present.

    The fee schedule for sanitation inspections of passenger cruise ships by VSP was first published in the Federal Register on November 24, 1987 (52 FR 45019). HHS/CDC began collecting fees on March 1, 1988. This notice announces fees that are effective for FY 2016, beginning on October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.

    The following formula will be used to determine the fees:

    EN26AU15.000

    The average cost per inspection is multiplied by size and cost factors to determine the fee for vessels in each size category. The size and cost factors were established in the fee schedule published in the Federal Register on July 17, 1987 (52 FR 27060). The fee schedule was most recently published in the Federal Register on July 31, 2014 (79 FR 44454). The size and cost factors for FY 2016 are presented inAppendix A.

    Fee

    The fee schedule (Appendix A) will be effective October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.

    Applicability

    The fees will apply to all passenger cruise vessels for which inspections are conducted as part of HHS/CDC's VSP. Inspections and reinspections involve the same procedures, require the same amount of time, and are therefore charged at the same rates.

    Appendix A Size/Cost Factors Used To Determine Inspection Fees Vessel size (GRT 1) Approximate
  • cost per
  • GRT 1
  • Extra Small (<3,001 GRT) US$0.25 Small (3,001-15,000 GRT) 0.50 Medium (15,001-30,000 GRT) 1.00 Large (30,001-60,000 GRT) 1.50 Extra Large (60,001-120,000 GRT) 2.00 Mega (>120,001 GRT) 3.00
    Fee Schedule for Each Vessel Size Vessel size (GRT 1) Inspection
  • fee
  • Extra Small (<3,000 GRT) US$1,495 Small (3,001-15,000 GRT) 2,990 Medium (15,001-30,000 GRT) 5,980 Large (30,001-60,000 GRT) 8,970 Extra Large (60,001-120,000 GRT) 11,960 Mega (>120,001 GRT) 17,940 1 Gross register tonnage in cubic feet, as shown in Lloyd's Register of Shipping.
    Dated: August 19, 2015. Pamela J. Cox, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat, Office of the Chief of Staff, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21107 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

    Proposed Projects:

    Title: State Self-Assessment Review and Report.

    OMB No.: 0970-0223.

    Description: Section 454(15)(A) of the Social Security Act, as amended by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, requires each State to annually assess the performance of its child support enforcement program in accordance with standards specified by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and to provide a report of the findings to the Secretary. This information is required to determine if States are complying with Federal child support mandates and providing the best services possible. The report is also intended to be used as a management tool to help States evaluate their programs and assess performance.

    Respondents: State Child Support Enforcement Agencies or the Department/Agency/Bureau responsible for Child Support Enforcement in each State.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average burden hours per
  • response
  • Total burden hours
    Self-assessment report 54 1 4 216

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 216.

    In compliance with the requirements of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded 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. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments 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) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21053 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0110] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Medical Device Reporting: Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and Distributor Reporting 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 September 25, 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 0910-0437. 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.

    Medical Device Reporting: Manufacturer, Importer, User Facility, and Distributor Reporting (21 CFR Part 803)—(OMB Control Number 0910-0437)—Revision

    Section 519(a)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360i(a)(1)) requires every manufacturer or importer to report whenever the manufacturer or importer receives or otherwise becomes aware of information that reasonably suggests that one of its marketed devices may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or has malfunctioned and that such device or a similar device marketed by the manufacturer or importer would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur.

    Section 519(b)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act requires whenever a device user facility receives or otherwise becomes aware of information that reasonably suggests that a device has or may have caused or contributed to the death or serious illness, of a patient of the facility, the facility shall, as soon as practicable but not later than 10 working days after becoming aware of the information, report the information to the Secretary of HHS and, if the identity of the manufacturer is known, to the manufacturer of the device.

    Section 519(b)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act requires whenever a device user facility receives or otherwise becomes aware of information that reasonably suggests that a device has or may have caused or contributed to the serious illness of, or serious injury to, a patient of the facility, shall, as soon as practicable but not later than 10 working days after becoming aware of the information, report the information to the manufacturer of the device or to the Secretary of HHS if the identity of the manufacturer is not known.

    Complete, accurate, and timely adverse event information is necessary for the identification of emerging device problems. Information from these reports will be used to evaluate risks associated with medical devices which will enable FDA to take appropriate regulatory measures in protection of the public health under section 519 of the FD&C Act. Thus FDA is requesting approval for these information collection requirements which are being implemented under part 803 (21 CFR part 803).

    Respondents to this collection of information are businesses or other for-profit and nonprofit organizations including user facilities, manufacturers, and importers of medical devices.

    Part 803 requires user facilities to report to the device manufacturer and to FDA in case of a death, incidents where a medical device caused or contributed to a death or serious injury. Additionally, user facilities are required to annually submit the number and summary of adverse events reported during the calendar year using Form FDA 3419. Manufacturers of medical devices are required to report to FDA when they become aware of information indicating that one of their devices may have caused or contributed to death or serious injury or has malfunctioned in such a way, that should the malfunction recur, it would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. Device importers report deaths and serious injuries to the manufacturers and FDA. Importers report malfunctions only to the manufacturers, unless they are unknown, then the reports are sent to FDA.

    The number of respondents for each Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section in table 1 is based upon the number of respondents entered into FDA's internal databases. FDA estimates, based on its experience and interaction with the medical device community, that all reporting CFR sections are expected to take 1 hour to complete, with the exception of § 803.19. Section 803.19 is expected to take approximately 3 hours to complete, but is only required for reporting the summarized data quarterly to FDA. By summarizing events, the total time used to report for this section is reduced because the respondents do not submit a full report for each event they report in a quarterly summary report.

    The Agency believes that the majority of manufacturers, user facilities, and importers have already established written procedures to document complaints and information to meet the medical device reporting (MDR) requirements as part of their internal quality control system. There are an estimated 30,000 medical device distributors. Although they do not submit MDR reports, they must maintain records of complaints under § 803.18(d).

    The Agency has estimated that on average 220 user facilities, importers, and manufacturers would annually be required to establish new procedures, or revise existing procedures, in order to comply with this provision.

    Therefore, FDA estimates the one-time burden to respondents for establishing or revising procedures under § 803.17 to be 6,006 hours (1,820 respondents × 3.3 hours). For those entities, a one-time burden of 3.3 hours is estimated for establishing written MDR procedures. The remaining manufacturers, user facilities, and importers, not required to revise their written procedures to comply with this provision, are excluded from the burden because the recordkeeping activities needed to comply with this provision are considered “usual and customary” under 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2).

    Under § 803.18, 1,820 respondents represent distributors, importers, and other respondents to this information collection. FDA estimates that it should take them approximately 1.5 hours to complete the recordkeeping requirement for this section. Total hours for this section equal 2,730 hours.

    Reporting Requirements

    Part 803 requires user facilities to report incidents where a medical device caused or contributed a death or serious injury to the device manufacturer and to FDA in the case of a death. Manufacturers of medical devices are required to report to FDA when they become aware of information indicating that one of their devices may have caused or contributed to death or serious injury or has malfunctioned in such a way that, should the malfunction recur, it would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. Device importers report deaths and serious injuries to the manufacturers and FDA. Importers report malfunctions only to the manufacturers (see third-party disclosure burden table), unless the manufacturers are unknown, then the reports are sent to FDA.

    FDA estimates are based on our experience and interaction with the medical device community and burden analysis from the rulemaking. Section 803.19 is expected to take approximately 1 hour to complete, but is only required to report the summarized data quarterly to FDA. By summarizing events, the total time used to report for this section is reduced because the respondents do not submit a full report for each event they report in a quarterly summary report.

    Recordkeeping Requirements

    The Agency believes that the majority of manufacturers, user facilities, and importers have already established written procedures to document complaints and information to meet the MDR requirements as part of their internal quality control system. The Agency has estimated that on average, 1,820 user facilities, importers, and manufacturers would annually be required, under § 803.17, to establish new procedures, or revise existing procedures, in order to comply with this provision. We estimate that it will take each respondent 3.3 hours annually to establish new procedures, or revise existing procedures. We estimate that it will take each respondent 1.5 hours annually to maintain the records.

    Third-Party Disclosure Burden

    Under §§ 803.40 and 803.42, device importers report deaths and serious injuries to the manufacturers and FDA. Importers report malfunctions only to the manufacturers, unless they are unknown, then the reports are sent to FDA. We estimate that it will take respondents 0.35 hours annually to report the information.

    In the Federal Register of May 07, 2015 (80 FR 26278), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received. However, since the 60-day notice, we have updated the burden estimates to reflect revisions made by the final rule, “Medical Device Reporting: Electronic Submission Requirements,” which became effective August 14, 2015.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 21 CFR Section FDA Form No. Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    Exemptions—803.19 56 4 224 1 224 User Facility Reporting—803.30 and 803.32 520 7 3,640 0.35 1,274 User Facility Annual Reporting—803.33 3419 520 1 520 1 520 Importer Reporting, Death and Serious Injury—803.40 and 803.42 1 1 1 1 1 Manufacturer Reporting—803.50, through 803.53 1,240 204 252,960 0.10 25,296 Supplemental Reports—803.56 1,050 94 98,700 0.10 9,870 Total 37,185 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 2—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 21 CFR Section Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total annual records Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeping
  • Total hours
    MDR Procedures—803.17 1,820 1 1,820 3.3 6,006 MDR Files—803.18 1,820 1 1,820 1.5 2,730 Total 47,200 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 3—Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1 21 CFR Section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • disclosures per
  • respondent
  • Total annual
  • disclosures
  • Average
  • burden per
  • disclosure
  • Total hours
    Importer Reporting, Malfunctions—803.40 and 803.42 60 25 1,500 0.35 525 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Dated: August 20, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21036 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-D-2537] Request for Quality Metrics; Notice of Draft Guidance Availability and Public Meeting; Request for Comments; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting; request for comments; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending the comment period for the notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting that appeared in the Federal Register of July 28, 2015, and August 7, 2015. In the notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting, FDA requested comments on a number of specific questions identified in the document. The Agency is taking this action in response to requests for an extension to allow interested persons additional time to submit comments.

    DATES:

    FDA is extending the comment period on the notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting published July 28, 2015 (80 FR 44973) and August 7, 2015 (80 FR 47493). Submit either electronic or written comments by November 27, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. (FDA-2015-D-2537) for this notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting. All comments received may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the “Request for Comments” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lesley DeRenzo, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 5161, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4612.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In the Federal Register of July 28, 2015, and August 7, 2015, FDA published a notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting with a 60-day comment period and requested comments on a number of specific questions identified throughout the document. Comments on the notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting will inform FDA's development and planned implementation of a quality metrics program launched under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

    FDA is extending the comment period for an additional 60 days, until November 27, 2015. The Agency believes that an additional 60-day extension of the comment period for the notice of draft guidance availability and public meeting will allow adequate time for interested persons to submit comments without significantly delaying Agency decisionmaking on these important issues.

    II. Request for Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). You should annotate and organize your comments to identify the specific questions or topic to which they refer. 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. 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.

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21149 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-N-2919] In Vitro Diagnostic Testing for Direct Oral Anticoagulants; Public Workshop; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public workshop; request for comments.

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public workshop entitled “In Vitro Diagnostic Testing for Direct Oral Anticoagulants”. The objective of the workshop is to gain public input and to discuss analytical performance requirements for the diagnostic assessment of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and the clinical circumstances under which patients receiving these agents would require testing. Specifically, this workshop aims to do the following: (1) Evaluate the impact of DOACs on traditional coagulation testing results; (2) identify clinical circumstances where testing of DOACs anticoagulant activity or concentration would be relevant; (3) discuss clinically meaningful interpretation of coagulation testing results for patients on DOACs; and (4) review the regulatory requirements for granting clearance for in vitro diagnostic devices intended for coagulation testing in patients treated with DOACs.

    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on October 26, 2015, from 9 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. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    Contact Person: Claudia Dollins, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66 Rm. 5262, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-4807, [email protected]

    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in attending this public workshop must register online by 4 p.m., October 16, 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 permits, onsite registration on the day of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 8 a.m.

    Contact for Special Accommodations: If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Susan Monahan, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Communication and Education, 301-796-5661, [email protected] no later than October 9, 2015.

    To register for the public workshop, please visit FDA's Medical Devices News & Events—Workshops & 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 for Special Accommodations). 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 October 16, 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 October 20, 2015. If you have never attended a Connect Pro event before, test your connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get a quick overview of the Connect Pro program, visit http://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. (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 information on in vitro diagnostic testing for direct oral anticoagulants. 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 topics. The deadline for submitting comments related to the public workshop is November 25, 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 questions as outlined in section II of this document, please identify the question 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. It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (see Comments). A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. The Freedom of Information office address is available on the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov. 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. (Select this public workshop from the posted events list).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Coagulation is the process of forming a clot to stop bleeding. Blood clotting is initiated by injury to a blood vessel resulting in the exposure of various proteins on the inner surface of the vessels. These proteins trigger the serial activation of coagulation factors that make up the coagulation cascade that culminates in the formation of the insoluble clot.

    Although immediate clot formation is critical to prevent severe blood loss, excessive clot formation outside of wound healing obstructs blood flow and poses serious medical consequences. To prevent unwanted coagulation, a number of anticoagulant drugs have been developed. Historically, anticoagulation drug therapy was limited to the administration of non-specific anticoagulants, such as heparin or vitamin K antagonists, that act by inhibiting the coagulation cascade at several points. Although effective, these anticoagulants have numerous drawbacks, such as delayed onset and offset of action, a narrow therapeutic window, and interactions with food and drugs that necessitate frequent monitoring and dose adjustments. Several tests have been cleared for monitoring of patients undergoing vitamin K antagonist therapy.

    A new class of DOACs has been developed in the last decade to overcome limitations of traditional anticoagulants. Thus far, FDA has approved four DOACs: PRAXADA (dabigatran), XARELTO (rivaroxiban), ELIQUIS (apixaban), and SAVAYSA (edoxaban). DOAC therapy creates a need for coagulation testing, which in turn poses new challenges.

    Currently there are no FDA cleared devices for the characterization of DOAC effects on coagulation. Differences in individual responses to the drugs require laboratories to develop unique testing schemes to assess a patient's coagulation status while on DOAC regimens. Thus, the first aim of this workshop is to discuss the effect of DOACs on traditional coagulation test methods currently on the market and the impact these effects may have on patient management.

    We will also examine clinical scenarios that would warrant DOAC testing. Instructions for coagulation monitoring as required for vitamin K antagonists are not specified in DOAC's instructions for use. However, in certain clinical settings assessment of DOAC-induced anticoagulation may be advantageous. The second aim of the workshop will focus on medical conditions that require coagulation testing of patients taking DOACs.

    There are a limited number of strategies to assess coagulation in patients taking DOACs. We will review options for quantitative and qualitative determination of the drug effects and discuss problems related to interpretation of results. Also, we will consider the corresponding analytical performance criteria of DOAC testing required to provide reliable and informative test results.

    Thus, the Center for Devices and Radiological Health plans to provide an overview of the scientific, clinical, and regulatory challenges that need to be addressed to ultimately support the development of in vitro testing for patients on DOAC regimens that would translate into clinically meaningful results.

    II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Workshop

    The public workshop seeks to involve industry and academia in addressing analytical performance requirements for the diagnostic assessment of DOACs. Furthermore, the workshop aims to focus on the clinical circumstances under which patients receiving these agents would require testing, including but not limited to, the following topic areas:

    1. Overview of the effects of DOACs on traditional coagulation tests;

    2. identification of clinical scenarios that necessitate DOAC testing;

    3. interpretation of coagulation testing results for patients on DOACs; and

    4. considerations for regulatory review of devices assessing the effect of DOACs on coagulation.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21095 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Indian Health Service Meeting on American Indian/Alaska Native Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health Issues AGENCY:

    Indian Health Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Indian Health Service (IHS) is continuing to seek broad public input as it continues efforts to advance and promote the health needs of the American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held as shown below:

    1. September 11, 2015 from 12:00 p.m. EST to 2:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting location is:

    1. Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201.

    Written statements may be submitted to Lisa Neel, MPH, Program Coordinator, Office of Clinical and Preventive Services, Indian Health Service, 801 Thompson Avenue, Suite 300, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa Neel, MPH, Program Coordinator, Office of Clinical and Preventive Services, Indian Health Service, 801 Thompson Avenue, Suite 300, Rockville, MD 20852, Telephone 301-443-4305. (This is not a toll-free number.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meeting will be open to the public. To facilitate the building security process, those who plan to attend should RSVP to Lisa Neel at [email protected] or by telephone at 301-443-4305 no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on August 31, 2015. (This is not a toll-free number.) Public attendance will be limited to the space available. Members of the public may make statements during the meeting to the extent time permits and file written statements with the Agency for its consideration. Written statements should be submitted to the address listed above.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Robert G. McSwain, Deputy Director, Indian Health Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21068 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-16-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 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 meetings.

    The meetings 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 Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; Clinical Trial Review.

    Date: September 22, 2015.

    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Shiguang Yang, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDCD, NIH, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8349, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel—Fellowships—Chemical Senses.

    Date: October 1, 2015.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Shiguang Yang, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDCD, NIH, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8349, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Communication Disorders Review Committee.

    Date: October 15-16, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Crowne Plaza Chicago Metro Downtown, 733 West Madison, Chicago, IL 60661.

    Contact Person: Eliane Lazar-Wesley, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders/NIH, 6001 Executive Blvd., MSC 9670, Bethesda, MD 20892-8401, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 21, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21142 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; 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 meetings.

    The meetings 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: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Shared Mass Spectrometers.

    Date: September 17-18, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: David R Jollie, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4150, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1722, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Immunology Integrated Review Group, Transplantation, Tolerance, and Tumor Immunology Study Section.

    Date: October 1-2, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: Jin Huang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4199, MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1230, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 21, 2015. Carolyn Baum, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21152 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Frederick National Laboratory Advisory Committee to the National Cancer Institute.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will also be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov/).

    Name of Committee: Frederick National Laboratory Advisory Committee to the National Cancer Institute.

    Date: September 30, 2015.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Ongoing and new activities at the Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 31 Center Drive, Building 31, Wing C, 6th Floor, Conference Room 10, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Peter L. Wirth, Ph.D., Acting Executive Secretary, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W-514, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-276-6434, [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/fac/fac.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 21, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21140 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; 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 meetings.

    The meetings 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 Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NCI Omnibus R21 & R03 SEP-2.

    Date: October 5-6, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The Ritz-Carlton, Tysons Corner, 1700 Tysons Boulevard, McLean, VA 22102.

    Contact Person: Eun Ah Cho, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Special Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W104, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6342, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Initial Review Group; NCI Subcommittee F-Institutional Training and Education.

    Date: October 19-20, 2015.

    Time: 7:30 p.m. to 3:45 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda Downtown, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Timothy C. Meeker, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W606, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6464, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Initial Review Group; Subcommittee J-Career Development.

    Date: November 4, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Robert E. Bird, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W110, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6344, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 21, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21141 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-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 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 Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Mitochondria, Antioxidants and Aging I.

    Date: September 22, 2015.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 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: August 21, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21139 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; 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 meetings.

    The meetings 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: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel PAR14-262: Weight and Sleep Outcomes After Bariatric Surgery.

    Date: September 17, 2015.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Ellen K Schwartz, EDD., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3144, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-828-6146, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel PAR Panel: Targeting Temporal Dynamics of the Brain Activity for the Treatment of Cognitive Deficits.

    Date: September 29, 2015.

    Time: 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Wei-Qin Zhao, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5181 MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892-7846, 301-435-1236, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 21, 2015. Carolyn Baum, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21153 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) Priority List of Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) hereby announces the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) Priority List of Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics for 2015. The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) seeks to improve the level of information on the safe and effective use of pharmaceuticals used to treat children. The BPCA requires that the NIH identify the drugs of highest priority for study in pediatric populations, and publish a list of drugs/needs in pediatric therapeutics. This notice fulfills the requirement to publish that list.

    ADDRESSES:

    All nominations of pediatric therapeutics for future consideration by NICHD should be submitted to Dr. Perdita Taylor-Zapata at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Perdita Taylor-Zapata via email at [email protected]; by phone at 301-496-9584; or by fax at 301-480-2897.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The pediatric medical community, the public health community, and government agencies have long recognized multiple gaps in knowledge regarding the use of therapeutics in children including the correct dosage, appropriate indications, side effects, and safety concerns of pharmaceuticals in the short- and long term. These gaps have frequently resulted in inadequate labeling for pediatric use and in wide-spread off-label use of prescription drugs in children. Off-label use of a drug substantially limits the ability to gain clinical information of the drug product such as appropriate dosing of a drug, changes in drug metabolism and response during growth and development, and important short- and long-term effects.

    The NICHD, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), other federal agencies, and various non-profit and commercial organizations are taking steps to fill knowledge gaps that exist in pediatric therapeutics and to promote an increase in evidence-based data about medications used in children.

    Update on BPCA Prioritization

    The BPCA requires that the NIH, in consultation with the Food and Drug Administration and experts in pediatric research, identify the drugs and therapeutic areas of highest priority for study in pediatric populations. The NIH's authority and responsibility outlined in the BPCA legislation is to establish a program for pediatric drug testing and development and to publish a list of information needs regarding drugs used to treat children. The drug development program consists of a series of clinical trials in various therapeutic areas, which may be based on proposed pediatric study requests (PPSRs) submitted to FDA and/or from written requests (WR) received from the FDA. The BPCA Priority List consists of key therapeutic needs in the medical treatment of children and adolescents identified for further study; it is organized by therapeutic area, which can be a group of conditions, a subgroup of the population, or a setting of care. The first priority list of off-patent drugs needing further study under the 2002 BPCA legislation was published in January 2003 in the Federal Register (FR Vol. 68, No. 13; Tuesday, January 21, 2003: 2789-2790). The most recent priority list was published August 25, 2014; all Federal Register notices can be found on the BPCA Web site: http://bpca.nichd.nih.gov/prioritization/status.cfm. The BPCA legislation requires the NIH to update the priority list every three years. This publication serves as an update to the BPCA priority list of needs in pediatric therapeutics.

    The Obstetric and Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics Branch of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), NIH, has developed a prioritization process for the determination of the needs in pediatric therapeutics. There are two main phases: Phase I of the prioritization process entails identifying therapeutic areas, which are general categories of conditions, diseases, settings of care, or populations with multiple therapeutic needs. The NICHD solicits input from experts in pediatric research, general pediatric and subspecialty care, organizations focused on specific conditions, and professional societies to determine these therapeutic areas that need further study. Each year, the NICHD revisits the current list of needs in pediatric therapeutics, prioritizes three therapeutic areas of interests for that calendar year, and develops working groups in the prioritized areas. Recommendations from these working groups are then presented to the NICHD and the FDA at the annual BPCA meeting. Previous meeting minutes can be found on the BPCA Web site: http://bpca.nichd.nih.gov/prioritization/meeting_summary.cfm. Phase II of the prioritization process includes an extensive review and ranking of all stakeholder nominations received based on key criteria for prioritization, such as relevance, gaps in labeling information, affected populations and feasibility. Please visit the BPCA Web site for more details (http://bpca.nichd.nih.gov/prioritization/priority_list.cfm).

    Below is an updated list of therapeutic areas and drugs that have been prioritized for study since the inception of the BPCA and a summary of the NICHD's plans and progress in all of these areas to date. The NICHD welcomes input from the pediatric medical community on additional gaps in pediatric therapeutics for future consideration. All nominations should be submitted to Dr. Perdita Taylor-Zapata at the address in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    Priority List of Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics 2015

    In accordance with the BPCA legislation, the list outlines priority needs in pediatric therapeutics for multiple therapeutic areas listed below. The complete list can be found on the BPCA Web site at the following address: http://bpca.nichd.nih.gov.

    Table 1: Infectious Disease Priorities

    Table 2: Cardiovascular Disease Priorities

    Table 3: Respiratory Disease Priorities

    Table 4: Intensive Care Priorities

    Table 5: Bio-defense Research Priorities

    Table 6: Pediatric Cancer Priorities

    Table 7: Psychiatric Disorder Priorities

    Table 8: Neurological Disease Priorities

    Table 9: Neonatal Research Priorities

    Table 10: Adolescent Research Priorities

    Table 11: Hematologic Disease Priorities

    Table 12: Endocrine Disease Priorities and Diseases with Limited Alternative Therapies

    Table 13: Dermatologic Disease Priorities

    Table 14: Gastrointestinal Disease Priorities

    Table 15: Renal Disease Priorities

    Table 16: Rheumatologic Disease Priorities

    Table 17: Special Considerations.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Francis S. Collins, M.D., Director, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21155 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS-2015-0042] National Infrastructure Advisory Council AGENCY:

    National Protection and Programs Directorate, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Committee Management; Notice of an Open Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Infrastructure Advisory Council will meet Friday, September 11, 2015, at the Navy League Building, 2300 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22201. This meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The National Infrastructure Advisory Council will meet on September 11, 2015 from 1:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m. EDT. The meeting may close early if the committee has completed its business. For additional information, please consult the National Infrastructure Advisory Council Web site, www.dhs.gov/NIAC, or contact the National Infrastructure Advisory Council Secretariat by phone at (703) 235-2888 or by email at [email protected]

    ADDRESSES:

    Navy League Building, 2300 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22201. Members of the public will register at the table at the door to the meeting room. For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT below as soon as possible.

    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment on the issues to be considered by the Council as listed in the “Summary” section below. Comments must be submitted in writing no later than 12:00 p.m. on September 9, 2015, in order to be considered by the council in its meeting. The comments must be identified by “DHS-2015-0042,” and may be submitted by any one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting written comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (703) 235-9707.

    Mail: Nancy Wong, National Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane SW., Mail Stop 0612, Washington, DC 20598-0607.

    Instructions: All written submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and the docket number for this action. Written comments received will be posted without alteration at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received by the National Infrastructure Advisory Council, go to www.regulations.gov. Enter “NIAC” in the search line and the Web site will list all relevant documents for your review.

    Members of the public will have an opportunity to provide oral comments on the topics on the meeting agenda below, and on any previous studies issued by the National Infrastructure Advisory Council. We request that comments be limited to the issues and studies listed in the meeting agenda and previous National Infrastructure Advisory Council studies. All previous National Infrastructure Advisory Council studies can be located at www.dhs.gov/NIAC. Public comments may be submitted in writing or presented in person for the Council to consider. Comments received by Nancy Wong after 12:00 p.m. on September 9, 2015, will still be accepted and reviewed by the members, but not necessarily by the time of the meeting. In-person presentations will be limited to three minutes per speaker, with no more than 15 minutes for all speakers. Parties interested in making in-person comments should register on the Public Comment Registration list available at the meeting location no later than 15 minutes prior to the beginning of the meeting.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nancy Wong, National Infrastructure Advisory Council, Designated Federal Officer, Department of Homeland Security, (703) 235-2888.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix. The National Infrastructure Advisory Council shall provide the President, through the Secretary of Homeland Security, with advice on the security and resilience of the Nation's critical infrastructure sectors.The NIAC will meet to discuss issues relevant to critical infrastructure security and resilience as directed by the President.

    The meeting will commence at 1:30 p.m. EDT. At this meeting, the council will receive unclassified briefings on water resources and water supply, urban storm water, and wastewater. The council will discuss and deliberate the scope and approach to a tasking from the Administration on the Water Sector.

    All presentations will be posted no later than one week prior to the meeting on the council's public Web page—www.dhs.gov/NIAC.

    Public Meeting Agenda I. Opening of Meeting II. Roll Call of Members III. Opening Remarks and Introductions IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes V. Water Resources and Water Supply Briefing VI. Urban Storm Water Briefing VII. Wastewater Briefing VIII. Public Comment IX. Discussion and Deliberation on Scope of Water Sector Topic of Study X. Closing Remarks Dated: Augsut 20, 2015. Nancy J. Wong, Designated Federal Officer for the National Infrastructure Advisory Council.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21138 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9P-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2015-N168; FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group; Public Meeting AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a public meeting of the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG). The TAMWG is a Federal advisory committee that affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight.

    DATES:

    Public meeting: TAMWG will meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Pacific Time on Tuesday, September 15, 2015, and from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Pacific Time on Wednesday, September 16, 2015. Deadlines: For deadlines on submitting written material, please see “Public Input” under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Weaverville Fire Hall, 125 Bremer Street, Weaverville, CA 96093.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joseph C. Polos, by mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; by telephone at 707-822-7201 or by email at [email protected] or Elizabeth W. Hadley, Redding Electric Utility, by mail at 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001; by telephone at 530-339-7308 or by email at [email protected] Individuals with a disability may request an accommodation by sending an email to either point of contact.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., we announce that the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group will hold a meeting.

    Background

    The TAMWG affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the TMC. The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight.

    Meeting Agenda

    • Designated Federal Officer (DFO) update;

    • TMC Chair update;

    • Executive Director and Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) staff update;

    • Update on current river and reservoir conditions;

    • TMC current issues;

    • Public comment;

    • Klamath Salmonid Run Size Projection procedure;

    • TRRP Goals, objectives, and definition of completion; and

    • TRRP Coarse Sediment Lessons Learned Workshop.

    The final agenda will be posted on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/arcata.

    Public Input If you wish to You must contact Elizabeth Hadley (FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than Submit written information or questions for the TAMWG to consider during the meeting September 8, 2015. Submitting Written Information or Questions

    Interested members of the public may submit relevant information or questions for the TAMWG to consider during the meeting. Written statements must be received by the date listed in “Public Input,” so that the information may be available to the TAMWG for their consideration prior to this meeting. Written statements must be supplied to Elizabeth Hadley in one of the following formats: One hard copy with original signature, one electronic copy with original signature, and one electronic copy via email (acceptable file formats are Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, PowerPoint, or rich text file).

    Registered speakers who wish to expand on their oral statements, or those who wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, may submit written statements to Elizabeth Hadley up to 7 days after the meeting.

    Meeting Minutes

    Summary minutes of the meeting will be maintained by Elizabeth Hadley (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). The minutes will be available for public inspection within 14 days after the meeting, and will be posted on the TAMWG Web site at http://www.fws.gov/arcata.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Joseph C. Polos, Supervisory Fish Biologist, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, California.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21100 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R1-ES-2015-N182; FXES11130100000-156-FF01E00000] Endangered Species; Recovery Permit Applications AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications for recovery permits to conduct activities with the purpose of enhancing the survival of endangered species. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), prohibits certain activities with endangered species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. The Act also requires that we invite public comment before issuing such permits.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Program Manager, Restoration and Endangered Species Classification, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Regional Office, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colleen Henson, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address, or by telephone (503-231-6131) or fax (503-231-6243).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) prohibits certain activities with respect to endangered and threatened species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. Along with our implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17, the Act provides for certain permits, and requires that we invite public comment before issuing these permits for endangered species.

    A permit granted by us under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes the permittee to conduct activities (including take or interstate commerce) with respect to U.S. endangered or threatened species for scientific purposes or enhancement of propagation or survival. Our regulations implementing section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act for these permits are found at 50 CFR 17.22 for endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant species.

    Applications Available for Review and Comment

    We invite local, State, and Federal agencies and the public to comment on the following applications. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    Documents and other information submitted with these applications are available for review by request from the Program Manager for Restoration and Endangered Species Classification at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) and the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

    Permit Number: TE-060179 Applicant: Zoological Society of San Diego, San Diego, California.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take (collect eggs and nestlings, band, radio-tag, satellite-tag, collect biosamples, release, and recapture) the aga or Mariana crow (Corvus kubaryi), in conjunction with captive propagation and release in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

    Permit Number: TE-829250 Applicant: Hawaii Wildlife Fund, Kahului, Hawaii.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take (relocate nests) the honu or green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) and to take (insert temperature loggers and data sensors into nests and utilize a trained turtle nest detector dog) the honu or green sea turtle, the honu ea or hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), and the olive Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea), in conjunction with scientific research on the islands of Kaho`olawe, Lana`i, Maui, and Moloka`i, for the purpose of enhancing their survival.

    Public Availability of Comments

    All comments and materials we receive in response to this request will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section.

    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.

    Authority

    We provide this notice under section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Stephen Zylstra, Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21096 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2014-0018; FF09A1000-145-FXIA16710900000] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Seventeenth Regular Meeting: Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES Appendices AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States, as a Party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), may propose amendments to the CITES Appendices for consideration at meetings of the Conference of the Parties. The seventeenth regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (CoP17) is scheduled to be held in South Africa, September 24 to October 5, 2016. With this notice, we describe proposed amendments to the CITES Appendices (species proposals) that the United States might submit for consideration at CoP17 and invite your comments and information on these proposals.

    DATES:

    We will consider written information and comments we receive by October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments pertaining to species proposals for consideration at CoP17 by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2014-0018.

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-IA-2014-0018; Division of Policy, Performance, and Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: BPHC; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We will not consider comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy comments on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Comments and materials we receive in response to this notice will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Scientific Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: IA, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; phone 703-358-1708.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rosemarie Gnam Ph.D., Chief, Division of Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at 703-358-1708 (phone), 703-358-2276 (fax), or [email protected] (email). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, hereinafter referred to as CITES or the Convention, is an international treaty designed to control and regulate international trade in certain animal and plant species that are affected by trade and are now, or potentially may become, threatened with extinction. These species are included in the Appendices to CITES, which are available on the CITES Secretariat's Web site at www.cites.org. Currently, 181 Parties, including the United States, have joined CITES. The Convention calls for regular biennial meetings of the Conference of the Parties, unless the Conference decides otherwise, and meetings are typically held every 2 to 3 years. At these meetings, the Parties review the implementation of CITES, make provisions enabling the CITES Secretariat in Switzerland to carry out its functions, consider amendments to the list of species in Appendices I and II, consider reports presented by the Secretariat, and make recommendations for the improved effectiveness of CITES. Any country that is a Party to CITES may propose amendments to Appendices I and II, as well as resolutions, decisions, and agenda items for consideration by all the Parties.

    This is our third in a series of Federal Register notices that, together with an announced public meeting (time and place to be announced), provide you with an opportunity to participate in the development of the U.S. submissions and negotiating positions for the seventeenth regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (CoP17), which is scheduled to be held in South Africa, from September 24 to October 5, 2016. We published our first CoP17-related Federal Register notice on June 27, 2014 (79 FR 36550), in which we requested information and recommendations on animal and plant species proposals for the United States to consider submitting for consideration at CoP17. You may obtain information on that Federal Register notice from the Division of Scientific Authority at the address provided in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above. We published our second CoP17-related Federal Register notice on May 11, 2015 (80 FR 26948), in which we requested information and recommendations on resolutions, decisions, and agenda items that the United States might consider submitting for discussion at CoP17, and provided preliminary information on how to request approved observer status for national nongovernmental organizations within the United States that wish to attend the meeting. Comments received on that notice may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2014-0018. You may obtain information on that Federal Register notice by contacting Craig Hoover, Chief, Wildlife Trade and Conservation Branch, Division of Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at 703-358-2095 (phone), 703-358-2298 (fax), or [email protected] (email). Our regulations governing this public process are found in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at § 23.87.

    Recommendations for Species Proposals for the United States to Consider Submitting for CoP17

    In our Federal Register notice of June 27, 2014 (79 FR 36550), we requested information and recommendations on potential species proposals for the United States to consider submitting for consideration at CoP17. We received recommendations from 22 individuals and the following organizations for possible proposals involving 80 taxa (2 families, 6 genera, 70 individual species, and 2 general groups (U.S. and foreign softshell turtles and North American map turtles)): the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA); Center for Biological Diversity (CBD); Earthtrust; Ginseng Board of Wisconsin (GBW); Hsu's Ginseng Enterprises, Inc. (HGE); Humane Society International (HSI); International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW); International Union for Conservation of Nature-Species Survival Commission (IUCN-SSC) Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group; Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC); Pew Environment Group (PEG); Species Survival Network (SSN); United Plant Savers (UPS); Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS); and World Wildlife Fund (WWF)/TRAFFIC. We also received general comments from individual commenters for CITES protections on the following species: 7 on rhinoceroses, elephants, and lions; 44 on elephants; 39 on rhinoceroses; and 29,738 on polar bears, pangolins, nautiluses, snapping and map turtles, walruses, sea cucumbers, and seahorses. Additionally, the United States may submit proposals on six animal species, one plant species, and one plant genus currently under periodic review by the CITES technical committees, and is undecided about submitting proposals regarding four bird species based on recent taxonomic changes.

    We have undertaken initial assessments of the available trade and biological information on all of these taxa. Based on these assessments, we made provisional evaluations of whether to proceed with the development of proposals for species to be included in, removed from, or transferred between the CITES Appendices. We made these evaluations by considering the biological and trade information available on the species; the presence, absence, and effectiveness of other mechanisms that may preclude the need for species' inclusion in the CITES Appendices (e.g., range country actions or other international agreements); and availability of resources. We have also considered the following factors, as per the U.S. approach for CoP17 discussed in our June 27, 2014, Federal Register notice:

    (1) Does the proposed action address a serious wildlife or plant trade issue that the United States is experiencing as a range country for species in trade?

    (2) Does the proposed action address a serious wildlife or plant trade issue for species not native to the United States?

    (3) Does the proposed action provide additional conservation benefit for a species already covered by another international agreement?

    Based on our initial assessments, we have assigned each taxon to one of three categories, which reflects the likelihood of our submitting a proposal. In sections A, B, and C below, we have listed the current status of each species proposal recommended by the public, as well as species proposals we have been developing on our own. Please note that we have only provided here a list of taxa and the proposed action. We have posted an extended version of this notice on our Web site at http://www.fws.gov/international/publications-and-media/federal-register-notices.html, with text describing in more detail each proposed action and explaining the rationale for the tentative U.S. position on each possible proposal. Copies of the extended version of the notice are also available from the Division of Scientific Authority at the above address or at www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2014-0018.

    We welcome your comments, especially if you are able to provide any additional biological or trade information on these species. For each species, more detailed information is on file in the Division of Scientific Authority.

    A. What species proposals is the United States likely to submit for consideration at CoP17?

    The United States is likely to develop and submit proposals for the following taxa. Most of the taxa in this section are undergoing periodic review of the CITES Appendices by the Animals Committee (AC) and Plants Committee (PC), in accordance with Resolution Conf. 14.8 (Rev. CoP16). This is a regular process under CITES to evaluate whether listings of taxa in CITES Appendices I and II continue to be appropriate, based on current biological and trade information. These taxa are at various stages in the periodic review process. This process includes an initial assessment that is put before the appropriate Committee (Plants or Animals) for discussion, which may result in an AC or PC recommendation that a taxon be uplisted (transferred from Appendix II to Appendix I); or downlisted (transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II, or deleted from Appendix II); or that no change be made to the listing.

    Plants 1. Saw-toothed Lewisia (Lewisia serrata)—Potential amendment to Appendix-II listing 2. Fishhook cactus (Sclerocactus spp.)—Potential amendments to Appendix-I and Appendix-II listings Invertebrates 3. Wabash riffleshell (Epioblasma sampsonii)—Potential amendment to Appendix-I listing Reptiles 4. Puerto Rican boa (Epicrates inornatus)—Amendment to Appendix-I listing Mammals 5. Caribbean monk seal (Monachus tropicalis)—Potential amendment to Appendix-I listing 6. Guam flying-fox (Pteropus tokudae)—Potential amendment to Appendix-II listing 7. Eastern cougar (Puma concolor couguar) and Florida panther (P. concolor coryi)—Potential amendments to Appendix I listings—Potential amendments to Appendix-II listings 8. Polar bear (Ursus maritimus)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I B. On what species proposals is the United States still undecided, pending additional information and consultations?

    The United States is still undecided on whether to submit proposals for CoP17 for the following taxa. In most cases, we have not completed our consultations with relevant range countries. In other cases, we expect meetings to occur in the immediate future, at which participants will generate important recommendations, trade analyses, or biological information on the taxon in question that may be useful to our final decision-making.

    Invertebrates 1. Sea cucumbers native to the United States: Pepino de mar (Actinopyga agassizii), Deep-water redfish (A. echinites), Stonefish (A. lecanora), Surf redfish (A. mauritiana), Blackfish (A. miliaris), Giant California sea cucumber (Apostichopus californicus), Warty sea cucumber (A. parvimensis), Furry sea cucumber (Astichopus multifidus), Leopard fish (Bohadschia argus), Brown sandfish (B. vitiensis), Orange-footed sea cucumber (Cucumaria frondosa), Tripang (Holothuria arenicola), Lollyfish (H. atra), Zanga fleur (H. cinerascens), Snakefish (H. coluber), Pinkfish (H. edulis), Red snakefish (H. flavomaculata), Labuyo (H. fuscocinerea), White teatfish (H. fuscogilva), Elephant trunkfish (H. fuscopunctata), Tiger tail (H. hilla), Spotted sea cucumber (H. impatiens), Golden sandfish (H. lessoni), White threadfish (H. leucospilota), Pepino de mar (H. mexicana), Bantunan (H. pardalis), “Unknown” (H. pervicax), Black teatfish (H. whitmaei), Four-sided sea cucumber (Isostichopus badionotus), Blackspotted sea cucumber (Pearsonothuria graeffei), Greenfish (Stichopus chloronotus), Curryfish (S. herrmanni), Selenka's sea cucumber (S. horrens), Prickly redfish (Thelenota ananas), Amber fish (T. anax), and Lemonfish (T. rubralineata)—Inclusion in Appendix II 2. Chambered nautiluses (Allonautilus spp. and Nautilus spp.)—Inclusion in Appendix II 3. Red and pink corals (Corallium spp. and Paracorallium spp.)—Inclusion in Appendix II Fishes 4. American eel (Anguilla rostrata)—Inclusion in Appendix II 5. Lined seahorse (Hippocampus erectus)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I 6. Dwarf seahorse (Hippocampus zosterae)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I 7. Devil rays (Mobula spp.): Pygmy devil ray (M. eregoodootenkee), Atlantic devil ray (M. hypostoma), Spinetail devil ray (M. japanica), Shortfin devil ray (M. kuhlii), Giant devil ray (M. mobular), Smoothtail devil ray (M. munkiana), Lesser Guinean devil ray (M. rochebrunei), Sicklefin devil ray (M. tarapacana), and Smoothtail devil ray (M. thurstoni))—Inclusion in Appendix II Reptiles 8. Chaco side-necked turtle (Acanthochelys pallidipectoris)—Inclusion in Appendix II or Appendix I 9. African and Middle Eastern softshell turtles in the family Trionychidae: Aubry's flapshell turtle (Cycloderma aubryi); Zambezi flapshell turtle (C. frenatum); Nubian flapshell turtle (Cyclanorbis elegans); Senegal flapshell turtle (C. senegalensis); Euphrates softshell turtle (Rafetus euphraticus); and African or Nile softshell turtle (Trionyx triunguis)—Inclusion in Appendix II 10. African pygmy chameleons (Rhampholeon spp. and Rieppeleon spp): Mount Gorongosa pygmy chameleon (Rhampholeon gorongosae), Marshall's pygmy chameleon (R. marshalli), Cameroon stumptail chameleon (R. spectrum), East Usambara pygmy chameleon (R. temporalis), Rare (Green) pygmy chameleon (R. viridis), Nguru spiny pygmy chameleon (R. acuminatus), Beraducci's pygmy chameleon (R. beraduccii), Boulenger's pygmy chameleon (R. boulangeri), Chapman's pygmy chameleon (R. chapmanorum), Udzungwa pygmy chameleon (R. moyeri), Nchisi pygmy chameleon (R. nchisiensis), Mulanje pygmy chameleon (R. platyceps), Uluguru pygmy chameleon (R. uluguruensis), Mount Inago pygmy chameleon (R. bruessoworum), Mount Namuli pygmy chameleon (R. tilburyi), Mount Chiperone pygmy chameleon (R. nebulauctor), Mount Mabu pygmy chameleon (R. maspictus), Zomba pygmy chameleon (Rieppeleon brachyurus), Bearded pygmy chameleon (R. brevicaudatus), Kenya leaf chameleon (R. kerstenii)—Inclusion in Appendix II Birds 11. Four Indo-Pacific bird species: Loria's bird-of-paradise (Cnemophilus loriae), Crested bird-of-paradise (C. macgregorii), Yellow-breasted bird-of-paradise (Loboparadisea sericea), and Macgregor's bird-of-paradise (Macgregoria pulchra)—Removal from Appendix II 12. African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Mammals 13. Pangolins (Manis spp.)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I 14. Narwhal (Monodon monoceros)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I 15. African lion (Panthera leo leo)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I C. What species proposals is the United States not likely to submit for consideration at CoP17, unless we receive significant additional information?

    The United States does not intend to submit proposals for the following taxa unless we receive significant additional information indicating that a proposal is warranted. As described further in the extended version of this notice on our Web site, information currently available for each of the taxa listed below does not support a proposal.

    Plants 1. Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis)—Removal from Appendix II 2. American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius)—Amendment of the Appendix-II listing annotation to exclude sliced roots from CITES control 3. Hawaiian sandalwoods (Santalum spp.)—Inclusion in Appendix II Invertebrates 4. Sea cucumbers not native to the United States: Deepwater blackfish (Actinopyga palauensis), Burying blackfish (A. spinea), Japanese sea cucumber (Apostichopus japonicas), Brown-spotted sandfish (Bohadschia marmorata), Falalyjaka (B. subrubra), Japanese cucumaria (Cucumaria japonica), Black teatfish (Holothuria nobilis), Sandfish (H. scabra), Selenka's sea cucumber (Stichopus monotuberculatus), Selenka's sea cucumber (S. naso)—Inclusion in Appendix II Fishes 5. Thresher sharks (Alopias spp.): Bigeye thresher shark (A. pelagicus), Pelagic thresher shark A. superciliosus), Common thresher shark (A. vulpinus)—Inclusion in Appendix II 6. Dusky shark (Carcharhinus obscurus)—Inclusion in Appendix II 7. Silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis)—Inclusion in Appendix II 8. Mako sharks: Longfin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus) and shortfin mako shark (I. paucus)—Inclusion in Appendix II 9. Blue shark (Prionace glauca)—Inclusion in Appendix II 10. Hammerhead sharks (Sphyrnidae Family): Winghead shark (Eusphyra blochii), Scalloped bonnethead (Sphyrna corona), Whitefin hammerhead (S. couardi), Scoophead shark (S. media), Bonnethead shark (S. tiburo), Smalleye hammerhead shark (S. tudes)—Inclusion in Appendix II 11. Humphead wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus)—Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Reptiles 12. North American softshell turtles in the Genus Apalone: Spiny softshell (A. spinifera, including 6 subsp.*); Smooth softshell (A. mutica, including 2 subsp.); and Florida softshell (A. ferox)—Inclusion in Appendix II [* excluding A.s. atra, which is in Appendix I and found in Mexico] 13. North American map turtles (Graptemys spp.): Barbour's map turtle (G. barbouri); Cagle's map turtle (G. caglei); Escambia map turtle (G. ernsti); Yellow-blotched map turtle (G. flavimaculata); Northern map turtle (G. geographica); Pascagoula map turtle (G. gibbonsi); Black-knobbed map turtle (G. nigrinoda); Ringed map turtle (G. oculifera); Ouachita map turtle (G. ouachitensis); Pearl River map turtle (G. pearlensis); False map turtle (G. pseudogeographica); Alabama map turtle (G. pulchra); Texas map turtle (G. versa)—Transfer from Appendix III to Appendix II 14. Chinese softshell turtle (Pelodiscus sinensis)—Inclusion in Appendix II 15. Alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii)—Transfer from Appendix III to Appendix II Mammals 16. Cape fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus)—Transfer to Appendix I 17. White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum)—Inclusion of the entire species in Appendix I 18. African elephant (Loxodonta africana)—Inclusion of the entire species in Appendix I 19. Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus)—Inclusion in Appendix I Future Actions

    As stated above, the next regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP17) is scheduled to be held in South Africa, September 24 to October 5, 2016. The United States must submit any proposals to amend Appendix I or II, or any draft resolutions, decisions, or agenda items for discussion at CoP17, to the CITES Secretariat 150 days (April 27, 2016) prior to the start of the meeting. In order to meet this deadline and to prepare for CoP17, we have developed a tentative U.S. schedule. Approximately 12 months prior to CoP17, we plan to publish a Federal Register notice announcing draft resolutions, draft decisions, and agenda items the United States is considering submitting for CoP17 and soliciting further information and comments on them. Approximately 4 months prior to CoP17, we will post on our Web site an announcement of the species proposals, draft resolutions, draft decisions, and agenda items submitted by the United States to the CITES Secretariat for consideration at CoP17.

    Through a series of additional notices and Web site postings in advance of CoP17, we will inform you about preliminary negotiating positions on resolutions, decisions, and amendments to the Appendices proposed by other Parties for consideration at CoP17. We will also publish an announcement of a public meeting to be held approximately 3 months prior to CoP17. That meeting will enable us to receive public input on our positions regarding CoP17 issues. The procedures for developing U.S. documents and negotiating positions for a meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES are outlined in 50 CFR 23.87. As noted in paragraph (c) of that section, we may modify or suspend the procedures outlined there if they would interfere with the timely or appropriate development of documents for submission to the CoP and of U.S. negotiating positions.

    Author

    The primary author of this notice is Patricia De Angelis, Ph.D., Division of Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    Authority

    The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: August 17, 2015. Daniel M. Ashe, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21033 Filed 8-24-15; 12:00 pm] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R4-ES-2015-N139; FF04E00000-1115-0000 156] Proposed Joint Programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement With Assurances and Safe Harbor Agreement in the Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita River (Headwaters) Watersheds, Arkansas AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice advises the public that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Arkansas Ecological Services Field Office (ARFO), the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (AGFC), the U.S. Department of Agriculture—Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) have applied for enhancement of survival permits (permits) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act). The permit application includes a proposal (referred to as the “agreement”) that combines a safe harbor agreement (SHA) for 5 endangered and threatened species and a candidate conservation agreement with assurances (CCAA) for 20 State species of concern. The term of the agreement would be 30 years. If approved, the agreement would allow the applicants to issue certificates of inclusion (CI) to eligible non-Federal landowners throughout the Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita River (Headwaters) Watersheds in Arkansas whose property owner management agreements (POMA) are approved. We invite public comments on these documents.

    DATES:

    We must receive any written comments at our Regional Office (see ADDRESSES) on or before September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may obtain a copy of the information available by contacting Melvin Tobin, Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, Arkansas Ecological Services Field Office, 110 South Amity Road, Suite 300, Conway, AR 72032. Documents are also available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the Fish and Wildlife Service's Regional Office, 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345; or at the Arkansas Ecological Services Field Office, Fish and Wildlife Service, 110 Amity Road, Suite 300, Conway, AR 72032. Note that requests for any documents must be in writing to be processed. When you are requesting or commenting on the information provided in this notice, please reference “Programmatic CCAA and SHA in the Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita Rivers” in any correspondence.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael Harris, At-Risk Species Coordinator, at the Regional Office (see ADDRESSES), telephone: 404-679-7066; or Mr. Chris Davidson, Endangered Species Program Supervisor, at the Arkansas Field Office (see ADDRESSES), telephone: 501-513-4481.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    We announce the availability of the agreement, which covers the Arkansas fatmucket (Lampsilis powellii), pink mucket (Lampsilis abrupta), spectaclecase (Cumberlandia monodonta), and rabbitsfoot (Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica) mussels, and Harperella (Ptilmnium nodosum), a plant, and a candidate conservation agreement with assurances (CCAA) for 20 State species of concern (collectively “covered species”).

    CCAAs and SHAs

    Under a CCAA, participating property owners voluntarily undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat benefiting species that may warrant listing under the Act. CCAAs encourage private and other non-Federal property owners to implement conservation efforts for candidate and at-risk species by assuring property owners they will not be subjected to increased property use restrictions should the species become listed as threatened or endangered under the Act. Under a SHA, participating property owners voluntarily undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat benefiting federally listed species under the Act. SHAs encourage private and other non-Federal property owners to implement conservation efforts for federally listed species by assuring property owners they will not be subjected to increased property use restrictions under the Act. Application requirements and issuance criteria for SHAs and CCAAs are found in 50 CFR 17.22(d) and 50 CFR 17.32(d), respectively. Because of the significant overlap between the covered species' habitat requirements and the anticipated beneficial effects from implementation of the voluntary conservation measures, we believe that it is appropriate to combine the CCAA/SHA components in a single agreement for consideration in this notice.

    Parties' Agreement

    The Agreement describes conservation practices designed to protect and enhance streambed and bankside habitats for the benefit of the covered species on private or non-Federal public lands enrolled under the agreement. Enrolled landowners who implement these measures would receive assurances against take liability for the federally listed species, as well as for the covered species that might become federally listed in the future. Conservation land use practices will vary according to the needs of a particular enrolled landowner. Typical measures include controlling livestock access to streams; protection, enhancement, or restoration of streamside or in-stream habitats; species reintroduction to unoccupied suitable habitat; and other conservation measures that may be developed in the future.

    We specifically request information, views, and opinions from the public via this notice on our proposed Federal action, including our determination that the agreement, including its proposed conservation measures, would have minor or negligible effects on the covered species. Therefore, we have determined that the agreement is a “low-effect” project and qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) as provided by the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6 Appendix 1). A low-effect project involves (1) minor or negligible effects on federally-listed or candidate species or their habitats, and (2) minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources. Further, we specifically solicit information regarding the adequacy of the agreement per 50 CFR parts 13 and 17.

    Public Comments

    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.

    If you wish to comment, you may submit comments by any one of several methods. Please reference TE 71956B or TE 71959B in such comments. You may mail comments to the Fish and Wildlife Service's Regional Office (see ADDRESSES). You may also comment via the internet to [email protected] or [email protected] Please include your name and return address in your email message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your email message, contact us directly at either telephone number listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Finally, you may hand-deliver comments to either of our offices listed under ADDRESSES.

    Covered Area

    The agreement covers approximately 439,792 acres of potentially eligible lands in the upper Saline River watershed; 412,556 acres of potentially eligible lands in the upper Ouachita River watershed; and 235,010 acres of potentially eligible lands in the upper Caddo River watershed. Lands eligible to enroll in the agreement include any non-Federal properties within the watershed of the upper Saline, Caddo, and Ouachita Rivers.

    Next Steps

    We will evaluate the enhancement of survival permit application, including the agreement and any comments we receive, to determine whether the applications meet the requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act. We will also evaluate whether the section 10(a)(1)(A) enhancement of survival permits would comply with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. If we determine that the requirements are met, we will issue a permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act to the Applicants in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. We will not make our final decision until after the end of the 30-day comment period and will fully consider all comments received during the comment period.

    Authority

    We provide this notice under section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

    Dated: July 29, 2015. Mike Oetker, Deputy Regional Director.
    [FR Doc. 2015-20960 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] HEARTH Act Approval of Squaxin Island Tribe Regulations AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 20, 2015, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the Squaxin Island Tribe leasing regulations under the HEARTH Act. With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into business leases without BIA approval.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Morales, Office of Trust Services—Division of Realty, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Telephone (202) 768-4166; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Summary of the HEARTH Act

    The HEARTH (Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal Homeownership) Act of 2012 (the Act) makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process available to tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The Act authorizes tribes to negotiate and enter into agricultural and business leases of tribal trust lands with a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. The Act also authorizes tribes to enter into leases for residential, recreational, religious or educational purposes for a primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary. Participating tribes develop tribal leasing regulations, including an environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The Act requires the Secretary to approve tribal regulations if the tribal regulations are consistent with the Department's leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved the tribal regulations for the Squaxin Island Tribe.

    II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes

    The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and local taxation and may be subject to taxation by the Indian tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble to the final regulations, the Federal government has a strong interest in promoting economic development, self-determination, and tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 72440, 72447-48 (December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities applies with equal force to leases entered into under tribal leasing regulations approved by the Federal government pursuant to the HEARTH Act.

    Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 465, preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). In addition, as explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of “traditional notions of Indian self-government,” requires a particularized examination of the relevant State, Federal, and tribal interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72447-48, as supplemented by the analysis below.

    The strong Federal and tribal interests against State and local taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's overarching intent was to “allow tribes to exercise greater control over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic development in tribal communities.” 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford tribes “flexibility to adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs” and to “enable [tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.” Id. at 5-6.

    Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express Federal policies supporting tribal economic development and self-determination, and also threaten substantial tribal interests in effective tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024, 2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that “[a] key goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign functions, rather than relying on Federal funding”). The additional costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from exercising its own sovereign right to impose a tribal tax to support its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043-44 (finding that State and local taxes greatly discourage tribes from raising tax revenue from the same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede tribal economic growth).

    Just like BIA's surface leasing regulations, tribal regulations under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See Guidance for the Approval of Tribal Leasing Regulations under the HEARTH Act, NPM-TRUS-29 (effective Jan. 16, 2013) (providing guidance on Federal review process to ensure consistency of proposed tribal regulations with Part 162 regulations and listing required tribal regulatory provisions). Furthermore, the Federal government remains involved in the tribal land leasing process by approving the tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing technical assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding approval of the tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not covered under the tribal regulations according to the Part 162 regulations.

    Accordingly, the Federal and tribal interests weigh heavily in favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed by tribal leasing regulations or Part 162. Improvements, activities, and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the Squaxin Island Tribe.

    Through the Congressionally-authorized Land Buy Back Program for Tribal Nations, the Squaxin Island Tribe has recovered the equivalent of more than 155 acres of land in trust. This initiative reflects the Federal policy of reducing the problem of fractionated interests in land and restoring tribal homelands. The approval of tribal leasing regulations has the potential to expand tribal sovereignty and increase tribal economic development on some of these newly consolidated lands.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21151 Filed 8-24-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] HEARTH Act Approval of Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation Regulations AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 18, 2015, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation leasing regulations under the HEARTH Act. With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into the following type of leases without BIA approval: Residential, business, wind and solar development, and other authorized purposes.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Morales, Office of Trust Services—Division of Realty, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Telephone (202) 768-4166; Email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Summary of the HEARTH Act

    The HEARTH (Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal Homeownership) Act of 2012 (the Act) makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process available to tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The Act authorizes tribes to negotiate and enter into agricultural and business leases of tribal trust lands with a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. The Act also authorizes tribes to enter into leases for residential, recreational, religious or educational purposes for a primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary. Participating tribes develop tribal leasing regulations, including an environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The Act requires the Secretary to approve tribal regulations if the tribal regulations are consistent with the Department's leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved the tribal regulations for the Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation.

    II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes

    The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and local taxation and may be subject to taxation by the Indian tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble to the final regulations, the Federal government has a strong interest in promoting economic development, self-determination, and tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72,447-48 (December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities applies with equal force to leases entered into under tribal leasing regulations approved by the Federal government pursuant to the HEARTH Act.

    Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 465, preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). In addition, as explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of “traditional notions of Indian self-government,” requires a particularized examination of the relevant State, Federal, and tribal interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72447-48, as supplemented by the analysis below.

    The strong Federal and tribal interests against State and local taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's overarching intent was to “allow tribes to exercise greater control over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic development in tribal communities.” 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford tribes “flexibility to adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs” and to “enable [tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.” Id. at 5-6.

    Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express Federal policies supporting tribal economic development and self-determination, and also threaten substantial tribal interests in effective tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024, 2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that “[a] key goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign functions, rather than relying on Federal funding”). The additional costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from exercising its own sovereign right to impose a tribal tax to support its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043-44 (finding that State and local taxes greatly discourage tribes from raising tax revenue from the same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede tribal economic growth).

    Just like BIA's surface leasing regulations, tribal regulations under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See Guidance for the Approval of Tribal Leasing Regulations under the HEARTH Act, NPM-TRUS-29 (effective Jan. 16, 2013) (providing guidance on Federal review process to ensure consistency of proposed tribal regulations with Part 162 regulations and listing required tribal regulatory provisions). Furthermore, the Federal government remains involved in the tribal land leasing process by approving the tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing technical assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding approval of the tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not covered under the tribal regulations according to the Part 162 regulations.

    Accordingly, the Federal and tribal interests weigh heavily in favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed by tribal leasing regulations or Part 162. Improvements, activities, and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation. We note that the Makah Indian Reservation possesses a fractionated lands problem, but through the Land Buy Back Program authorized by Congress, fractional interests in trust land equivalent to approximately 64 acres of land have been repurchased and restored to the Makah Indian Tribe. The Land Buy Back Program represents a Federal policy initiative to restore tribal homelands. It is Federal policy to support tribal sovereignty and self-government to the maximum extent possible on tribal trust lands.

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-20888 Filed 8-24-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [15 XL LLIDI00000-L11200000-PH0000 241 A 4500075502] Notice of Public Meeting, Idaho Falls District Resource Advisory Council Meeting AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Idaho Falls District Resource Advisory Council (RAC), will meet as indicated below.

    DATES:

    The Idaho Falls District RAC will meet in Challis, Idaho, September 22-23, 2015, for a two-day meeting at the Challis Field Office, 1151 Blue Mountain Road, Challis, Idaho 83226. The first day will begin at 10:00 a.m. and adjourn at 4:30 p.m. The second day will begin at 8:00 a.m. and adjourn at 2:30 p.m. Members of the public are invited to attend. A comment period will be held following the introductions from 10:00-10:30 a.m. All meetings are open to the public.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 15-member Council advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in the BLM Idaho Falls District (IFD), which covers eastern Idaho. Items on the agenda include an overview and tour of the new wilderness area.

    The Recreation RAC will convene at approximately 11:15 a.m. to discuss the Caribou-Targhee National Forest proposal to increase Christmas tree permits to $15.00, and the Salmon Challis National Forest's proposal to begin using the Copper Basin Guard Station (located approximately 35 miles from Mackay, Idaho) as a rental cabin. Following the morning part of the meeting, the group will discuss several riparian projects the Challis Field Office is undertaking to improve fish habitat and learn more about permitting Special Recreational Permits (SRPs) in Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). The second day RAC members will meet briefly at the office at 8:00 to begin a tour of the new wilderness area and several of the released WSAs to gain a better understanding of the affects it will have on BLM-managed lands.

    All meetings are open to the public. The public may present written comments to the Council. Each formal Council meeting will also have time allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation, tour transportation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact the BLM as provided below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah Wheeler, RAC Coordinator, Idaho Falls District, 1405 Hollipark Dr., Idaho Falls, ID 83401. Telephone: (208) 524-7550. Email: [email protected]

    Dated: August 18, 2015. Sarah Wheeler, Idaho Falls District Resource Advisory Coordinator.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21099 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement [Docket ID BSEE-2015-0009; OMB Control Number 1014-0007; 15XE1700DX EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000] Information Collection Activities: Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast Line; Submitted for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) is notifying the public that we have submitted to OMB an information collection request (ICR) to renew approval of the paperwork requirements in the regulations under Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast Line. This notice also provides the public a second opportunity to comment on the revised paperwork burden of these regulatory requirements.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments by September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments by either fax (202) 395-5806 or email ([email protected]) directly to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior (1014-0007). Please provide a copy of your comments to BSEE by any of the means below.

    • Electronically go to http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter BSEE-2015-0009 then click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view all related materials. We will post all comments.

    • Email [email protected], fax (703) 787-1546, or mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior; Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; Regulations and Standards Branch; ATTN: Cheryl Blundon; 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference ICR 1014-0007 in your comment and include your name and return address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cheryl Blundon, Regulations and Standards Branch, (703) 787-1607, to request additional information about this ICR. To see a copy of the entire ICR submitted to OMB, go to http://www.reginfo.gov (select Information Collection Review, Currently Under Review).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 30 CFR 254, Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast Line.

    OMB Control Number: 1014-0007.

    Abstract: Section 2(b)(3) of E.O. 12777 delegated to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) those responsibilities under section 311(j)(1)(C) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) (October 18, 1991; 56 FR 54757), requiring the Secretary to establish procedures, methods, and requirements for equipment to prevent and contain discharges of oil and hazardous substances from offshore facilities, including associated pipelines. Under section 2(d)(3) of E.O. 12777, section 311(j)(5) of FWPCA, and section 4202(b)(4) of OPA, the Secretary is required to issue regulations requiring the owners or operators of offshore facilities, including associated pipelines, to prepare and submit response plans that ensure the availability of private spill-response personnel and equipment and to permit the operation of offshore facilities, including associated pipelines, without approved response plans if certain conditions are met. Under section 2(e)(3) of E.O. 12777 and section 311(j)(6)(A) of FWPCA, the Secretary must require periodic inspections of containment booms and equipment used to remove discharges at offshore facilities, including associated pipelines. The Secretary has redelegated these responsibilities to the Director, BSEE.

    The FWPCA, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), requires that a spill-response plan be submitted for offshore facilities prior to February 18, 1993. The OPA specifies that after that date, an offshore facility may not handle, store, or transport oil unless a plan has been submitted. Regulations at 30 CFR 254 establish requirements for spill-response plans for oil-handling facilities seaward of the coast line, including associated pipelines.

    In addition, BSEE also issues various Notices to Lessees (NTLs) and Operators to clarify and provide additional guidance on some aspects of the regulations, as well as forms to capture the data and information.

    Regulations implementing these responsibilities are among those delegated to BSEE. Responses are mandatory or are required to obtain or retain a benefit. No questions of a sensitive nature are asked. BSEE protects information considered proprietary under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and DOI's implementing regulations (43 CFR 2), and under regulations at 30 CFR part 250.197, Data and information to be made available to the public or for limited inspection, 30 CFR part 252, OCS Oil and Gas Information Program.

    BSEE uses the information collected under 30 CFR 254 to determine compliance with OPA by lessees/operators. Specifically, BSEE needs the information to:

    • Determine that lessees/operators have an adequate plan and are sufficiently prepared to implement a quick and effective response to a discharge of oil from their facilities or operations.

    • Review plans prepared under the regulations of a State and submitted to BSEE to satisfy the requirements in 30 CFR 254 to ensure that they meet minimum requirements of OPA.

    • Verify that personnel involved in oil-spill response are properly trained and familiar with the requirements of the spill-response plans and to lead and witness spill-response exercises.

    • Assess the sufficiency and availability of contractor equipment and materials.

    • Verify that sufficient quantities of equipment are available and in working order.

    • Oversee spill-response efforts and maintain official records of pollution events.

    • Assess the efforts of lessees/operators to prevent oil spills or prevent substantial threats of such discharges.

    Frequency: On occasion, monthly, annually, biennially and as required by regulations.

    Description of Respondents: Potential respondents comprise OCS Federal oil, gas, or sulphur lessees and/or operators.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden: The estimated annual hour burden for this information collection is a total of 74,461 hours. The following chart details the individual components and estimated hour burdens. In calculating the burdens, we assumed that respondents perform certain requirements in the normal course of their activities. We consider these to be usual and customary and took that into account in estimating the burden.

    Burden Table Citation 30 CFR 254 and NTLs Reporting requirement * Hour
  • burden
  • Average number
  • of annual
  • responses
  • Annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • (rounded)
  • Subpart A—General 1(a) thru (d); 2(a); 3 thru 5; 7; 20 thru 29; 44(b); 47(a)(3); 51 Submit spill response plan for OCS facilities and related documents/copies of referenced documents; any additional information necessary for compliance purposes 192.8 18 new plans 3,470 1(e) Request BSEE jurisdiction over facility landward of coast line (no recent request received) 0.4 2 requests 1 2(b) Submit certification of capability to respond to worst case discharge or substantial threat of such 15.8 18 certification 284 2(c) Request deadline extension for submission of revised plan 2 8 extensions 16 8 Appeal BSEE orders or decisions per 30 CFR Part 290 Exempt under 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2), (c). 0 Subtotal 46 responses 3,771 Subpart B—Oil-Spill Response Plans for Outer Continental Shelf Facilities Subpart B 52 Requirements for your oil-spill response plans Burden included with specific requirements under subparts A and D. 0 30 Submit and/or resubmit revised spill response plan for OCS facilities at least every 2 years or within 15 days whenever certain changes occur (see (b)(1-4) or (see (e)(1-3)) 62 159 revised plans 9,858 30 Notify BSEE of no change to your plan 1 1 plan 1 Subtotal 160 responses 9,859 Subpart C—Related Requirements for OCS Facilities 40 Make records of all OSRO-provided services, equipment, personnel available to BSEE 7 40 records 280 41 Conduct annual training; retain training records for 2 years 149 138 plans holders/operators 20,562 42(a) thru (e) Conduct triennial response plan exercise; retain exercise records for 3 years 215 138 exercises 29,670 42(f) Inform BSEE 30 days before the date of any exercise (triennial) 1.3 138 notifications 179 43 Inspect response equipment monthly; retain inspection & maintenance records for 2 years 10.5 780 (65 sites × 12 months) 8,190 44(b) Request approval to use a different efficiency factor for specific oil recovery devices; submit evidence to demonstrate the request 1.5 1 request 2 46(a) NTL Notify NRC of all oil spills from owner/operator facility Burden would be included in the NRC inventory. 0 46(b) NTL(s) Notify BSEE of oil spills of one barrel or more from owner/operator facility; submit follow-up report; after catastrophic event may be requested to meet w/BSEE to discuss storm recovery strategies/pollution 2 6 notifications & reports 12 46(c) Notify BSEE & responsible party of oil spills from operations at another facility 1.8 24 notifications 43 47(d) Request instructions on how to calculate volume of WDC scenario if not listed in § 203.47(a-c) 0.9 1 request 1 Subtotal 1,266 responses 58,939 Subpart D—Oil Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located in State Waters Seaward of the Coast Line 50; 52 Submit response plan for facility in State waters following format for OCS plan 46.3 13 plans 602 50; 51; 52 Submit response plan for facility in State waters by modifying existing OCS plan 14.3 50 plans 715 50; 53 Submit response plan for facility in State waters developed under State requirements including all information as required in these sections 40 8 plans 320 54 Submit description of oil-spill prevention procedures and demonstrate compliance; include any industry safety and pollution prevention standards your facility meets 3.8 67 submissions 255 Subtotal 138 responses 1,892 Total Hour Burden 1,610 responses 74,461 * In the future, BSEE will be allowing the option of electronic reporting for certain requirements.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden: We have not identified any 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 a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond.

    Comments: Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.,) requires each agency “. . . to provide notice . . . and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information . . .” Agencies must specifically solicit comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the collection is necessary or useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of technology.

    To comply with the public consultation process, on May 29, 2015, we published a Federal Register notice (80 FR 30724) announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval. The notice provided the required 60-day comment period. In addition, § 254.9 provides the OMB Control Number for the information collection requirements imposed by these regulations. The regulation also informs the public that they may comment at any time on the collections of information and provides the address to which they should send comments. We received two comments in response to the Federal Register notice: One from the Marine Mammal Commission in support of the Bureau's request and one comment from a private citizen that was not germane to the PRA.

    Public Availability of Comments: 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: August 7, 2015. Robert W. Middleton, Deputy Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21102 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement [Docket ID BSEE-2015-0007; OMB Control Number 1014-0013; 15XE1700DX EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000] Information Collection Activities: Global Positioning Systems (GPS) for Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) NTL; Submitted for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    30-day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) is notifying the public that we have submitted to OMB an information collection request (ICR) to renew approval of the paperwork requirements associated with subpart A, General, and related documents. This notice also provides the public a second opportunity to comment on the revised paperwork burden of these regulatory requirements.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments by September 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments by either fax (202) 395-5806 or email ([email protected]) directly to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior (1014-0013). Please provide a copy of your comments to BSEE by any of the means below.

    • Electronically go to http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter BSEE-2015-0007 then click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view all related materials. We will post all comments.

    • Email [email protected], fax (703) 787-1546, or mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior; Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; Regulations and Standards Branch; ATTN: Cheryl Blundon; 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference ICR 1014-0013 in your comment and include your name and return address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cheryl Blundon, Regulations and Standards Branch, (703) 787-1607, to request additional information about this ICR. To see a copy of the entire ICR submitted to OMB, go to http://www.reginfo.gov (select Information Collection Review, Currently Under Review).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Notice to Lessees and/or Operators (NTL)—Gulf of Mexico OCS Region—GPS (Global Positioning System) for MODUs (Mobile Offshore Drilling Units).

    OMB Control Number: 1014-0013.

    Abstract: The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act at 43 U.S.C. 1334 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to prescribe rules and regulations necessary for the administration of the leasing provisions of that Act related to mineral resources on the OCS. Such rules and regulations will apply to all operations conducted under a lease, right-of-way, or a right-of-use and easement. Operations on the OCS must preserve, protect, and develop oil and natural gas resources in a manner that is consistent with the need to make such resources available to meet the Nation's energy needs as rapidly as possible; to balance orderly energy resource development with protection of human, marine, and coastal environments; to ensure the public a fair and equitable return on the resources of the OCS; to preserve and maintain free enterprise competition; and to ensure that the extent of oil and natural gas resources of the OCS is assessed at the earliest practicable time. Section 43 U.S.C. 1332(6) states that “operations in the outer Continental Shelf should be conducted in a safe manner by well-trained personnel using technology, precautions, and techniques sufficient to prevent or minimize the likelihood of blowouts, loss of well control, fires, spillages, physical obstruction to other users of the waters or subsoil and seabed, or other occurrences which may cause damage to the environment or to property, or endanger life or health.”

    To carry out these responsibilities, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) issues regulations to ensure that operations in the OCS will meet statutory requirements; provide for safety and protect the environment; and result in diligent exploration, development, and production of OCS leases. In addition, we also issue Notice to Lessees (NTLs) that provide clarification, explanation, and interpretation of our regulations. These NTLs are used to convey purely informational material and to cover situations that might not be adequately addressed in our regulations.

    The subject of this information collection (IC) request is an NTL, GPS (Global Positioning System) for MODUs (Mobile Offshore Drilling Units). This NTL requires MODUs to be equipped with multiple tracking/location devices so that during a storm event (hurricane) the respondent, as well as BSEE, will have the capability to monitor their locations. This NTL also provides BSEE GPS data access thereby granting BSEE real-time location information as needed for the Hurricane Response Team (HRT).

    The primary regulation for this IC is 30 CFR 250, subpart A, approved under the OMB Control Number 1014-0013. However, in connection with this subpart, the burden requirements in the NTL are in addition to the currently approved paperwork burdens under those requirements.

    Regulations implementing these responsibilities are among those delegated to BSEE.

    Responses are required to obtain or retain a benefit. No questions of a sensitive nature are asked. BSEE protects information considered proprietary under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and DOIs implementing regulations (43 CFR 2), and under regulations at 30 CFR part 250.197, Data and information to be made available to the public or for limited inspection, 30 CFR part 252, OCS Oil and Gas Information Program.

    After Hurricane Ike in 2008, due to the loss of a MODU, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and US Army Corps of Engineers conducted numerous side-sonar searches for dangerous submerged debris in several places in and around the Gulf of Mexico waters, including off the Louisiana coast, the Houston Ship Channel, and the Galveston areas. These searches continued for numerous days, with multiple government agencies, and covered well over 75 square statute miles. Nothing was found.

    On March 6, 2009, a 900-ft Norwegian flagged tank ship carrying approximately 130K MT of crude oil, reported listing 8 degrees and taking on water about 65-miles offshore of Galveston, TX. It was determined that the tanker had hit the sunken MODU that was submerged approximately 24 feet below the surface of the water, that had been missing since Hurricane Ike. The MODU was displaced off the coast of Louisiana during Hurricane Ike and ended up off the coast of Galveston, roughly 105 miles away.

    The information to be collected is necessary for BSEE to assess the whereabouts of any MODU becoming unmoored due to extreme weather situations; as well as, to follow the path of that facility to determine if other facilities/pipelines, etc., were damaged in any way. The offshore oil and gas industry will use the information to determine the safest and quickest way to either remove the obstacles or to fix and reuse them.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Description of Respondents: Potential respondents comprise OCS Federal oil, gas, or sulphur lessees and/or operators.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden: The estimated annual hour burden for this information collection is a total of 1 hour. The following chart details the individual components and estimated hour burdens. In calculating the burdens, we assumed that respondents perform certain requirements in the normal course of their activities. We consider these to be usual and customary and took that into account in estimating the burden.

    Burden Table NTL-GPS for MODUs
  • Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
  • Hour burden Average number of
  • annual responses
  • Annual burden hours
    Non-Hour Cost Burdens 1—Notify BSEE with tracking/locator data access and supporting information; notify BSEE Hurricane Response Team as soon as operator is aware a rig has moved off location 15 mins 1 rig * 1 hour (rounded). 15 mins 1 notification.* 2—Purchase and install tracking/locator devices—(these are replacement GPS devices or new rigs) 20 devices per year for replacement and/or new × $325.00 = $6,500. 3—Pay monthly tracking fee for GPS devices already placed on MODUs/rig 40 rigs at $50/month = $600/year = $24,000. 4—Rent GPS devices and pay monthly tracking fee per rig 40 rigs @$1,800 per year = $72,000. Total Burden 102 Responses 1 Hour. $102,500 non-hour cost burden.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden: Under this collection, the lessees and operators have already installed the GPS systems; therefore, we estimate a non-hour cost burden of $102,500 which consists of:

    —Replacing/repairing locator devices and/or adding devices for new MODUs added to the group;

    —paying monthly rental fees for GPS tracking purposes only, or

    —paying rental fees for the GPS devices themselves as well as associated tracking information.

    We have not identified any other non-hour cost burdens associated with this collection of information. See burden table for a breakdown of the burdens.

    Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond.

    Comments: Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) requires each agency “. . . to provide notice . . . and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information . . .” Agencies must specifically solicit comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the collection is necessary or useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of technology.

    To comply with the public consultation process, on May 22, 2015, we published a Federal Register notice (80 FR 29743) announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval. The notice provided the required 60-day comment period. In addition, § 250.199 provides the OMB Control Numbers for the information collection requirements imposed by the 30 CFR 250 regulations. The regulations also inform the public that they may comment at any time on a collection of information and provide the address to which they should send comments. The required PRA public disclosure and comment statement is displayed on the NTL. We received no comments in response to the Federal Register notice or unsolicited comments.

    Public Availability of Comments: 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: August 5, 2015. Robert W. Middleton, Deputy Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21103 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith, DN 3084; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing under section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR § 210.8(b)).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS,1 and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

    1 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at USITC.2 The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS.3 Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    2 United States International Trade Commission (USITC): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    3 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Pathway Innovations & Technologies, Inc. on August 20, 2015. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain document cameras for use therewith. The complaint names as respondents Recordex USA, Inc. of Long Island City, NY; QOMO HiteVision, LLC of Wixom, MI; and Adesso, Inc. of Walnut, CA. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(j).

    Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments, not to exceed five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments, on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

    In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

    (i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

    (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

    (iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

    (iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

    (v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

    Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation.

    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3084”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures).4 Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

    4 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf.

    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.5

    5 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

    Issued: August 20, 2015.

    By order of the Commission.

    Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21064 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Comment Request for Information Collection for ETA 191, Statement of Expenditures and Financial Adjustments of Federal Funds for Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees and Ex-Servicemembers Report, Extension Without Revisions AGENCY:

    Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (Department), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This program helps ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed.

    Currently, ETA is soliciting comments concerning the collection of data about Expenditures and Financial Adjustments of Federal Funds for Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees and Ex-Servicemembers.

    DATES:

    Submit written comments to the office listed in the addresses section below on or before October 26, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Cindy Le, Office of Unemployment Insurance, Room S-4524, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone number: 202-693-2829 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-877-889-5627 (TTY/TDD). Email: [email protected] To obtain a copy of the proposed information collection request (ICR), please contact the person listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Public Law 97-362, Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1982, amended the Unemployment Compensation for Ex-Sevicemembers (UCX) law (5 U.S.C. 8509), and Public Law 96-499, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, amended the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE) law (5 U.S.C. 8501, et. seq.) requiring each Federal employing agency to pay the costs of regular and extended UCFE/UCX benefits paid to its employees by the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). The ETA 191 report submitted quarterly by each SWA shows the amount of benefits that should be charged to each Federal employing agency. The Office of Unemployment Insurance uses this information to aggregate the SWA quarterly charges and submit one official bill to each Federal agency being charged. Federal agencies then reimburse the Federal Employees Compensation Account maintained by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

    II. Review Focus

    The Department is particularly interested in comments which:

    • 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 submissions of responses.

    III. Current Actions

    Type of Review: Extension without changes.

    Title: Statement of Expenditures and Financial Adjustments of Federal Funds for Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees and Ex-Servicemembers, ETA 191.

    OMB Number: 1205-0162.

    Affected Public: State Workforce Agencies.

    Estimated Total Annual Respondents: 53.

    Annual Frequency: Quarterly.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 212.

    Average Time per Response: 6 Hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,272 Hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Cost Burden: There is no cost to respondents.

    We will summarize and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the ICR, the comments received in response to this comment request; they will also become a matter of public record.

    Portia Wu, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21123 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Blasting and the Use of Explosives ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Blasting and the Use of Explosives,” 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 September 25, 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=201508-1218-001 (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, 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-OSHA, 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:

    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 Blasting and the Use of Explosives Standard information collection requirements codified in regulations 29 CFR 1926, subpart U. The Standard specifies the following information collection requirements for an Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) covered employer subject to the Standard: (1) Maintain an inventory and use record of all explosives, in use and not in use; (2) notify appropriate authorities in the event of any loss, theft, or unauthorized entry into a magazine; (3) display adequate signs warning against the use of mobile radio transmitters on all roads within 1,000 feet of blasting operations; (4) certify and maintain a record of alternative provisions made adequately to prevent any premature firing of electric blasting caps; (5) notify operators and/or owners of overhead power lines, communication lines, utility lines, or other services and structures when blasting operations will take place in proximity to those lines, services, or structures; (5) notify the hoist operator prior to transporting explosives or blasting agents in a shaft conveyance; (6) perform a weekly electrical system inspection on any truck used to transport explosives underground and maintain the most recent inspection certification that includes the inspection date, a serial number or other identifier of the truck inspected, and the signature of the person who performed the inspection; (7) post a code of blasting agents at one or more conspicuous places at the operation; and (8) place danger signs warning of blasting agents at suitable locations. A blaster must also (1) maintain an accurate and up-to-date record of explosives, blasting agents, and blasting supplies used in a blast and (2) maintain an accurate running inventory of all explosives and blasting agents stored on the operation. OSH Act sections 2(b)(9), (6), and 8(c) authorize this information collection. See 29 U.S.C. 651(b)(9), 655, and 657(c).

    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 1218-0217.

    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 June 11, 2015 (80 FR 33295).

    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 1218-0217. 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-OSHA.

    Title of Collection: Blasting and the Use of Explosives.

    OMB Control Number: 1218-0217.

    Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for profits.

    Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 201.

    Total Estimated Number of Responses: 818.

    Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 1,666 hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

    Dated: August 20, 2015. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21115 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO): Meeting AGENCY:

    Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS), Department of Labor.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of a forthcoming meeting of the ACVETEO. The ACVETEO will discuss the VETS core programs and services regarding efforts that assist veterans seeking employment and raise employer awareness as to the advantages of hiring veterans. There will be an opportunity for individuals or organizations to address the committee. Any individual or organization that wishes to do so should contact Mr. Gregory Green at 202-693-4734.

    Individuals who will need accommodations for a disability in order to attend the meeting (e.g., interpreting services, assistive listening devices, and/or materials in alternative format) should notify the Advisory Committee no later than Friday, September 25, 2015 by contacting Mr. Gregory Green at 202-693-4734. Requests made after this date will be reviewed, but availability of the requested accommodations cannot be guaranteed. The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. This Notice also describes the functions of the ACVETEO. Notice of this meeting is required under Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This document is intended to notify the general public.

    Date and Time: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 beginning at 9:00 a.m. and ending at approximately 4:00 p.m. (EST).

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of Labor, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, C-5310 Room 1B. Members of the public are encouraged to arrive early to allow for security clearance into the Frances Perkins Building.

    Security Instructions: Meeting participants should use the visitors' entrance to access the Frances Perkins Building, one block north of Constitution Avenue at 3rd and C Streets NW. For security purposes meeting participants must:

    1. Present a valid photo ID to receive a visitor badge.

    2. Know the name of the event being attended: the meeting event is the Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO).

    3. Visitor badges are issued by the security officer at the Visitor Entrance located at 3rd and C Streets NW. When receiving a visitor badge, the security officer will retain the visitor's photo ID until the visitor badge is returned to the security desk.

    4. Laptops and other electronic devices may be inspected and logged for identification purposes.

    5. Due to limited parking options, Metro's Judiciary Square station is the easiest way to access the Frances Perkins Building.

    Notice of Intent to Attend the Meeting: All meeting participants are being asked to submit a notice of intent to attend by Friday, September 18, 2015, via email to Mr. Gregory Green at [email protected], subject line “September 2015 ACVETEO Meeting.”

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Gregory Green, Assistant Designated Federal Official for the ACVETEO, (202) 693-4734.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The ACVETEO is a Congressionally mandated advisory committee authorized under title 38, U.S. Code, section 4110 and subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, as amended. The ACVETEO is responsible for: Assessing employment and training needs of veterans; determining the extent to which the programs and activities of the U.S. Department of Labor meet these needs; assisting to conduct outreach to employers seeking to hire veterans; making recommendations to the Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary for VETS, with respect to outreach activities and employment and training needs of Veterans; and carrying out such other activities necessary to make required reports and recommendations. The ACVETEO meets at least quarterly.

    Agenda 9:00 a.m.—Welcome and remarks, Teresa W. Gerton, Acting Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training Service 9:05 a.m.—Administrative Business, Gregory Green, Designated Federal Official 9:15 a.m.—Outreach Subcommittee Briefing and Discussion on finalizing recommendations 9:45 a.m.—Break 10:00 a.m.—Focused Populations Subcommittee Briefing and Discussion on finalizing recommendations 10:30 a.m.—Break 10:45 a.m.—Transition Subcommittee Briefing and Discussion on finalizing recommendations 11:15 p.m.—Break 11:30 p.m.—Lunch 12:00 p.m.—Subcommittees breakout drafting whitepaper on final recommendations 3:30 p.m.—Public Forum, Gregory Green Designated Federal Official 4:00 p.m.—Adjourn Signed in Washington, DC, this 21st day of August, 2015. Teresa W. Gerton, Acting Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21213 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-79-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Senior Executive Service; Appointment of Members to the Performance Review Board

    Title 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) provides that Notice of the Appointment of the individual to serve as a member of the Performance Review Board of the Senior Executive Service shall be published in the Federal Register.

    The following individuals are hereby appointed to serve on the Department's Performance Review Board:

    Permanent Membership Chair—Deputy Secretary—Christopher P. Lu Vice-Chair—Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management—T. Michael Kerr Alternate Vice-Chair—Director, Human Resources Center—Sydney T. Rose Executive Secretary—Director, Executive Resources—Lucy Cunningham Performance Officer—Director, Performance Management Center—Holly A. Donnelly Rotating Membership—Appointments Expire on 09/30/16 BLS Jay A. Mousa, Associate Commissioner for Office of Field Operations BLS Nancy F. Ruiz de Gamboa, Assistant Commissioner for Office of Administration ETA Leslie G. Range, Regional Administrator, Atlanta MSHA Patricia W. Silvey, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations OASAM Cheryl A. Greenaugh, Director, Chief Information Program Management Office OASAM Charlotte A. Hayes, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy OASAM Naomi M. Barry-Perez, Director, Civil Rights Center OFCCP Debra A. Carr, Division of Policy, Planning and Program Development OFCCP Diana S. Sen, Regional Director, New York OLMS Stephen J. Willertz, Director, Office of Enforcement and International Union Audits OWCP Antonio A. Rios, Director, Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Program SOL Michael D. Felsen, Regional Solicitor, Boston SOL Jeffrey L. Nesvet, Associate Solicitor for Employment and Training Legal Services WB Joan Y. Harrigan-Farrelly, Deputy Director WHD Patricia J. Davidson, Deputy Administrator, Office of Program Operations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Lucy Cunningham, Director, Office of Executive Resources, Room N2453, U.S. Department of Labor, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202) 693-6624.

    Signed at Washington, DC on 19th day of August 2015. Thomas E. Perez, Secretary of Labor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21070 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-23-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a meeting on September 9, 2015, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    The meeting will be open to public attendance with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of the ACRS, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

    Wednesday, September 9, 2015—12:00 p.m. until 1:00 p.m.

    The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee.

    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Quynh Nguyen (Telephone 301-415-5844 or Email: [email protected]) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 1, 2014 (79 FR 59307).

    Information regarding changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with the DFO if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience.

    If attending this meeting, please enter through the One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. After registering with security, please contact Mr. Theron Brown (240-888-9835) to be escorted to the meeting room.

    Dated: August 19, 2015. Mark L. Banks, Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21167 Filed 8-25-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2015-0079] Information Collection: NRC's Policy Statement on Cooperation With States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Production and Utilization Facilities 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 this renewal of an existing information collection. The information collection is entitled, “NRC's Policy Statement on Cooperation with States at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants and other Nuclear Production and Utilization Facilities.” The NRC has a number of programs and activities that involve coordinating with States, requesting their input on proposed policies and rulemakings, and exchanging information with the States on a wide range of topics. The NRC has entered into cooperative agreements with States to conduct security inspections to verify that their materials licensees are in compliance with the NRC's orders requiring additional measures to enhance security at their facilities and to provide the NRC with information arising from their inspections.

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 26, 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 (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject):

    • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov