Federal Register Vol. 80, No.173,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 173 (September 8, 2015)

Page Range53691-54221
FR Document

80_FR_173
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 53757 - Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking ProceedingPDF
80 FR 53764 - Office of the Chief Economist; Public Comment Period for Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System Assessment ReportPDF
80 FR 53773 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
80 FR 53902 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
80 FR 53921 - Open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notices and Correspondence Project CommitteePDF
80 FR 53922 - Open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Communications Project CommitteePDF
80 FR 53922 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 53919 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project CommitteePDF
80 FR 53919 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 5472.PDF
80 FR 53919 - Open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project CommitteePDF
80 FR 53923 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project CommitteePDF
80 FR 53754 - Safety Zone; Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular, Atlantic Ocean; Jacksonville Beach, FLPDF
80 FR 53918 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint CommitteePDF
80 FR 53921 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects CommitteePDF
80 FR 53920 - Members of Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardsPDF
80 FR 53923 - Fund Availability Under the Grants for Transportation of Veterans in Highly Rural AreasPDF
80 FR 53887 - Certain Audio Processing Hardware and Software Products Containing Same; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Intervenor Status to Conexant Systems Inc. and Waves Audio, Ltd.PDF
80 FR 53914 - Baby Jogger, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
80 FR 53911 - Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
80 FR 53804 - Administration for Children and FamiliesPDF
80 FR 53912 - Maserati S.p.A and Maserati North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
80 FR 53795 - Notice of Termination, 10473 Chipola Community Bank, Marianna, FloridaPDF
80 FR 53795 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10468 Westside Community Bank University Place, WashingtonPDF
80 FR 53795 - Notice of Termination; 10318 Paramount Bank, Farmington Hills, MichiganPDF
80 FR 53796 - Notice of Termination, 10274, NorhWest Bank and Trust Acworth, GeorgiaPDF
80 FR 53796 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10243 Bank of Florida-Tampa Bay, Tampa, FloridaPDF
80 FR 53796 - Notice of Termination; 10201, American National Bank, Parma, OhioPDF
80 FR 53794 - Notice of Termination; 10067 Southern Community Bank, Fayetteville, GAPDF
80 FR 53795 - Notice of Termination; 10066 First National Bank of Anthony, Anthony, KSPDF
80 FR 53886 - Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for a Breach Management Plan for Fire Island National Seashore, New YorkPDF
80 FR 53886 - Amended Meeting Notice for the National Park Service Subsistence Resource Commission for the Cape Krusenstern National MonumentPDF
80 FR 53902 - Quality Assurance Program Description-Design Certification, Early Site Permit and New License ApplicantsPDF
80 FR 53732 - Integrated Hedging Transactions of Qualifying DebtPDF
80 FR 53892 - Entergy Operations, Inc.; Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3PDF
80 FR 53896 - Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes: Meeting NoticePDF
80 FR 53887 - Notice of Proposed Information Collection; Request for Comments for 1029-0094PDF
80 FR 53799 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
80 FR 53801 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
80 FR 53765 - Inviting Applications for the Delta Health Care Services Grant ProgramPDF
80 FR 53811 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 53775 - Manufacturing Extension Partnership Advisory BoardPDF
80 FR 53758 - Amtrak Emergency Routing OrdersPDF
80 FR 53787 - President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and UniversitiesPDF
80 FR 53776 - Western Pacific Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 53776 - Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 53789 - Proposed Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
80 FR 53915 - Six County Association of Governments-Construction and Operation Exemption-A Rail Line Between Levan and Salina, UtahPDF
80 FR 53775 - Pacific Islands Fisheries; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 53799 - Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 53789 - Environmental Management Advisory Board MeetingPDF
80 FR 53904 - SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging CompaniesPDF
80 FR 53812 - Request for Public Comment: 30-Day Proposed Information Collection: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker PositionsPDF
80 FR 53890 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, and Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know ActPDF
80 FR 53803 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 53797 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
80 FR 53794 - Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision Approval, State of MississippiPDF
80 FR 53764 - Rogue and Umpqua Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 53889 - Certain Toner Supply Containers and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based Upon a Consent Order Stipulation and Consent Order; Issuance of a Consent Order; Termination of the InvestigationPDF
80 FR 53802 - A Vapor Containment Performance Protocol for Closed System Transfer Devices Used During Pharmacy Compounding and Administration of Hazardous Drugs; Request for CommentPDF
80 FR 53786 - Defense Personal Property Program (DP3)PDF
80 FR 53891 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Acquisition 360 SurveyPDF
80 FR 53917 - Information Collection Activities: Statutory Authority To Preserve Rail Service (49 U.S.C. 10904-05 and 10907, and 16 U.S.C. 1247(d))PDF
80 FR 53915 - Information Collection Activities: Statutory Licensing and Consolidation AuthorityPDF
80 FR 53890 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActPDF
80 FR 53796 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
80 FR 53797 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
80 FR 53791 - Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
80 FR 53792 - Notice of Commission Staff AttendancePDF
80 FR 53792 - Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C.; Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
80 FR 53891 - Notice of Information CollectionPDF
80 FR 53790 - Midwest Electric Power, Inc.; Supplemental Notice that Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 53790 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
80 FR 53793 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 53807 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Environmental Impact ConsiderationsPDF
80 FR 53903 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 53904 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 53814 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 53814 - National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 53816 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 53813 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 53814 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 53815 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 53817 - National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 53816 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 53805 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 53810 - Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions; Second Edition; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
80 FR 53906 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Adopting a Principles-Based Approach to Prohibit the Misuse of Material, Non-public Information by Market Makers by Deleting Rule 810PDF
80 FR 53905 - Order Granting Greenbacker Renewable Energy Company LLC a Limited ExemptionPDF
80 FR 53905 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change Adopting New Equity Trading Rules Relating to Orders and Modifiers and the Retail Liquidity Program To Reflect the Implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology PlatformPDF
80 FR 53911 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change Adopting New Equity Trading Rules Relating to Trading Halts, Short Sales, Limit Up-Limit Down, and Odd Lots and Mixed Lots To Reflect the Implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology PlatformPDF
80 FR 53759 - Privacy Act of 1974; New System of RecordsPDF
80 FR 53773 - Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission at Singapore Airshow; February 15-19, 2016PDF
80 FR 53777 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Rehabilitation of Jetty A at the Mouth of the Columbia RiverPDF
80 FR 53787 - Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
80 FR 53793 - Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision Approval, State of AlabamaPDF
80 FR 53888 - Chloropicrin From ChinaPDF
80 FR 53753 - Federal Acquisition Regulation; Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 53928 - Solicitation of Nomination for Appointment to the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' IllnessesPDF
80 FR 53888 - Crepe Paper From ChinaPDF
80 FR 53704 - Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates-Passport and Citizenship Services Fee ChangesPDF
80 FR 53691 - List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1040, Amendment No. 1PDF
80 FR 53889 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection; eComments Requested; Request for Recognition of a Non-profit Religious, Charitable, Social Service, or Similar Organization (Form EOIR-31)PDF
80 FR 54172 - Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and ActivitiesPDF
80 FR 53756 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles-Phase 2; Extension of Comment PeriodPDF
80 FR 53817 - Proposed Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program, Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program and Other Programs; Fiscal Year 2016PDF
80 FR 53709 - Streamlining Administrative Regulations for Public Housing: Revisions to Public Housing Flat RentsPDF
80 FR 53739 - National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research EndowmentsPDF
80 FR 53694 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
80 FR 53702 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
80 FR 53700 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
80 FR 53696 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
80 FR 54064 - Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended; System of Records NoticePDF
80 FR 53747 - Reorganization of the Enforcement Bureau's Field OperationsPDF
80 FR 53739 - Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Feather River Air Quality Management District; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 53735 - Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation PlanPDF
80 FR 53757 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation PlanPDF
80 FR 53897 - Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards InformationPDF
80 FR 53712 - On-Site Completion of Construction of Manufactured HomesPDF
80 FR 53933 - Federal Policy for the Protection of Human SubjectsPDF
80 FR 53759 - Notice of Meeting of the National Organic Standards BoardPDF
80 FR 54146 - Revisions to Test Methods, Performance Specifications, and Testing Regulations for Air Emission SourcesPDF

Issue

80 173 Tuesday, September 8, 2015 Contents Agency Agency for International Development PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES Meetings: National Organic Standards Board, 53759 2015-21736 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Forest Service

See

Rural Business-Cooperative Service

PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System Assessment Report; Public Comment Period, 53764 2015-22668 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 53759-53764 2015-22085
Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53797-53802 2015-22529 2015-22549 2015-22550 Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority; Corrections, 53799 2015-22535 Vapor Containment Performance Protocol for Closed System Transfer Devices Used during Pharmacy Compounding and Administration of Hazardous Drugs, 53802-53803 2015-22525 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53803 2015-22530 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53804-53807 2015-22041 2015-22495 2015-22571 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 53773 2015-22652 Coast Guard Coast Guard PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular, Atlantic Ocean; Jacksonville Beach, FL, 53754-53756 2015-22581 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Institute of Standards and Technology

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756
Defense Department Defense Department RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds; Correction, 53753 2015-22060 PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Defense Personal Property Program, 53786-53787 2015-22524 Meetings: Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel, 53787 2015-22068 Education Department Education Department PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Meetings: President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 53787-53789 2015-22541 Energy Department Energy Department See

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office

See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Management Advisory Board, 53789 2015-22534
Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53789-53790 2015-22538 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Feather River Air Quality Management District; Correction, 53739 2015-21939 Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plan, 53735-53739 2015-21938 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plan, 53757 2015-21936 Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles; Phase 2, 53756-53757 2015-22028 Revisions to Test Methods, Performance Specifications, and Testing Regulations for Air Emission Sources, 54146-54169 2015-20768 NOTICES Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision Approval, Alabama, 53793-53794 2015-22063 Authorized Program Revision Approval, Mississippi, 53794 2015-22528 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, 53694-53704 2015-22009 2015-22010 2015-22011 2015-22012 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Reorganization of the Enforcement Bureau's Field Operations, 53747-53753 2015-21963 PROPOSED RULES Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding, 53757 C1--2015--21763 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Termination of Receivership: American National Bank, Parma, OH, 53796 2015-22563 Bank of Florida—Tampa Bay, Tampa, FL, 53796 2015-22564 Chipola Community Bank, Marianna, FL, 53795 2015-22568 First National Bank of Anthony, Anthony, KS, 53795 2015-22561 NorhWest Bank and Trust, Acworth, GA, 53796 2015-22565 Paramount Bank, Farmington Hills, MI, 53795 2015-22566 Southern Community Bank, Fayetteville, GA, 53794-53795 2015-22562 Westside Community Bank, University Place, WA, 53795 2015-22567 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Colorado Interstate Gas Co., LLC, Wyoming Interstate Co., LLC, 53792-53793 2015-22514 Pacific Gas and Electric Co, 53791-53792 2015-22516 Combined Filings, 53790, 53793 2015-22508 2015-22509 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Midwest Electric Power, Inc., 53790-53791 2015-22510 Staff Attendances, 53792 2015-22515 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 53796 2015-22519 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 53797 2015-22518 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Environmental Impact Considerations, 53807-53810 2015-22507 Guidance: Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product -- Responses to Frequently Asked Questions; Second Edition, 53810-53811 2015-22494 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Rogue and Umpqua Resource Advisory Committee, 53764-53765 2015-22527 General Services General Services Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds; Correction, 53753 2015-22060 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

Indian Health Service

See

National Institutes of Health

RULES National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Endowments, 53739-53747 2015-22018 PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities, 54172-54221 2015-22043
Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53811-53812 2015-22545 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department RULES On-Site Completion of Construction of Manufactured Homes, 53712-53732 2015-21774 Streamlining Administrative Regulations for Public Housing; Revisions to Public Housing Flat Rents, 53709-53712 2015-22022 NOTICES Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program: Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program and Other Programs Fiscal Year 2016, 53817-53886 2015-22023 Indian Health Indian Health Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions, 53812-53813 2015-22532 Interior Interior Department See

National Park Service

See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Integrated Hedging Transactions of Qualifying Debt, 53732-53735 2015-22554 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53919, 53922-53923 2015-22584 2015-22588 Meetings: Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee, 53918 2015-22580 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notices and Correspondence Project Committee, 53921 2015-22591 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects Committee, 53921-53922 2015-22578 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee, 53919 2015-22585 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee, 53923 2015-22582 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Communications Project Committee, 53922 2015-22590 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project Committee, 53919-53920 2015-22583 Members of Senior Executive Service Performance Review Boards, 53920-53921 2015-22577 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 54064-54143 2015-21980 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission at Singapore Airshow, 53773-53775 2015-22072 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Audio Processing Hardware and Software Products Containing Same, 53887-53888 2015-22575 Certain Toner Supply Containers and Components Thereof, 53889 2015-22526 Chloropicrin from China, 53888 2015-22061 Crepe Paper from China, 53888 2015-22056 Justice Department Justice Department PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Acquisition 360 Survey, 53891 2015-22523 Request for Recognition of a Non-profit Religious, Charitable, Social Service, or Similar Organization, 53889-53890 2015-22052 Proposed Consent Decrees under CERCLA, 53890 2015-22520 Proposed Consent Decrees under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, etc., 53890-53891 2015-22531 Labor Department Labor Department PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds; Correction, 53753 2015-22060 PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53891-53892 2015-22512 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles; Phase 2, 53756-53757 2015-22028 NOTICES Inconsequential Noncompliance; Petitions: Baby Jogger, LLC, 53914-53915 2015-22573 Maserati S.p.A and Maserati North America, Inc., 53912-53913 2015-22569 Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., 53911-53912 2015-22572 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: Manufacturing Extension Partnership Advisory Board, 53775 2015-22544 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 53814-53815 2015-22504 Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 53813-53816 2015-22498 2015-22499 2015-22500 2015-22501 2015-22502 National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, 53814 2015-22503 National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, 53817 2015-22497 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 53816-53817 2015-22496 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Meetings: Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico -- Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review, 53776-53777 2015-22539 Pacific Islands Fisheries, 53775-53776 2015-22536 Western Pacific Management Council, 53776 2015-22540 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Rehabilitation of Jetty A at the Mouth of the Columbia River, 53777-53786 2015-22069 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Breach Management Plan, Fire Island National Seashore, NY, 53886-53887 2015-22560 Meetings: Subsistence Resource Commission for the Cape Krusenstern National Monument; Amendments, 53886 2015-22559 National Science National Science Foundation PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission RULES List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1040, Amendment No. 1, 53691-53694 2015-22053 NOTICES Applications and Amendments Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations, etc., 53897-53902 2015-21795 License Amendment Applications: Entergy Operations, Inc., Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3, 53892-53896 2015-22553 Meetings: Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes, 53896-53897 2015-22552 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 53902 2015-22613 Standard Review Plans: Quality Assurance Program Description—Design Certification, Early Site Permit and New License Applicants, 53902-53903 2015-22555 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 53903-53904 2015-22505 2015-22506 Rural Business Rural Business-Cooperative Service NOTICES Grant Applications: Delta Health Care Services, 53765-53773 2015-22546 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Limited Exemption Orders: Greenbacker Renewable Energy Co., LLC, 53905-53906 2015-22492 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies, 53904-53905 2015-22533 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: ISE Gemini, LLC, 53906-53911 2015-22493 NYSE Arca, Inc., 53905, 53911 2015-22490 2015-22491 Social Social Security Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 State Department State Department RULES Schedule of Fees for Consular Services: Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates; Passport and Citizenship Services Fee Changes, 53704-53709 2015-22054 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53887 2015-22551 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board PROPOSED RULES Amtrak Emergency Routing Orders, 53758 2015-22543 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Statutory Authority to Preserve Rail Service, 53917-53918 2015-22522 Statutory Licensing and Consolidation Authority, 53915-53917 2015-22521 Construction and Operation Exemptions: Six County Association of Governments, Rail Line between Levan and Salina, UT, 53915 2015-22537 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Surface Transportation Board

PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756
Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department PROPOSED RULES Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 53933-54061 2015-21756 NOTICES Fund Availability: Grants for Transportation of Veterans in Highly Rural Areas, 53923-53928 2015-22576 Requests for Nominations: Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses, 53928-53929 2015-22057 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Agency for International Development, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Agriculture Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Commerce Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Defense Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Education Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Energy Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Environmental Protection Agency, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Health and Human Services Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Homeland Security Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Justice Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Labor Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 53933-54061 2015-21756 National Science Foundation, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Social Security Administration, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Transportation Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Veterans Affairs Department, 53933-54061 2015-21756 Part III Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, 54064-54143 2015-21980 Part IV Environmental Protection Agency, 54146-54169 2015-20768 Part V Health and Human Services Department, 54172-54221 2015-22043 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.

80 173 Tuesday, September 8, 2015 Rules and Regulations NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72 [NRC-2015-0067] RIN 3150-AJ58 List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1040, Amendment No. 1 AGENCY:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirming the effective date of September 8, 2015, for the direct final rule that was published in the Federal Register on June 23, 2015. This direct final rule amended the NRC's spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Holtec International, Inc. (Holtec), HI-STORM (Holtec International Storage Module) Underground Maximum Capacity (UMAX) Canister Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to add Amendment No. 1 to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1040. Amendment No. 1 provides a seismically enhanced version of the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, identified as the “Most Severe Earthquake (MSE)” version that could be used in areas with higher seismic demands than those analyzed previously. Amendment No. 1 also includes minor physical design changes to help ensure structural integrity of the amended system. These are the addition of a hold-down system to the closure lid; replacing the fill material in the interstitial spaces between the cavity enclosure containers (CECs) surrounding the casks with 3000 psi concrete; strengthening the multi-purpose canister (MPC) guides, and engineering the guides' nominal gap with the MPC to be tighter than the original HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design.

DATES:

Effective date: The effective date of September 8, 2015, for the direct final rule published June 23, 2015 (80 FR 35829), is confirmed.

ADDRESSES:

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0067 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0067. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]

NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Solomon Sahle, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3781; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Discussion

On June 23, 2015 (80 FR 35829), the NRC published a direct final rule amending its regulations in § 72.214 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) by revising the Holtec HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to add Amendment No. 1 to CoC No. 1040. Amendment No. 1 provides a seismically enhanced version of the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, identified as the “Most Severe Earthquake (MSE)” version that could be used in areas with higher seismic demands than those analyzed previously. Amendment No. 1 also includes minor physical design changes to help ensure structural integrity of the amended system. These are the addition of a hold-down system to the closure lid; replacing the fill material in the interstitial spaces between the CECs surrounding the casks with 3000 psi concrete; strengthening the MPC guides, and engineering the guides' nominal gap with the MPC to be tighter than the original HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design.

II. Public Comments on the Companion Proposed Rule

In the direct final rule, the NRC stated that if no significant adverse comments were received, the direct final rule would become effective on September 8, 2015. The NRC received 10 comment submittals on the companion proposed rule (80 FR 35872). Electronic copies of these comments can be obtained from the Federal Rulemaking Web site, http://www.regulations.gov, by searching for Docket ID NRC-2015-0067. The comments are also available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML15210A145, ML15210A150, ML15210A151, ML15210A155, ML15210A169, ML15210A164, ML15210A166, ML15210A177, ML15210A181, and ML15210A184. For the reasons discussed in more detail in Section III, “Public Comment Analysis,” of this document, none of the comments received are considered significant adverse comments as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6, “United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook” (ADAMS Accession No. ML052720461).

III. Public Comment Analysis

The NRC received 10 comment submittals on the proposed rule, many raising multiple and overlapping issues. As explained in the June 23, 2015, direct final rule (80 FR 35829), the NRC would withdraw the direct final rule only if it received a “significant adverse comment.” This is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and significant if:

(1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For example, a substantive response is required when:

(a) The comment causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis;

(b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or

(c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC staff.

(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition.

(3) The comment causes the NRC staff to make a change (other than editorial) to the rule, CoC, or Technical Specifications (TSs).

The NRC determined that none of the comments submitted on this direct final rule met any of these criteria. The comments either were already addressed by the NRC staff's safety evaluation report (SER) (ADAMS Accession No. ML15070A149), or were beyond the scope of this rulemaking. The NRC has not made any changes to the direct final rule as a result of the public comments. However, the NRC is taking this opportunity to respond to some of the comments in an effort to clarify information about the 10 CFR part 72 CoC rulemaking process.

For rulemakings amending or revising a CoC, the scope of the rulemaking is limited to the specific changes requested by the applicant in the request for the amendment or amendment revision. Therefore, comments about the system or spent fuel storage in general that are not applicable to the changes requested by the applicant are outside the scope of this rulemaking. Comments about details of the particular system that is the subject of the rulemaking, but that are not being addressed by the specific changes requested, have already been resolved in prior rulemakings. Persons who have questions or concerns about prior rulemakings and the resulting final rules may consider the NRC's process for petitions for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802. Additionally, safety concerns about any NRC-regulated activity may be reported to the NRC in accordance with the guidance posted on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/allegations/safety-concern.html. This Web page provides information on how to notify the NRC of emergency or non-emergency issues.

The NRC identified the following issues raised in the comments, and the NRC's responses to these issues follow.

(1) Potential Supersonic Shear Earthquakes and Site Specific Seismic Standards

Several commenters raised concerns regarding the ability of this CoC system to withstand seismic events, particularly if the system were to be used at specific sites with known seismic activity, such as San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). These commenters stated that Holtec casks have not been tested for newly discovered potential Supersonic Shear Earthquakes, which might result in a rupture after Supersonic Shear Earthquake Events. According to the comments, cask venting can be blocked after a tsunami leading to cask failure.

NRC Response

These comments are outside the scope of this rulemaking because they are not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raise concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of the CoC systems. This rule adds Amendment No. 1 to the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, CoC No. 1040. Applicants submitting CoC's for approval are required to document a design bases for their CoC or amendment CoC, which includes seismic parameters. Under 10 CFR 72.212(b)(6), general licensees (power reactors seeking to use those CoC systems at their specific sites) are required to conduct a review of the CoC's Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and the related NRC SER prior to use of the general license to ensure that the reactor site parameters, including analyses of earthquake intensity, are enveloped by the cask design bases considered in these reports. This rulemaking makes no determination regarding the acceptability of this amended system for use at any specific site. Nor does this rule seek to change the existing generic nature of CoC approvals or the technical qualifications outlined for CoC approval, as currently envisioned in 10 CFR part 72. Commenters with concerns regarding the existing 10 CFR part 72 regulations for technical review and approval of CoC systems could consider filing a petition for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802.

(2) Wind Effect on Underground Cask Maximum Heat Load

Commenters stated that according to NUREG-2174 “Impact of Variation in Environmental Conditions on the Thermal Performance of Dry Storage Casks” (ADAMS Accession No. ML15054A207), low-speed wind conditions increased the peak cladding temperature on underground systems, and asked whether this was considered in the development of the heat load limits of the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System.

NRC Response

The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule. The NRC evaluated and approved the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System heat loads in the initial CoC certification, and this is provided in its SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML15093A510). The Amendment No. 1 application requested no thermal changes that required NRC evaluation.

(3) MPC Seismic Evaluation

A commenter stated that the thin stainless steel MPC canisters are subject to pitting and corrosion (particularly from marine environments like chloride-induced stress corrosion cracking). According to the comment, since cracks may initiate during the initial licensing period in these canisters, cracking canisters should be included in the seismic analysis for MPC's stored while in the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System since it would be of more concern in high risk seismic areas as proposed for this UMAX Amendment.

NRC Response

The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule. The NRC has evaluated the design of the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System and has determined that the design is robust, and contains a number of layers of acceptable confinement systems in compliance with 10 CFR part 72 requirements. Furthermore, the NRC has evaluated the susceptibility to and effects of stress corrosion cracking and other corrosion mechanisms on safety significant systems for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) dry cask storage (DCS) systems during an initial certification period. The NRC staff has determined that the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, when used within the requirements of the proposed CoC, will safely store SNF and prevent radiation releases and exposure consistent with regulatory requirements, including seismic requirements. This evaluation is documented in the NRC staff's SERs (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15070A149 and ML14202A031).

(4) Transfer Cask

Commenters ask if the transfer casks were approved for storage of an MPC in case of a failed MPC.

NRC Response

To the extent that this comment raises a concern with the availability of a transfer cask, it raises an issue that was addressed in the NRC's evaluation of this amendment and fails to cite any specific information that would alter the NRC's conclusions. In this case, the transfer cask utilized in the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System is described in the HI-STORM Flood/Wind (F/W) Multipurpose Canister (MPC) Storage System FSAR (ADAMS Accession No. ML15177A336). The HI-STORM UMAX transfer cask is authorized to transfer intact MPC's in accordance with the CoC No. 1040 TSs.

(5) Failed Canister Remediation

A commenter asked if there is a plan to remediate a failed canister.

NRC Response

The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises a concern with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirement and process for certification of the CoC systems. Implementing corrective actions in the event of a failed MPC is the responsibility of the general licensee and those corrective actions are not incorporated into CoC No. 1040.

(6) MPC Thickness

Commenters questioned the maximum MPC thickness allowed in this amendment, noting that although the FSAR indicated 0.5″ as the maximum thickness, Holtec has proposed using a thickness of 0.625 at San Onofre (SONGS). The commenters raised concerns regarding the implications of such a change outside of a license amendment where it could be properly evaluated to determine if the change in limiting parameters will affect seismic, thermal, weight, dimensions and other critical analyses.

NRC Response

The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of the CoC systems. The nominal MPC thickness for the canisters certified under CoC No. 1040, Amendment No. 1 is 0.5″. The NRC has no knowledge of a Holtec proposal to increase the thickness of an MPC to 0.625″. If presented with an amendment request to do so, the NRC will evaluate it in accordance with 10 CFR part 72 requirements.

(7) Definition of “Long-term”

Commenters requested the NRC require a definition of “long-term” in the FSAR.

NRC Response

The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises general concerns regarding terminology. The definitions required by the NRC to support the evaluation and approval of CoC No. 1040, Amendment No. 1, are provided in Appendix A of the CoC, Technical Specifications for the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System. “Long-term” is a general descriptive term that is not required to support any regulatory or technical evaluation, and thus is not required to be more formally defined.

(8) Definition of Underground

Commenters requested the NRC define the term “underground” as used in this system. The comments raised concerns that a structure that is only partially underground, but covered on the side with an “earthen berm,” could still be considered “underground” for compliance with this CoC.

NRC Response

The comments regarding the need to define the term “underground” as used in the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System are outside the scope of this rulemaking because they are not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raise concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of CoC systems. In this instance, Holtec has provided and analyzed specific structure placement parameters, and the NRC has evaluated these parameters that bound the placement of such a system in the ground. Pursuant to the regulatory requirements in 10 CFR 72.212(b), any general licensee that seeks to use this system must determine that the design and construction of the system, structures, and components are bounded by the conditions of the CoC by analyzing the generic parameters provided and analyzed in the FSAR and SER to ensure that its site specific parameters are enveloped by the cask design bases established in these reports. The NRC is aware of the SONGS proposed configuration submitted to the California Coastal Commission and is closely monitoring this issue. The NRC will continue to ensure that the facility constructed at SONGS meets the requirements of the CoC and TS of the specific DCS system selected by Southern California Edison.

(9) Heat Load Charts

One commenter stated that the FSAR indicates that changes to storage cell kW heat loads were made and requested that the NRC determine if this was evaluated in the amendment request. The comment also requested clarification on the placement configuration of SNF assemblies in the MPC, as well as the rationale for the heat load configuration.

NRC Response

This comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of CoC systems. The comment is addressing revision bars that are incorporated into the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System FSAR, Revision 2 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14202A031). The tables referenced in the comment were revised due to changes made during the original HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System evaluation; 10 CFR 72.248(a)(1) requires that an updated FSAR reflecting any changes made during the NRC review process be submitted within 90 days after an approval of the cask design. The loading patterns were evaluated and approved by the NRC staff in its initial SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML15093A510). The Amendment No. 1 application required no further changes to these tables requiring NRC evaluation.

(10) MPC Inspection

A commenter requested that the NRC clarify that the MPC leak test inspection, that is used to verify the integrity of the confinement boundary, is performed before the MPC is loaded with fuel.

NRC Response

This comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of CoC systems. The HI-STORM F/W MPC Canister System FSAR clearly identifies the purpose of the MPC leak detection requirement as a post fabrication certification test that is only required to be performed one time.

(11) Assumption of No Fuel Cladding Degradation After Dry Storage Is Not Substantiated

Some commenters raised an issue with Holtec's claim that there is no credible mechanism for gross fuel cladding degradation of fuel classified as undamaged during storage in the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System.

NRC Response

These comments are outside the scope of this rulemaking because they are not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule. Instead, these comments raise issues that would be addressed during any renewal application review. The NRC has determined that fuel cladding degradation is not an issue during the initial 20-year certification period, but instead, is an issue that would have to be addressed if a CoC holder requested renewal of the CoC for a period beyond the initial 20 years. If a renewal application is filed, NRC regulations require that the application include programs to manage the effects of aging, including necessary monitoring and inspection programs. Those programs would have to be reviewed and determined acceptable by the NRC before any CoC renewal is approved.

(12) Vertical Ventilated Module Needs Substantiation for Expected Lifespan

Commenters questioned Holtec's claims of a design life of 60 years, a service life of 100 years and a licensed life of 40 years. Since no substantiation was provided for these claims, the commenters requested the claims be removed from the FSAR.

NRC Response

This issue is outside of the scope of this rulemaking because the term of a certificate is determined in the original certification, not in amendments to that certification. This rulemaking seeks to add Amendment No. 1 to CoC No. 1040. In this case, the UMAX CoC was approved on March 6, 2015 (80 FR 12073), for an initial 20-year term. This 20-year term will also apply to Amendment No. 1. Use of this system beyond the expiration date of 20 years would require an evaluation of a renewal application for this CoC which would be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking process.

(13) Concrete Inspection and Inspection Limitations

Some commenters questioned whether the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design provided a safe and accessible method to perform inspections within the license period given that high seismic risk areas are more likely to cause cracking or other structural changes, and indicated that such an evaluation should be part of the NRC's review process.

NRC Response

This comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking because it is not specific to the amendment at issue in the rule, but instead raises concerns with the general 10 CFR part 72 requirements and process for certification of CoC systems. The NRC has determined that concrete degradation is not an issue requiring inspection during the initial 20-year certification period, but instead, is an issue that would have to be addressed if a CoC holder requested renewal of the CoC for a period beyond the initial 20 years. If a renewal application is filed, NRC regulations require that the application include programs to manage the effects of aging, including necessary monitoring and inspection programs. Those programs would have to be reviewed and determined acceptable by the NRC before any CoC renewal is approved.

(14) High Burnup Fuel

Commenters also raised questions regarding the long-term acceptability of the extended storage of high burnup fuel (HBF).

NRC Response

To the extent these comments raise issues about the storage of HBF in the CoC for the first 20 years, these comments are outside the scope of this rulemaking. The NRC has evaluated the acceptability of storage of HBF for the initial 20-year certification term for the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System during its review of the initial certificate. As documented in the NRC staff's SER under Docket ID NRC-2014-0120, the NRC staff has determined that the use of the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, including storage of HBF, will be conducted in compliance with the applicable regulations of 10 CFR part 72, and the CoC should be approved for the initial 20-year term. This amendment does not impact the analysis conducted by the NRC staff during the initial certification of this system.

Additionally, to the extent these comments raise concerns regarding the storage of HBF beyond the initial term of 20 years, the comments are also outside the scope of this rulemaking. A request to store HBF beyond the initial 20 years provided in the certification of this system will require the applicant to submit a license renewal application with the inclusion of Aging Management Programs addressing HBF. In that regard, a demonstration project is being planned by the U.S. Department of Energy to provide confirmatory data on the performance of HBF in DCS. The NRC plans to evaluate the data obtained from the project to confirm the accuracy of current models that are relied upon for authorizing the storage of HBF for extended storage periods beyond the initial 20-year certification term.

The NRC staff has concluded that the comments received on the companion proposed rule for the Holtec HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, CoC No. 1040, Amendment No. 1, are not significant adverse comments as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6, “United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook.” Therefore, this rule will become effective as scheduled.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of September, 2015.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-22053 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31033; Amdt. No. 3657] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES:

This rule is effective September 8, 2015. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 8, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

For Examination

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Dunham III, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) Telephone: (405) 954-4164.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part § 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.

The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

The Rule

This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.

Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97:

Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 14, 2015. John Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: Effective 17 SEPTEMBER 2015 Augusta, GA, Daniel Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1A Grenada, MS, Grenada Muni, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 13, Amdt 2B Grenada, MS, Grenada Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1A Jasper, TN, Marion County-Brown Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-A Effective 15 OCTOBER 2015 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 12, Amdt 9 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Amdt 2 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, VOR RWY 12, Amdt 12 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, VOR/DME RWY 12, Amdt 14 Crescent City, CA, Jack Mc Namara Field, VOR/DME RWY 36, Amdt 12 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, ILS OR LOC RWY 4, Orig Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 2 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 1 Punta Gorda, FL, Punta Gorda, VOR RWY 22, Amdt 5 Meridian, MS, Key Field, RADAR-1, Orig Lebanon, NH, Lebanon Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 18, Amdt 6 Oneonta, NY, Oneonta Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1 Greer, SC, Greenville Spartanburg Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A Spartanburg, SC, Spartanburg Downtown Memorial, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A Pulaski, TN, Abernathy Field, VOR/DME RWY 34, Amdt 3 Lynchburg, VA, Falwell, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig-A Newport, VT, Newport State, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Puyallup, WA, Pierce County—Thun Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16C, ILS RWY 16C (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16C (CAT II), ILS RWY 16C (CAT III), Amdt 16 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16L, ILS RWY 16L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16L (CAT II), ILS RWY 16L (CAT III), Amdt 7 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16R (CAT II), ILS RWY 16R (CAT III), Amdt 4 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16L, Amdt 5 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16L, Amdt 2

RESCINDED: On July 31, 2015 (80 FR 45604), the FAA published an Amendment in Docket No. 31026, Amdt No. 3651, to Part 97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations under section 97.29. The following entry for Las Vegas, NV, effective August 20, 2015 is hereby rescinded in its entirety:

Las Vegas, NV, Mc Carran Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 25R, Amdt 18
[FR Doc. 2015-22012 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31036; Amdt. No. 3660] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES:

This rule is effective September 8, 2015. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 8, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

For Examination

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001;

2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Dunham III, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone: (405) 954-4164.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is unnecessary.

This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

The Rule

This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.

The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than 30 days.

Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 28, 2015. John Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication AIRAC date State City Airport FDC No. FDC date Subject 15-Oct-15 MI Owosso Owosso Community 4/0425 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 MI Owosso Owosso Community 4/0426 08/06/15 VOR/DME RWY 29, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 VA Richmond Richmond Executive-Chesterfield County 5/0091 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 VA Richmond Richmond Executive-Chesterfield County 5/0092 08/06/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 2C. 15-Oct-15 VA Richmond Richmond Executive-Chesterfield County 5/0093 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 OK Oklahoma City Wiley Post 5/0523 08/13/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 17L, Amdt 11. 15-Oct-15 OK Oklahoma City Wiley Post 5/0524 08/13/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 35R, Orig. 15-Oct-15 OK Oklahoma City Wiley Post 5/0525 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35R, Orig. 15-Oct-15 CA San Martin South County Arpt Of Santa Clara County 5/0904 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 CA San Martin South County Arpt Of Santa Clara County 5/0905 08/13/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 MT Choteau Choteau 5/0915 08/13/15 NDB OR GPS RWY 23, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 IN Griffith Griffith-Merrillville 5/1158 08/13/15 VOR RWY 8, Amdt 8. 15-Oct-15 KS Junction City Freeman Field 5/1341 08/17/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 KS Junction City Freeman Field 5/1364 08/17/15 NDB B, Amdt 5. 15-Oct-15 TX Falfurrias Brooks County 5/1480 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig. 15-Oct-15 SD Sturgis Sturgis Muni 5/1485 08/13/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 GA Atlanta Dekalb-Peachtree 5/1788 08/17/15 VOR/DME RWY 21L, Amdt 2B. 15-Oct-15 OK Ardmore Ardmore Downtown Executive 5/1987 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 CA Oroville Oroville Muni 5/2201 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 CA Oroville Oroville Muni 5/2202 08/12/15 VOR-A, Amdt 7B. 15-Oct-15 MT Dillon Dillon 5/2283 08/06/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 3. 15-Oct-15 AK Kotzebue Ralph Wien Memorial 5/2312 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Kotzebue Ralph Wien Memorial 5/2313 08/12/15 ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 9, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Kotzebue Ralph Wien Memorial 5/2314 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Kotzebue Ralph Wien Memorial 5/2316 08/12/15 VOR/DME RWY 9, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Kotzebue Ralph Wien Memorial 5/2317 08/12/15 VOR RWY 9, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Big Lake Big Lake 5/2398 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 CA Palo Alto Palo Alto Arpt Of Santa Clara Co 5/2423 08/17/15 VOR/DME RWY 31, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 CA Palo Alto Palo Alto Arpt Of Santa Clara Co 5/2424 08/17/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 AK Yakutat Yakutat 5/3056 08/17/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 3A. 15-Oct-15 IL Belleville Scott AFB/MidAmerica 5/3238 08/20/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 32R, Orig-F. 15-Oct-15 IA Le Mars Le Mars Muni 5/3889 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 IA Le Mars Le Mars Muni 5/3890 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 NJ Robbinsville Trenton-Robbinsville 5/4022 08/06/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2. 15-Oct-15 WI La Pointe Major Gilbert Field 5/4269 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig. 15-Oct-15 WI La Pointe Major Gilbert Field 5/4270 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 OK Mangum Scott Field 5/4417 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 OK Mangum Scott Field 5/4425 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 NE Beatrice Beatrice Muni 5/4566 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 NE Beatrice Beatrice Muni 5/4567 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 NE Beatrice Beatrice Muni 5/4569 08/24/15 VOR RWY 14, Amdt 18A. 15-Oct-15 AK Kivalina Kivalina 5/4604 08/10/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig. 15-Oct-15 MN Faribault Faribault Muni 5/4620 08/24/15 VOR-A, Amdt 6. 15-Oct-15 AL Mobile Mobile Downtown 5/4831 08/12/15 VOR RWY 18, Amdt 2. 15-Oct-15 OK Ardmore Ardmore Downtown Executive 5/5003 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 MI Muskegon Muskegon County 5/5006 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 OH Mansfield Mansfield Lahm Rgnl 5/5009 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig. 15-Oct-15 OH Mansfield Mansfield Lahm Rgnl 5/5014 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 IL Dixon Dixon Muni-Charles R Walgreen Field 5/5030 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 IL Dixon Dixon Muni-Charles R Walgreen Field 5/5032 08/06/15 VOR-A, Amdt 10A. 15-Oct-15 IL Dixon Dixon Muni-Charles R Walgreen Field 5/5033 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 WY Worland Worland Muni 5/5173 08/06/15 VOR RWY 16, Amdt 6A. 15-Oct-15 WY Worland Worland Muni 5/5174 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 WY Worland Worland Muni 5/5175 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 SC Orangeburg Orangeburg Muni 5/5199 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 FL Miami Miami Intl 5/5231 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 8L, Amdt 2. 15-Oct-15 WY Greybull South Big Horn County 5/5658 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 WY Greybull South Big Horn County 5/5662 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 WY Greybull South Big Horn County 5/5663 08/06/15 NDB RWY 34, Amdt 3A. 15-Oct-15 FL St Augustine Northeast Florida Rgnl 5/5849 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 31, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 FL St Augustine Northeast Florida Rgnl 5/5850 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 GA Millen Millen 5/5907 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6011 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6012 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 17L, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6015 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 17R, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6016 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 35L, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6017 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 35R, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6018 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 35L, ILS RWY 35L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 35L (CAT II & III), Amdt 3C. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6021 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 35R , ILS RWY 35R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 35R (CAT II & III), Amdt 4C. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6023 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 17L, Amdt 4C. 15-Oct-15 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 5/6024 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 17R, Amdt 3D. 15-Oct-15 VA Norfolk Norfolk Intl 5/6033 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-D. 15-Oct-15 LA Baton Rouge Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Field 5/6037 08/24/15 VOR RWY 4L, Amdt 18. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6205 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 3, Amdt 17B. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6206 08/24/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 30, Amdt 3A. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6208 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6212 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6213 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Amdt 1. 15-Oct-15 WI Appleton Outagamie County Regional 5/6216 08/24/15 VOR/DME RWY 3, Amdt 8F. 15-Oct-15 IL Effingham Effingham County Memorial 5/6336 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 IL Effingham Effingham County Memorial 5/6337 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 IL Effingham Effingham County Memorial 5/6339 08/24/15 VOR RWY 1, Amdt 10B. 15-Oct-15 NC Wilson Wilson Industrial Air Center 5/6435 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-D. 15-Oct-15 NC Wilson Wilson Industrial Air Center 5/6443 08/24/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 1B. 15-Oct-15 MT Stevensville Stevensville 5/6652 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 TN Morristown Moore-Murrell 5/6732 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 TN Morristown Moore-Murrell 5/6756 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 TN Morristown Moore-Murrell 5/6758 08/12/15 NDB RWY 5, Amdt 5B. 15-Oct-15 TN Morristown Moore-Murrell 5/6759 08/12/15 SDF RWY 5, Amdt 5B. 15-Oct-15 WV Logan Logan County 5/6766 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 WV Logan Logan County 5/6768 08/12/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 ME Old Town Dewitt Fld, Old Town Muni 5/6882 08/24/15 VOR/DME RWY 22, Amdt 5A. 15-Oct-15 OR Portland Portland Intl 5/7120 08/12/15 RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28R, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 WY Saratoga Shively Field 5/7337 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 WY Saratoga Shively Field 5/7338 08/10/15 NDB-A, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 WY Saratoga Shively Field 5/7342 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 WY Casper Casper/Natrona County Intl 5/7434 08/06/15 VOR/DME RWY 3, Amdt 6A. 15-Oct-15 CA Long Beach Long Beach/Daugherty Field/ 5/7435 08/06/15 RNAV (RNP) RWY 12, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 MD Cumberland Greater Cumberland Rgnl 5/7472 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-C. 15-Oct-15 IA Mason City Mason City Muni 5/7795 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 IA Mason City Mason City Muni 5/7797 08/20/15 VOR/DME RWY 18, Amdt 5A. 15-Oct-15 IA Mason City Mason City Muni 5/7801 08/20/15 VOR RWY 36, Amdt 6D. 15-Oct-15 MT Miles City Frank Wiley Field 5/7812 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 2A. 15-Oct-15 MT Miles City Frank Wiley Field 5/7814 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-B. 15-Oct-15 MT Miles City Frank Wiley Field 5/7815 08/10/15 VOR/DME RWY 22, Amdt 8B. 15-Oct-15 MT Miles City Frank Wiley Field 5/7816 08/10/15 VOR/DME RWY 4, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 MT Miles City Frank Wiley Field 5/7818 08/10/15 VOR RWY 4, Amdt 12A. 15-Oct-15 TX Baytown RWJ Airpark 5/7916 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 FL Jacksonville Jacksonville Intl 5/7930 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 32, Amdt 2C. 15-Oct-15 TX Baytown RWJ Airpark 5/7933 08/20/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig. 15-Oct-15 LA Vivian Vivian 5/8309 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 LA Vivian Vivian 5/8310 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 LA Vivian Vivian 5/8311 08/10/15 VOR/DME-A, Amdt 3A. 15-Oct-15 LA Vivian Vivian 5/8312 08/10/15 NDB RWY 9, Amdt 2A. 15-Oct-15 AK Coldfoot Coldfoot 5/8694 08/06/15 RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig-A. 15-Oct-15 UT Cedar City Cedar City Rgnl 5/8854 08/07/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 20, Amdt 3C. 15-Oct-15 NM Carlsbad Cavern City Air Trml 5/8920 08/13/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32L, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 AK Palmer Palmer Muni 5/9044 08/07/15 RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig. 15-Oct-15 AK Palmer Palmer Muni 5/9045 08/07/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1A. 15-Oct-15 NC Roanoke Rapids Halifax-Northampton Rgnl 5/9599 08/10/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 1A.
[FR Doc. 2015-22009 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31035; Amdt. No. 3659] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES:

This rule is effective September 8, 2015. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 8, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

For Examination

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Dunham III, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125), Telephone: (405) 954-4164.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part § 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.

The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

The Rule

This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.

Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97:

Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 28, 2015. John Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: Effective 15 OCTOBER 2015 Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, ILS Y OR LOC Y RWY 26, Amdt 3 Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, KODIAK SEVEN, Graphic DP Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 2 Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, VOR RWY 26, Amdt 3 San Jose, CA, Norman Y. Mineta San Jose Intl, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 30L, Amdt 24 Telluride, CO, Telluride Rgnl, LOC/DME RWY 9, Amdt 3 Telluride, CO, Telluride Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 9, Amdt 1 Telluride, CO, Telluride Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 9, Orig Boca Raton, FL, Boca Raton, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 9L, ILS RWY 9L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 9L (CAT II), ILS RWY 9L (CAT III), Amdt 3 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 9R, Amdt 11 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 10C, ILS RWY 10C (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 10C (CAT II), ILS RWY 10C (CAT III), Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 10L, ILS RWY 10L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 10L (CAT II), ILS RWY 10L (CAT III), Amdt 18 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 10R, Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27L, ILS RWY 27L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 27L (CAT II), ILS RWY 27L (CAT III), Amdt 30 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27R, ILS RWY 27R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 27R (CAT II), ILS RWY 27R (CAT III), Amdt 3 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 28C, ILS RWY 28C (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 28C (CAT II), ILS RWY 28C (CAT III), Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 28L, ILS RWY 28L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 28L (CAT II), ILS RWY 28L, (CAT III), Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 28R, ILS RWY 28R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 28R (CAT II), ILS RWY 28R (CAT III), Amdt 17 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS PRM RWY 10C, ILS PRM RWY 10C (SA CAT I), ILS PRM RWY 10C (CAT II), ILS PRM RWY 10C (CAT III) (CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, ILS PRM RWY 10R (CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9L, Amdt 3 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9R, Amdt 4 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10C, Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10L, Amdt 5 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10R, Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27R, Amdt 3 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28C, Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28L, Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28R, Amdt 4 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) PRM RWY 10C (CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) PRM RWY 10R (CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 27L, Amdt 4 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 27L, Amdt 1 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 20 Rantoul, IL, Rantoul Natl Avn Cntr-Frank Elliott Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 2 Rantoul, IL, Rantoul Natl Avn Cntr-Frank Elliott Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1 Rantoul, IL, Rantoul Natl Avn Cntr-Frank Elliott Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2 Rantoul, IL, Rantoul Natl Avn Cntr-Frank Elliott Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Valparaiso, IN, Porter County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A Valparaiso, IN, Porter County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A North Adams, MA, Harriman-And-West, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig Mora, MN, Mora Muni, NDB OR GPS RWY 35, Amdt 3B, CANCELED Mora, MN, Mora Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig Mora, MN, Mora Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Excelsior Springs, MO, Excelsior Springs Memorial, RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig Sanford, NC, Raleigh Exec Jetport at Sanford-Lee County, ILS Y OR LOC Y RWY 3, Orig Sanford, NC, Raleigh Exec Jetport at Sanford-Lee County, ILS Z OR LOC Z RWY 3, Amdt 2 Sanford, NC, Raleigh Exec Jetport at Sanford-Lee County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 2 Sanford, NC, Raleigh Exec Jetport at Sanford-Lee County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 2 Loup City, NE, Loup City Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Orig Loup City, NE, Loup City Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig Loup City, NE, Loup City Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Morristown, NJ, Morristown Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 23, Amdt 11 Morristown, NJ, Morristown Muni, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 23, Amdt 1 Pittstown, NJ, Alexandria, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig Pittstown, NJ, Alexandria, RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig Pittstown, NJ, Alexandria, VOR/DME RWY 8, Amdt 2 Clovis, NM, Clovis Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 4, Amdt 1 Clovis, NM, Clovis Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1 Clovis, NM, Clovis Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1 Clovis, NM, Clovis Muni, VOR RWY 22, Amdt 5 New York, NY, John F. Kennedy Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 9 New York, NY, La Guardia, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 10 Oklahoma City, OK, Wiley Post, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17R, Orig Oklahoma City, OK, Wiley Post, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35L, Orig Clarksville, VA, Lake Country Regional, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-B, CANCELED Clarksville, VA, Lake Country Regional, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-A, CANCELED Clarksville, VA, Lake Country Regional, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig Clarksville, VA, Lake Country Regional, RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig Suffolk, VA, Suffolk Executive, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1B Puyallup, WA, Pierce County—Thun Field, GPS RWY 34, Orig-C, CANCELED Puyallup, WA, Pierce County—Thun Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34C, Amdt 2 Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34L, Amdt 2
[FR Doc. 2015-22010 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31034; Amdt. No. 3658] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES:

This rule is effective September 1, 2015. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

For Examination

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001;

2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Dunham III, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone: (405) 954-4164.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is unnecessary.

This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

The Rule

This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.

The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than 30 days.

Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 14, 2015. John Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication AIRAC date State City Airport FDC No. FDC date Subject 17-Sep-15 NC Wilmington Wilmington Intl 5/0168 07/27/15 ILS Z RWY 24, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0562 07/28/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0563 07/28/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0565 07/28/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0566 07/28/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Orig-C. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0567 07/28/15 VOR RWY 25, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 NH Lebanon Lebanon Muni 5/0570 07/28/15 VOR/DME RWY 7, Amdt 1C. 17-Sep-15 WI Middleton Middleton Muni—Morey Field 5/0778 08/03/15 VOR RWY 28, Orig. 17-Sep-15 WI Middleton Middleton Muni—Morey Field 5/0779 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 2. 17-Sep-15 FL Jacksonville Jacksonville Intl 5/1388 08/04/15 RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 26, Amdt 2A. 17-Sep-15 AR Lake Village Lake Village Muni 5/1683 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 AR Lake Village Lake Village Muni 5/1684 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 AR Lake Village Lake Village Muni 5/1685 08/03/15 VOR-A, Amdt 8A. 17-Sep-15 AR Lake Village Lake Village Muni 5/1686 08/03/15 VOR/DME-B, Amdt 6A. 17-Sep-15 WI Madison Dane County Rgnl-Truax Field 5/2008 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 2C. 17-Sep-15 WI Madison Dane County Rgnl-Truax Field 5/2009 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2C. 17-Sep-15 WI Madison Dane County Rgnl-Truax Field 5/2010 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2C. 17-Sep-15 WI Madison Dane County Rgnl-Truax Field 5/2011 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 2B. 17-Sep-15 SD Martin Martin Muni 5/2018 08/03/15 GPS RWY 32, Orig-B. 17-Sep-15 MN New Ulm New Ulm Muni 5/2101 08/03/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig. 17-Sep-15 TX Waco Waco Rgnl 5/2105 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 1B. 17-Sep-15 IN Terre Haute Terre Haute Intl-Hulman Field 5/2162 08/03/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 23. 17-Sep-15 IN Brazil Brazil Clay County 5/2188 07/28/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig. 17-Sep-15 WI Madison Dane County Rgnl-Truax Field 5/2190 07/28/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 21, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NY Schenectady Schenectady County 5/2346 07/29/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-B. 17-Sep-15 NY Poughkeepsie Dutchess County 5/2660 07/30/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig-B. 17-Sep-15 NY Poughkeepsie Dutchess County 5/2661 07/30/15 VOR/DME RWY 6, Amdt 7A. 17-Sep-15 NY Poughkeepsie Dutchess County 5/2662 07/30/15 VOR/DME RWY 24, Amdt 4C. 17-Sep-15 NY Poughkeepsie Dutchess County 5/2663 07/30/15 VOR A, Amdt 11B. 17-Sep-15 NY Poughkeepsie Dutchess County 5/2664 07/30/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-B. 17-Sep-15 PA Ebensburg Ebensburg 5/3210 08/03/15 VOR-A, Amdt 7. 17-Sep-15 PA Ebensburg Ebensburg 5/3211 08/03/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2. 17-Sep-15 MS Meridian Key Field 5/4237 08/04/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 19, Amdt 1B. 17-Sep-15 FL Plant City Plant City 5/4253 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig. 17-Sep-15 FL Tallahassee Tallahassee Intl 5/4488 08/03/15 ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 36, Amdt 25A. 17-Sep-15 FL Tallahassee Tallahassee Intl 5/4623 08/03/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 1. 17-Sep-15 NY Hudson Columbia County 5/5214 08/04/15 NDB-A, Amdt 4A. 17-Sep-15 NY Hudson Columbia County 5/5216 08/04/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NY Hudson Columbia County 5/5217 08/04/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 IA Creston Creston Muni 5/5547 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 1B. 17-Sep-15 GA Rome Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field 5/5576 07/29/15 ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 1, Orig-B. 17-Sep-15 MS Grenada Grenada Muni 5/6313 07/30/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1. 17-Sep-15 MS Grenada Grenada Muni 5/6314 07/30/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1. 17-Sep-15 MS Grenada Grenada Muni 5/6315 07/30/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1. 17-Sep-15 KY Covington Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Intl 5/6647 08/04/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 18L, Amdt 7A. 17-Sep-15 MA Stow Minute Man Air Field 5/6658 08/04/15 VOR/DME RWY 21, Amdt 3C. 17-Sep-15 NY New York John F Kennedy Intl 5/7203 07/27/15 RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 22L, Amdt 1. 17-Sep-15 MI Detroit Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County 5/7474 07/27/15 ILS PRM Y RWY 4L, Orig-D. 17-Sep-15 LA Baton Rouge Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Ryan Field 5/7557 08/03/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 SD Sturgis Sturgis Muni 5/8224 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 SD Sturgis Sturgis Muni 5/8225 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8307 07/27/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 10R, Amdt 3B. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8308 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 10L, Amdt 1B. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8313 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 10R, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8314 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 28L, Amdt 2A. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8315 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 28R, Amdt 2C. 17-Sep-15 MN Minneapolis Flying Cloud 5/8316 07/27/15 VOR RWY 10R, Amdt 9A. 17-Sep-15 NE Creighton Creighton Muni 5/8346 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NE Creighton Creighton Muni 5/8351 07/27/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig-A. 17-Sep-15 NE Creighton Creighton Muni 5/8356 07/27/15 Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Orig. 17-Sep-15 TN Nashville Nashville Intl 5/8382 08/05/15 RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 2C, Amdt 2. 17-Sep-15 TN Nashville Nashville Intl 5/8383 08/05/15 RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 2L, Amdt 2. 17-Sep-15 TN Nashville Nashville Intl 5/8386 08/05/15 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 2R, Amdt 2A. 17-Sep-15 GA Thomasville Thomasville Rgnl 5/8603 07/29/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig. 17-Sep-15 TN Rogersville Hawkins County 5/8608 07/29/15 NDB RWY 7, Amdt 2. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9354 08/03/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 15, Amdt 6. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9355 08/03/15 VOR/DME RWY 15, Amdt 3. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9356 08/03/15 NDB RWY 15, Amdt 6. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9363 08/03/15 COPTER VOR RWY 33, Amdt 2A. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9364 08/03/15 VOR-A, Amdt 2A. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9365 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9366 08/03/15 RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1A. 17-Sep-15 TX Fort Hood/Killeen Robert Gray AAF 5/9367 08/03/15 ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 1A.
[FR Doc. 2015-22011 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 22 [Public Notice: 9257] RIN 1400-AD71 Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates—Passport and Citizenship Services Fee Changes AGENCY:

Department of State.

ACTION:

Interim final rule with request for comment.

SUMMARY:

The Department of State amends the Schedule of Fees for Consular Services (Schedule) for certain passport fees and citizenship services fees. More specifically, the rule amends the passport book application services fee and passport book security surcharge. The Department is adjusting these fees in light of the findings of the most recent annual update to the Cost of Service Model to ensure that the fees for consular services better align with the costs of providing those services. The passport fee changes will not alter the total fee paid by passport customers. The rule also renames the “Administrative Processing of Formal Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship” fee, as the “Administrative Processing of Request for Certificate of Loss of Nationality” fee, applying the fee to any request for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality whether the individual has relinquished nationality by taking an oath of renunciation or by voluntarily and intentionally performing another potentially expatriating act specified by statute.

DATES:

Section 22.1, Items 2.(a), 2.(b), and 2.(g) of this rule become effective September 23, 2015. Section 22.1, Item 8 becomes effective November 9, 2015. Written comments must be received on or before November 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Interested parties may submit comments to the Department by any of the following methods:

• Visit the Regulations.gov Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov and search for the Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 1400-AD71 or docket number DOS-2014-0016.

• Mail (paper, disk, or CD-ROM): U.S. Department of State, Office of the Comptroller, Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA/C), SA-17 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20522-1707.

• Email: [email protected] You must include the RIN (1400-AD71) in the subject line of your message.

• All comments should include the commenter's name, the organization the commenter represents, if applicable, and the commenter's address. If the Department is unable to read your comment for any reason, and cannot contact you for clarification, the Department may not be able to consider your comment. After the conclusion of the comment period, the Department will publish a Final Rule (in which it will address relevant comments) as expeditiously as possible.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jill Warning, Special Assistant, Office of the Comptroller, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State; phone: 202-485-6681, telefax: 202-485-6826; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The rule makes changes to the Schedule of Fees for Consular Services of the Department of State's Bureau of Consular Affairs. The Department sets and collects its fees based on the concept of full cost recovery. The Department completed its most recent review of current consular fees and will implement several changes to the Schedule of Fees based on the costs of services calculated by the Fiscal Year 2013 update to the Cost of Service Model.

What is the authority for this action?

The Department of State derives the general authority to set fees based on the cost of the consular services it provides, and to charge those fees, from the general user charges statute, 31 U.S.C. 9701. See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2)(A) (“The head of each agency . . . may prescribe regulations establishing the charge for a service or thing of value provided by the agency . . . based on . . . the costs to the government.”). As implemented through Executive Order 10718 of June 27, 1957, 22 U.S.C. 4219 further authorizes the Department to establish fees to be charged for official services provided by U.S. embassies and consulates. Other authorities allow the Department to charge fees for consular services, but not to determine the amount of such fees because the amount is statutorily determined.

Several statutes address specific fees relating to passports. For instance, 22 U.S.C. 214 authorizes the Secretary of State to set the passport application fee by regulation. In addition, another statute authorizes the Department to collect and retain a surcharge on passports to help pay for efforts to enhance border security. See 8 U.S.C. 1714. Although this passport surcharge was originally frozen statutorily at $12, subsequent legislation authorized the Department to amend this surcharge administratively, provided, among other things, that the resulting surcharge is “reasonably related to the costs of providing services in connection with the activity or item for which the surcharges are charged.” Public Law 109-472, 6, 120 Stat. 3554, reproduced at 8 U.S.C. 1714 (note).

Certain people are exempted by law or regulation from paying specific fees. These are noted in the Schedule of Fees. They include, for instance, exemptions from the passport execution and application fees for officers or employees of the United States government proceeding abroad in the discharge of official duties. See 22 U.S.C. 214; 22 CFR 51.52(b).

Although the funds collected for many consular fees must be deposited into the general fund of the Treasury pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3302(b), various statutes permit the Department to retain some or all of the fee revenue it collects. For example, the Department retains the immigrant visa and passport security surcharges, see 8 U.S.C. 1714, but the portion of the passport application fee not related to the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative is deposited into the general fund of the Treasury.

The Department last changed fees for passport services in an interim final rule dated June 28, 2010. See Department of State Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates, 22 CFR part 22 (75 FR 36522). Those changes to the Schedule went into effect July 13, 2010. A final rule regarding those fees was published on February 2, 2012 (77 FR 5177). The Department last changed fees for visa and citizenship services in an interim final rule dated August 28, 2014. See Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates—Visa and Citizenship Services Fee Changes, 22 CFR part 22 (79 FR 51247). That change to the Schedule went into effect on September 12, 2014. A final rule regarding those fees was published on August 25, 2015 (80 FR 51464).

Some fees in the Schedule, including Items 20(a) and (b), 31(a) and (b) and 35(c), are set by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). These DHS fees were most recently updated by that agency on November 23, 2010, and are subject to change in the future. See 75 FR 58962. The Department lists these DHS fees in the Department Schedule of Fees for cashiering purposes only. The Department has no authority to set DHS fees, which are listed at 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1).

Why is the department adjusting certain passport and citizenship services fees at this time?

Consistent with OMB Circular A-25 guidelines, the Department recently completed a fee review using its Cost of Service Model. This review was conducted from September 2013 through May 2014 and provides the basis for updating the Schedule. The results of that review are outlined in this rule.1 While fees are set in accordance with full cost recovery, there are limited circumstances, such as the passport book and card application fees for minors, in which costs are allocated to related fees or the Department charges a fee that is lower than the cost of providing the service. This may be done in order to account for statutory requirements or the potential impact on the public of setting those fees at a higher level. See 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2) (user charges based on costs to the government, the value of the service to the recipient, the public policy or interest served, and other relevant facts).

1 To request more information about the Cost of Service model, please send your request using one of the methods in the Addresses section above.

Similar to the 2012 fee review, upon which the current Schedule is based, costs are generated by an activity-based costing model that takes into account all costs to the U.S. government. Unlike a typical accounting system, which accounts for only traditional general-ledger-type costs such as salaries, supplies, travel and other business expenses, activity-based costing (ABC) models measure the costs of activities, or processes, and then provide an additional view of costs by the products and services produced by an organization through the identification of the key cost drivers of the activities. Below is a description of activity-based costing excerpted from the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on March 24, 2010 (75 FR 14111).

Activity-Based Costing Generally

OMB Circular A-25 states that it is the objective of the United States Government to “(a) ensure that each service, sale, or use of Government goods or resources provided by an agency to specific recipients be self-sustaining; [and] (b) promote efficient allocation of the Nation's resources by establishing charges for special benefits provided to the recipient that are at least as great as costs to the Government of providing the special benefits . . .” OMB Circular A-25, 5(a)-(b); see also 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2)(A) (agency “may prescribe regulations establishing the charge for a service or thing of value provided by the agency . . . based on . . . the costs to the Government . . .”). To set prices that are “self-sustaining,” the Department must determine the full cost of providing consular services. Following guidance provided in Statement 4 of OMB's Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS), available at http://www.fasab.gov/pdffiles/sffas-4.pdf, the Department chose to develop and use an activity-based costing (ABC) model to determine the full cost of the services listed in its Schedule of Fees, both those whose fee the Department proposes to change, and those whose fee will remain unchanged from prior years. The Department refers to the specific ABC model that underpins the proposed fees as the “Cost of Service Model” or “CoSM.”

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines activity-based costing as a “set of accounting methods used to identify and describe costs and required resources for activities within processes.” Because an organization can use the same staff and resources (computer equipment, production facilities, etc.) to produce multiple products or services, ABC models seek to precisely identify and assign costs to processes and activities and then to individual products and services through the identification of key cost drivers referred to as “resource drivers” and “activity drivers.”

Example: Imagine a government agency that has a single facility it uses to prepare and issue a single product—a driver's license. In this simple scenario, every cost associated with that facility (the salaries of employees, the electricity to power the computer terminals, the cost of a blank driver's license, etc.) can be attributed directly to the cost of producing that single item. If that agency wants to ensure that it is charging a “self-sustaining” price for driver's licenses, it only has to divide its total costs for a given time period by an estimate of the number of driver's licenses to be produced during that same time period.

However, if that agency issues multiple products (driver's licenses, non-driver ID cards, etc.), has employees that work on other activities besides licenses (for example, accepting payment for traffic tickets), and operates out of multiple facilities it shares with other agencies, it becomes much more complex for the agency to determine exactly how much it costs to produce any single product. In those instances, the agency would need to know what percent of time its employees spend on each service and how much of its overhead (rent, utilities, facilities maintenance, etc.) can be allocated to the delivery of each service to determine the cost of producing each of its various products—the driver's license, the non-driver ID card, etc. Using an ABC model allows the agency to identify separate costs for those different services.

Components of Activity-Based Costing

As noted in SFFAS Statement 4, “activity-based costing has gained broad acceptance by manufacturing and service industries as an effective managerial tool” (SFFAS Statement 4, 147). There are no “off-the-shelf” ABC models that allow the Department (or any other entity) to simply populate a few data points and generate an answer. ABC models require financial and accounting analysis and modeling skills combined with a detailed understanding of all the organization's business processes, which, in an entity the size of the Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs, are exceedingly complex. More specifically, ABC models require an organization to:

• Identify all of the activities that are required to produce a particular product or service (“activities”);

• Identify all of the resources allocated to the production of (costs) that product or service (“resources”);

• Measure the quantity of resources consumed (“resource driver”); and

• Measure the frequency and intensity of demand placed on activities to produce services (“activity driver”).

For additional details on an activity-based costing model, see the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on March 24, 2010 (75 FR 14111).

Although much of the modeling methodology has remained the same between fee reviews, the methodology for capturing the Department's historical support costs and projected costs has been revised to reflect the change in the Department's workload. In order to accurately account for the costs associated with growing demand for consular services, the current fee review also incorporates two years of projected costs in addition to two years of historical costs and one year of current costs. The new fees represent a weighted average of the annual costs by service for fiscal years 2011 through 2015. Costs for individual fiscal years were weighted by the projected workload volume for that year. These weighted costs by fiscal year were then added together to generate a single cost per service upon which the fees are determined.

Passport Book Application Services

The Department is decreasing the application fee for an adult (age 16 and older) passport book from $70 to $50, and the application fee for a minor (under age 16) passport book from $40 to $20. These changes apply to all applicants except those persons who are statutorily exempted from paying fees. The reduction in the passport application fee (and corresponding increase in the passport security surcharge noted below) will result in a reduction of funds deposited in the general fund at the Treasury and an increase in the revenue retained by the Department of State. The passport fee changes will not alter the total fee paid by passport customers.

Since the passport book application services fee was last changed in 2010, the Department has enhanced its Cost of Service Model to more accurately identify which costs should be attributed to the application fee and which should be attributed to the passport security surcharge. The application fee includes all costs of passport issuance and use that are not included in the passport security surcharge, such as the cost of providing emergency services for American citizens overseas and the cost of collecting passport fees and initial data entry through a lockbox service. The 2013 Cost of Service Model reflected that these costs were lower than the previous fee of $70 (including the “WHTI surcharge” described below) and thus the Department is lowering the fee to more precisely reflect these costs.

Because a minor passport book has a validity of just five years, in contrast with the ten-year validity period of an adult passport book, the Department charges a lower, below-cost fee for minor passport books and allocates the remainder of the cost of processing minor passport book applications to the adult passport application fee. The Department is also decreasing the minor passport book application fee by $20.

As described in 22 CFR 51.51(d), the passport application services fee incorporates a surcharge (the “Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative surcharge” or “WHTI surcharge”) to recover the costs of meeting the increased demand for passports as a result of actions taken to comply with section 7209(b) of Pub. L. 108-458 (reproduced at 8 U.S.C. 1185 note) (“WHTI”). The 2013 Cost of Service Model revealed that there has been no change in the costs attributable to WHTI and thus the surcharge remains $22 for adults. This surcharge is embedded within the passport book application services fee and not charged separately or separately itemized in the Schedule of Fees, see 22 CFR 51.51(d) (noting absence of separate itemization). This portion of the application fee has decreased from $22 to $20 for minors to allow the Department to keep the overall passport application fee for minors (including the security surcharge, below) at $80, a reduced fee. The Department may charge reduced fees in order to account for statutory requirements or the potential impact on the public of setting those fees at a higher level. See 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2) (user charges based on costs to the government, the value of the service to the recipient, the public policy or interest served, and other relevant facts).

Passport Security Surcharge

The Department is increasing the passport security surcharge, which is applicable to all applicants except those persons who are statutorily exempted from paying fees, from $40 to $60. The passport security surcharge includes costs associated with the passport application processing fee that support enhanced border security, such as the secure book and card materials, passport printers, and compensation associated with passport adjudication, including fraud prevention. The 2013 Cost of Service Model results indicated that these costs amount to approximately $60 per passport. This change will result in a reduction of revenue deposited in the general fund of the Treasury and increase the revenue retained by the Department of State. This fee increase is due in part to new technology and more secure passport materials since 2010. See 8 U.S.C. 1714 and Public Law 109-472, 120 Stat. 3554, reproduced at 8 U.S.C. 1714 note.

Documentation for Loss of Nationality

The Department is expanding the application of and renaming item 8 in the Schedule of Fees to “Administrative Processing of Request for Certificate of Loss of Nationality.” The fee will be applied to cover not only services to U.S. nationals (i.e., U.S. citizens and non-citizen nationals) who relinquish nationality by taking the oath of renunciation under 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(5), but also to cover services to U.S. nationals who relinquish nationality under 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(1) to 1481(a)(4) or any earlier-in-time relinquishment statutes administered by the Department of State and request a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. Currently, the fee is paid by those taking the oath of renunciation under 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(5) at the time the oath is sworn. The fee would be collected from an individual claiming to have relinquished nationality at the time that person requests the Certificate of Loss of Nationality (that is, after completing Form DS-4079 and signing before a consular officer Part II of Form DS-4079 entitled “Statement of Voluntary Relinquishment of U.S. Citizenship”). The Fiscal Year 2012 Cost of Service Model update demonstrated that documenting a U.S. national's relinquishment of nationality is extremely costly whether the service is for a relinquishment under 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(1) to 1481(a)(4) or a relinquishment by renunciation under 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(5). Both require American consular officers overseas to spend substantial amounts of time to accept, process, and adjudicate cases. The cost of the service is not limited to the time consular officers spend with individuals prior to and at appointments. The application is reviewed both overseas and domestically to ensure full compliance with the law. The consular officer must determine that the individual is indeed a U.S. national, advise the individual on the consequences of loss of nationality, and ensure that the individual fully understands the consequences of loss, including the inability to reside in the United States unless properly documented as an alien. Through documentary review, consideration of the individual's circumstances, and careful interviewing, the consular officer also must determine whether the individual is seeking loss of nationality voluntarily and with the requisite intent, as required by U.S. Supreme Court case law and by statute (8 U.S.C. 1481). This determination can be especially demanding in the case of minors or individuals with a developmental disability or mental illness.

The consular officer must also ensure that the commission of an expatriating act was as prescribed by statute, which is often an issue in non-renunciation relinquishment cases. The loss of nationality service must be documented on several forms and in consular systems as well as in a memorandum from the consular officer to the Department's Directorate of Overseas Citizens Services in Washington, DC (“OCS”), in the Bureau of Consular Affairs. All forms and memoranda are closely reviewed in OCS by a country officer and a senior approving officer, and may include consultation with legal advisers. This review entails close examination of whether the requirements of voluntariness and intent are satisfied in the individual case. Some applications require multiple rounds of correspondence between post and the Department. The final approval of the loss of nationality must be done by law within the Department (8 U.S.C. 1501), by OCS, after which the case is returned to the consular officer overseas for final delivery of the Certificate of Loss of Nationality to the individual. In addition, every individual issued a Certificate of Loss of Nationality is advised of the possibility of seeking a future Administrative Review of the loss of nationality, a time-consuming process that is conducted by OCS's Office of Legal Affairs.

Currently, nationals who renounce nationality pay a fee of $2,350, while nationals who apply for documentation of relinquishment of nationality by the voluntary commission of an expatriating act with the intention to lose nationality, do not pay a fee. However the services performed in both situations are similar, requiring close and detailed case-by-case review of the factors involved in a request for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality, and both result in similar costs to the Department.

In the past, individuals seldom requested Certificates of Loss of Nationality from the Department to document relinquishment. Although the Department was aware that an individual relinquishment service was among the most time consuming of consular services, it was rarely performed so the overall cost to the Department was low and the Department did not establish a fee. Requests for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality on the basis of a non-renunciatory relinquishment have increased significantly in recent years, and the Department expects the number to grow in the future, causing the total cost of this service to increase. At the same time, the Department funds consular services completely from user fees. The Cost of Service Model continues to demonstrate that such costs are incurred by the Department when accepting, processing, and adjudicating relinquishment of nationality cases; therefore, the Department will collect a fee from all individuals seeking a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. Taking into account the costs of both renunciation and non-renunciation relinquishment processes, the fee will be $2,350.

Regulatory Findings Administrative Procedure Act

The Department is publishing this rule as an interim final rule with request for comment, with a 60-day provision for post-promulgation comments and with an effective date for § 22.1, Items 2.(a), 2.(b), and 2.(g) of less than 30 days from the date of publication, based on the “good cause” exception set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3). Delaying implementation of this rule would be contrary to the public interest because consular services are directly funded by user fees, not by appropriated funds. Each day that the Department is not collecting adequate user fees, services provided by the Department to citizens, nationals, and other customers worldwide suffer an immediate degradation. For example, the passport security surcharge change will provide approximately $1,000,000 per day to continue timely and secure passport services in a sustainable manner. There is no backup source of funds for consular services. Therefore, the Department finds that the delay involved in publishing this rule for notice and comment would cause immediate harm to the ability of the Department to provide these services.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department has reviewed this rule and, by approving it, certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

This rule will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501-1504.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

The Department has reviewed this rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in the Executive Orders. This rule has been submitted to OMB for review.

This rule is necessary in light of the Department of State's Fiscal Year 2013 update to the Cost of Service Model finding that the cost of processing passports has changed since those fees were last amended in 2010. The Department is setting the new fees in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 9701 and other applicable legal authorities, as described in detail above. See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2)(A) (“The head of each agency . . . may prescribe regulations establishing the charge for a service or thing of value provided by the agency . . . based on . . . the costs to the government.”). This regulation sets the fees for consular services at the amount required to recover the costs associated with providing that service.

Details of the fee changes are as follows:

Item No. New fee Current fee Change in fee Percentage
  • increase
  • Estimated annual number of
  • applications 1
  • Estimated change in annual fees collected 2
    SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES *         *         *         *         *         *         * PASSPORT AND CITIZENSHIP SERVICES 2. Passport Book Application Services for: 3 (a) Applicants age 16 or over (including renewals) $50 $70 −$20 −29 10,840,438 −$216,808,760 (b) Applicants under age 16 20 40 −20 −50 2,276,122 −$45,522,440 (g) Passport book security surcharge (enhanced border security fee) 60 40 20 50 13,116,560 $262,331,200 8. Administrative Processing of Request for Certificate of Loss of Nationality 4 (a.) Oath of renunciation 2,350 2,350 0 0 5,986 0 (b.) Relinquishment 2,350 0 2,350 N/A 559 $1,313,650 Total $1,313,650 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Based on projected FY 2015 workload. 2 Based on projected FY 2015 workload. 3 The shift of $20 between the passport application fee and the passport security surcharge will result in a reduction in funds deposited in the general fund of the Treasury and an increase in the funds retained by State. 4 The existing fee definition covers a projected 5,986 applicants renouncing their U.S. nationality in FY 2015. This rule expands the definition of the fee to cover an additional projected 559 applicants who will relinquish their nationality in FY 2015. The total volume of applicants paying this fee is projected to be 6,545, if in effect for all of FY 2015.
    Executive Orders 12372 and 13132

    This regulation will 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. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on federal programs and activities do not apply to this regulation.

    Executive Order 13175

    The Department has determined that this rulemaking will not have tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not preempt tribal law. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this rulemaking.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose any new reporting or record-keeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 22

    Consular services, Fees, Passports.

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, 22 CFR part 22 is amended as follows:

    PART 22—SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES—DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND FOREIGN SERVICE 1. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1153 note, 1183a note, 1351, 1351 note, 1714, 1714 note; 10 U.S.C. 2602(c); 11 U.S.C. 1157 note; 22 U.S.C. 214, 214 note, 1475e, 2504(a), 4201, 4206, 4215, 4219, 6551; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Exec. Order 10,718, 22 FR 4632 (1957); Exec. Order 11,295, 31 FR 10603 (1966).

    2. Section 22.1 is amended by: a. Revising Items 2.(a), (b), and (g), effective September 23, 2015; and b. Revising Item 8, effective November 9, 2015.

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 22.1 Schedule of fees. Schedule of Fees for Consular Services Item No. Fee PASSPORT AND CITIZENSHIP SERVICES *         *         *         *         *         *         * 2. Passport Book Application Services for: (a) Applicants age 16 or over (including renewals) 50 (b) Applicants under age 16 20 *         *         *         *         *         *         * (g) Passport book security surcharge (enhanced border security fee) 60 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 8. Administrative Processing of Request for Certificate of Loss of Nationality 2,350 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    Dated: August 28, 2015. Patrick F. Kennedy, Under Secretary of State for Management, U.S. Department of State.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22054 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Part 960 [Docket No. FR 5743-I-02] RIN 2577-AC94 Streamlining Administrative Regulations for Public Housing: Revisions to Public Housing Flat Rents AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Interim rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Section 238 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2015 (2015 Appropriations Act) amended the requirements in the United States Housing Act of 1937 (1937 Act) for public housing agencies (PHAs) to set flat rents in public housing. These requirements were previously amended by Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2014 (2014 Appropriations Act). This interim rule amends HUD regulations implementing the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 statutory language regarding public housing flat rents to allow PHAs to take advantage of the FY 2015 authority that provides PHAs with more flexibility in setting flat rents. This interim rule supersedes the portion of a proposed rule issued by HUD earlier this year that addressed the issue of setting flat rents in public housing, and HUD continues to seek comment on this issue.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: October 8, 2015.

    Comment Due Date: November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this interim rule. All communications must refer to the above docket number and title. There are two methods for submitting public comments.

    1. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500.

    2. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make comments immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically through the www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.

    Note:

    To receive consideration as public comments, comments must be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. Again, all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the rule.

    No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile (fax) comments are not acceptable.

    Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., weekdays, at the above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (this is a toll-free number). Copies of all comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Todd Thomas, Program Analyst, Public Housing Management and Occupancy Division, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 40 Marietta Street NW., Atlanta, GA 30303, telephone (678) 732-2056 (this is not a toll-free number) or at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Section 3(a)(2)(B) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(2)(B)) requires PHAs to set a flat rental amount for each public housing unit. In the 2014 Appropriations Act,1 this amount was statutorily set at no less than 80 percent of the applicable fair market rent (FMR), as determined by HUD under section 8(c) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)). In the event that implementation of this requirement would increase a family's rental payment by more than 35 percent a year, the PHA must phase in the flat rent as necessary to avoid such result. The 2014 Appropriations Act required HUD to implement this change by notice, and to begin the rulemaking process necessary to amend the corresponding regulations. HUD implemented the 2014 statutory change by notice issued on May 19, 2014 2 and commenced rulemaking on January 6, 2015, at 80 FR 423.3

    1 Title II of Division L of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, Public Law 113-76, approved January 17, 2014.

    2 See Notice PIH 2014-12 at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=pih2014-12.pdf.

    3 See http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-01-06/pdf/2014-30504.pdf.

    In the 2015 Appropriations Act,4 section 3 of the 1937 Act was amended again to allow for additional flexibility to the requirement that the flat rental amount be set at no less than 80 percent of the applicable FMR, as established under 8(c) of the 1937 Act. HUD may allow a PHA to establish a flat rent based on an FMR that is based on an area geographically smaller than would otherwise be used, if HUD determines that the resulting FMR more accurately reflects local market conditions. In addition, a PHA may apply to HUD for an exception allowing a flat rental amount that is lower than the amount otherwise determined under the two allowable FMRs, if HUD determines that the two FMRs do not reflect the market value of the property and the lower flat rental amount is based on a market analysis of the applicable market. In either case, the alternative flat rent must not create a disincentive for families seeking to become economically self-sufficient to continue to reside in public housing.

    4 Title II of Division K of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law 113-235, approved December 16, 2014.

    In addition to providing additional flexibility to the 80 percent of an applicable FMR and allowing PHAs to apply for an exception, the 2015 Appropriations Act struck the statutory language requiring flat rents to be based on the rental value of the unit and the language requiring PHAs to comply with the statutory provisions by June 1, 2014.

    HUD's January 6, 2015 rule proposed regulatory changes to conform to several statutory changes made to the 1937 Act that were designed to streamline and ease the burden of administrative requirements, imposed primarily on PHAs but also on multifamily housing owners administering programs and certain HUD Multifamily Housing and HUD Community Planning and Development programs. The January 6, 2015, proposed rule addresses a variety of administrative requirements, including verification of Social Security numbers, annual reexamination for families on fixed incomes, utility reimbursements, and the Earned Income Disregard used in several HUD programs. That proposed rule also included changes to 24 CFR 960.253(b), the regulations addressing public housing flat rents,5 and proposed to codify the changes already implemented for flat rents by PIH Notice 2014-12.

    5 See the discussion of flat rents in the preamble of the January 6, 2015, proposed rule at 80 FR 426, and the proposed regulatory changes at 80 FR 432-432.

    This interim rule replaces only the proposed changes with respect to flat rents in § 960.253(b); the changes proposed in January for other portions of § 960.253 remain in place, and are not effective until HUD issues a final rule that addresses all the regulatory changes proposed by HUD on January 6, 2015. HUD intends to issue a single final rule that takes into consideration all public comments received on both the January 6, 2015, proposed rule and this interim rule.

    II. This Interim Rule—Summary of Changes

    This interim rule, consistent with statutory authority and the notice implementing the changes in the 2014 Appropriations Act, establishes a standard flat rent amount at not less than 80 percent of the applicable FMR for a given unit.

    However, the 2015 Appropriations Act allowed PHAs flexibility when establishing flat rents if 80 percent of the applicable FMR did not reflect the market value of a unit.6 This interim rule amends 24 CFR 960.253(b)(2) to provide PHAs additional flexibility when setting flat rents using a HUD-determined FMR. First, this interim rule provides that HUD may permit a flat rental amount based on either 80 percent of the applicable FMR, or an FMR that more accurately reflects local market conditions and is based on an area geographically smaller than the one that would otherwise be used. This second FMR would be either the Small Area FMR (SAFMR), issued for metropolitan counties, or the unadjusted rents, for counties not covered by an SAFMR, or any successor fair market rental determination. If neither a SAFMR nor an unadjusted rent has been determined for an area, PHAs must set flat rents based on the applicable FMR for the larger area. Second, this interim rule provides that the PHA may submit to HUD a request for an exception to use a flat rental amount that is lower than the amount allowed under the two FMRs. This request, if made, must include a market analysis and a demonstration that the proposed lower flat rental amount is based on a market analysis of the applicable market and is reasonable in comparison to other comparable unassisted units.

    6 See, for example, the description of section 238 in the attached overview of the 2015 Appropriations Act by the Council of Large Public Housing Authorities, at http://www.clpha.org/articledetail/?aid=645.

    While the new statutory authority grants PHAs additional flexibility in establishing flat rents, PHAs are not required to exercise such flexibility. PHAs may opt to continue to implement flat rents equal to not less than 80 percent of the applicable FMR, as determined under 8(c) of the 1937 Act. Some PHAs may want to wait for the conclusion of public comment and the final rule before taking advantage of the new authority, and HUD understands and supports this position.

    However, consistent with the 2014 Appropriations Act and the implementing PIH Notice 2014-12, PHAs are required to adjust flat rents downward to account for tenant-paid utilities and to revise flat rents within 90 days of HUD's issuance of new FMRs. In addition, the family's rent must not increase by more than 35 percent in a single year as a result of the new flat rent rules.

    Finally, this interim rule removes language requiring documentation on the part of the PHA regarding the PHA's methods of determining a unit's flat rent, as the process setting flat rents is now less reliant upon discretionary actions by the PHA, except in the case of exception requests, which require documentation provided by PHAs.

    III. Justification for Interim Rulemaking

    In general, HUD publishes rules for advance public comment in accordance with its rule on rulemaking at 24 CFR part 10. However, under 24 CFR 10.1, HUD may omit prior public notice and comment if it is “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under such circumstances, HUD may publish an interim rule without soliciting public comment. In this instance, HUD has determined that it is unnecessary to delay the effectiveness of this rule for advance public comment.

    First, section 238 of the 2015 Appropriations Act is effective immediately and introduces statutory changes intended to provide relief to PHAs and tenants burdened by the current statute. This interim rule implements those statutory changes.

    Second, while the interim rule does exercise some discretion on the part of HUD, the exercise is minimal and generally relies on the PHA requesting action by HUD to initiate the action. HUD is not mandating that PHAs use the flexibility authorized by the new statutory language, but is rather allowing PHAs the option to utilize the new authority if they so choose. PHAs may elect to continue to establish flat rents in accordance with the changes allowed under the 2014 Appropriations Act. Given that many PHAs want to use the new authority, this interim rule strikes the right balance of allowing them to implement this new authority but not requiring them to do so.

    Finally, although HUD has determined that good cause exists to publish this rule for effect without prior solicitation of public comment, HUD recognizes the value and importance of public input in the rulemaking process. Accordingly, HUD is issuing these regulatory amendments on an interim basis and providing a 60-day public comment period.

    IV. Findings and Certifications Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review.” This rule was determined to be a “significant regulatory action,” as defined in section 3(f) of the order (although not an economically significant regulatory action under the order). The docket file is available for public inspection in the Regulations Division, Office of the General Counsel, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410- 0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the docket file by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (this is a toll-free number).

    Information Collection Requirements

    The information collection requirements contained in this interim rule have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB control numbers 2577-0220 and -0169. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This interim rule will not impose any Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector within the meaning of UMRA.

    Environmental Review

    A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment was made in accordance with HUD regulations in 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)), in connection with HUD's publication of the Streamlining Administrative Regulations proposed rule, published on January 6, 2015, at 80 FR 423. That FONSI remains applicable to this interim rule, and is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (this is a toll-free number).

    Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This interim rule reduces administrative burdens on PHAs in many aspects of administering public housing. All PHAs, regardless of size, will benefit from the burden reduction made by this interim rule. These revisions impose no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, the undersigned certifies that this interim rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    Notwithstanding HUD's belief that this interim rule will not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities, HUD specifically invites comments regarding any less burdensome alternatives to this interim rule that will meet HUD's objectives as described in this preamble.

    Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments and is not required by statute or the rule preempts State law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive order. This interim rule does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments nor preempt State law within the meaning of the Executive order.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for the Public Housing program is 14.872.

    List of Subjects for 24 CFR Part 960

    Aged, Grant programs—housing and community development, Individuals with disabilities, Pets, Public housing.

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD amends 24 CFR part 960 as follows:

    PART 960—ADMISSION TO, AND OCCUPANCY OF, PUBLIC HOUSING 1. The authority citation for 24 CFR part 960 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 1437a, 1437c, 1437d, 1437n, 1437z-3, and 3535(d).

    2. In § 960.253, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 960.253 Choice of rent.

    (b) Flat rent. The flat rent is determined annually, based on the market rental value of the unit as determined by this paragraph (b).

    (1) The PHA must establish a flat rent for each public housing unit that is no less than 80 percent of the applicable Fair Market Rent (FMR) as determined under 24 CFR part 888, subpart A; or

    (2) HUD may permit a flat rent of no less than 80 percent of an applicable small area FMR (SAFMR) or unadjusted rent, if applicable, as determined by HUD, or any successor determination, that more accurately reflects local market conditions and is based on an applicable market area that is geographically smaller than the applicable market area used in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If HUD has not determined an applicable SAFMR or unadjusted rent, the PHA must rely on the applicable FMR under paragraph (b)(1) or may apply for an exception flat rent under paragraph (b)(3).

    (3) The PHA may request, and HUD may approve, on a case-by-case basis, a flat rent that is lower than the amounts in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, subject to the following requirements:

    (i) The PHA must submit a market analysis of the applicable market.

    (ii) The PHA must demonstrate, based on the market analysis, that the proposed flat rent is a reasonable rent in comparison to rent for other comparable unassisted units, based on the location, quality, size, unit type, and age of the public housing unit and any amenities, housing services, maintenance, and utilities to be provided by the PHA in accordance with the lease.

    (iii) All requests for exception flat rents under this paragraph (b)(3) must be submitted to HUD.

    (4) For units where utilities are tenant-paid, the PHA must adjust the flat rent downward by the amount of a utility allowance for which the family might otherwise be eligible under 24 CFR part 965, subpart E.

    (5) The PHA must revise, if necessary, the flat rent amount for a unit no later than 90 days after HUD issues new FMRs.

    (6) If a new flat rent would cause a family's rent to increase by more than 35 percent, the family's rent increase must be phased in at 35 percent annually until such time that the family chooses to pay the income-based rent or the family is paying the flat rent established pursuant to this paragraph.

    Dated: August 7, 2015. Lourdes Castro Ramírez, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing. Approved on August 7, 2015. Nani A. Coloretti, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22022 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Parts 3280, 3282 and 3285 [Docket No. FR-5295-F-02] RIN 2502-AI83 On-Site Completion of Construction of Manufactured Homes AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule establishes a procedure whereby construction of new manufactured housing that is substantially completed in the factory can be completed at the installation site, rather than in the plant. Before this rule, a manufacturer would first be required to obtain HUD approval for on-site completion of each of its designs using the alternate construction provisions of HUD's regulations. This final rule simplifies this process by establishing uniform procedures by which manufacturers may complete construction of their homes at the installation site without having to obtain advance approval from HUD. This final rule applies only to the completion of homes subject to the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards, not to the installation of homes subject to the Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards. Moreover, this final rule would not apply when a major section of a manufactured home is to be constructed on-site.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: March 7, 2016

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Pamela B. Danner, Administrator, Office of Manufactured Housing Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 9168, Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-708-6423 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8389 (this is a toll-free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.) (the Act), as amended, authorizes HUD to establish and amend the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (the Construction and Safety Standards, or Standards). The Construction and Safety Standards established by HUD are codified in 24 CFR part 3280. The Act also authorizes HUD to conduct inspections and investigations necessary to enforce the Standards, to determine whether a manufactured home fails to comply with an applicable standard or contains a defect or an imminent safety hazard, and to direct the manufacturer to furnish notification of such failure, defect, or hazard, and, in some cases, to remedy the defect or imminent safety hazard through established procedures necessary to ensure compliance with the Construction and Safety Standards and the related enforcement and monitoring provisions of the Act. These procedures are codified in 24 CFR part 3282. As provided in § 3282.1(b), HUD's policy is to work in partnership, especially with State agencies, in the enforcement of the Construction and Safety Standards, consistent with the public interest.

    This final rule establishes procedures to permit completion of new manufactured housing at the installation site, rather than in the factory, under certain circumstances. Prior to this rule, manufacturers were required to request and obtain advanced HUD approval to permit alternative construction (AC) under § 3282.14(b), for each model of home that it wanted to complete on-site rather than in the production facility. Among other things, manufacturers were required to include in their requests information regarding how the construction work completed on-site would bring the home into conformance with the Construction and Safety Standards. This final rule establishes simplified procedures that eliminate the requirement for the manufacturer to obtain advance HUD approval and permits certain construction to be completed on-site rather than in the factory when the completed site work will bring the home into conformance with the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards.

    This final rule follows a proposed rule published on June 23, 2010 (75 FR 35902), and takes into account public comments received on the proposed rule. In preparing this final rule, HUD also reconsidered and incorporated some of the earlier comments provided by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) during the development of the proposed rule. The MHCC is a Federal Advisory Committee authorized by the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-569) (42 U.S.C. 5403). The MHCC was established to provide HUD with periodic recommendations regarding Federal Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards and related procedural and enforcement regulations.

    II. Changes and Clarifications Made in This Final Rule

    This final rule follows publication of the June 23, 2010, proposed rule and takes into consideration the public comments received on the proposed rule. In response to public comment, a discussion of which is presented in the following section of this preamble, and in further consideration of issues addressed at the proposed rule stage, the Department is making the following changes at this final rule:

    • Section 3280.5 has been revised to conform to this final rule to require that the manufacturer's data plate contain information, if applicable, stating that, except for the components completed on-site, the home has been substantially completed in accordance with an approved design and has been inspected in accordance with the Construction and Safety Standards.

    • Section 3280.305 has been revised to provide that the attic floor of homes with high-pitched roofs (with slopes of 7:12 or greater), completed on-site, be designed to support live loads of 40 pounds per square inch. The attic floor of homes with roofs with slopes less than 7:12 that contain an attic space that can be used for storage must be designed for a storage live load of 20 pounds per square foot.

    • Section 3282.603(d) has been revised to provide that the contents of the Design Approval Primary Inspection Agency (DAPIA) approval, in addition to items listed in this section in the proposed rule, must include a unique site completion numeric identification for each approval for each manufacturer (i.e., manufacturer name or abbreviation, SC-XX) and a quality control checklist to be used by the manufacturer and Production Inspection Primary Inspection Agency (IPIA) and approved by the DAPIA to verify that all required components, materials, labels, and instructions needed for site completion are provided in each home prior to shipment.

    • Section 3282.604(c) of the proposed rule which would have required the DAPIA to determine if complex work requires special criteria or qualification for the IPIA inspector has been removed in this final rule.

    • Section 3282.605(a) has been revised to permit the “SC” designation to be used as either a prefix or suffix in the serial number for homes or sections of homes completed on-site.

    • Section 3282.605(b) has been revised to remove the requirement that the manufacturer include a green, on-site certification label of the same size, location, material, and fastening as provided by § 3280.11. Rather, this final rule provides that the manufacturer have a label affixed to the home, in accordance with § 3282.362(c)(2).

    • Section 3282.605(d)(4) has been revised to provide that the manufacturer must, within 5 business days after receiving notification from the IPIA regarding acceptance of its final site inspection report, provide the purchaser or lessor, as applicable, the manufacturer's final site inspection report.

    • Section 3282.607 has been revised to provide that the IPIA is responsible for reporting to HUD, the DAPIA, and manufacturer if one or more homes has not been site inspected prior to occupancy or when arrangements for one or more manufactured homes to be site inspected have not been made.

    • Section 3282.608 has been revised in several ways. First, HUD removed the requirement that the manufacturer certify the home by affixing the on-site completion certification label as proposed at paragraph (f), and that the manufacturer notify a State or local jurisdiction of any add-on to the home as proposed by paragraph (n). HUD also revised paragraph (e) by adding the requirement that the manufacturer maintain a copy of any applicable DAPIA-approved quality assurance manual for on-site completion, the approved instructions for completing the construction work on-site, and the approved inspection checklist at the job site until all on-site work is completed and accepted by the IPIA. HUD also added paragraph (f) which makes the manufacturer responsible for the satisfactory completion of all on-site construction and required repairs and for authorizing a licensed contractor or a similarly qualified person to complete site construction and needed repairs. HUD also added paragraph (g) to require that the manufacturer provide a written certification to the lessor or purchaser when all site construction work is completed that each home, to the best of the manufacturer's knowledge and belief, is constructed in conformance with the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards. Finally, HUD revised paragraph (m) of the final rule to require the manufacturer to provide a copy of the site report to a State Administrative Agency (SAA), upon request.

    • Section 3285.801(f)(2) has been revised to provide that homes with roof slopes of less than 7:12, including any designs incorporating peak cap construction or peak flip construction, are exempt from IPIA inspection and are to be inspected in accordance with 24 CFR part 3286.

    III. The Public Comments

    The public comment period for the June 23, 2010 (75 FR 35902), proposed rule closed August 23, 2010. In addition to soliciting comments on the proposal as a whole, HUD invited comments on 26 specific questions. HUD received 20 public comments. Comments were submitted by individuals; a housing alliance; a housing and community development organization; a vertically integrated manufactured housing company; a marketer of factory-built homes; a fire, building, and life-safety organization; manufactured housing associations; an industry trade journal; a State licensed installer/manager; a producer of manufactured housing; and a trade association representing all segments of the factory-built housing industry. The following section of this preamble summarizes the significant issues raised by the commenters on the June 23, 2010, proposed rule and HUD's responses to these comments.

    A. General Comments Consistency of the Rule With the Act

    Comment: Several commenters stated that properly implemented, the rule supports the goals of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 to “facilitate the availability of affordable manufactured homes” and “encourage innovative and cost-effective construction techniques for manufactured homes.” These commenters stated that allowing selected completion of construction after the home is transported to the site will also encourage the use of designs and techniques that will demonstrate the adaptability and versatility of manufactured housing. The commenters stated that the current process of HUD approval of AC requests on a case-by-case basis is time consuming, unduly costly, and ultimately unnecessary given the third-party design approval and quality control inspection infrastructure that the program already has in place.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenters that allowing selected completion of homes to conform to the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards after the homes have been transported to the site will encourage and facilitate use of innovative designs and construction methods and that its current method of approving AC requests has been time consuming.

    Comment: Another commenter stated, however, that the manufactured home program appears to be expanding beyond the scope of the Act. Specifically, the commenter stated that the manufactured home industry of today appears to be competing with site-built and modular homes constructed to site-built codes. Rather than providing affordable, safe, durable, low-cost housing, the manufactured housing industry is trying to outdo site-built homes while trying to avoid the site-built codes and regulations adopted by most States with preemptive and weakened Federal regulations that are not strictly enforced to ensure safe, durable housing for consumers.

    HUD Response: The scope of HUD's authority to regulate the manufacture of manufactured homes is established by the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Act, as amended. Under the Act, HUD is responsible for establishing construction and safety standards that, among other things, protects residents of manufactured homes, while encouraging innovation and cost-effective construction techniques. This rule recognizes that manufactured housing is evolving in ways that may not have been contemplated when the Act was enacted. Nevertheless, this rule remains consistent with the Act and its goals and reflects HUD's efforts to encourage innovative designs, while ensuring that high construction standards continue to be met.

    Overall Purpose of the Rule is Too Broad

    Comment: One commenter stated that under the proposed rule, there are many situations that would require extensive approval, reporting, and notification procedures and that there is not a clear “trigger” for when this new process would be required. The commenter stated, for example, that there are a number of existing DAPIA approvals that currently allow site installation of certain components, such as the field installation of double exterior doors (to prevent damage during transportation) and the field installation of fireplace hearths that cross the mating lines. These on-site installations are minor in nature and are already a natural part of the current process. The commenter asked, therefore, whether they would fall under the new proposal.

    HUD Response: Yes, the field completion and installation of these components would be allowed under § 3282.602(a)(4) and (a)(5) of the final rule.

    Rule Will Create Confusion for Consumers

    Comment: One commenter stated that the proposed rule would significantly change the procedure for the on-site assembly of manufactured homes and will create confusion with consumers and retailers and may add unnecessary cost. The commenter stated that the completion of manufactured homes on-site should be left to the State or local authority having jurisdiction, working from manufacturer and DAPIA-approved methods of site assembly.

    HUD Response: HUD believes that this rule will not create confusion with consumers and retailers or add to costs currently incurred by manufactures under the AC procedure for similar site-completion work. The final rule continues to require the IPIA rather than a State or local authority having jurisdiction to conduct the inspection. HUD does not agree with the commenter's suggestion that entities other than IPIAs conduct the final site inspection, as State or local jurisdictions are often unfamiliar with the requirements of the Standards and are not authorized to conduct these inspections on HUD's behalf.

    Rule Shifts Regulatory Burden to Retailers and Installers

    Comment: Several commenters recommended that HUD withdraw the proposed rule given its lack of accountability, oversight, and enforcement, coupled with its failure to recognize the concerns of the retailers, installers, and home buying public. Another commenter stated that the views and concerns of retailers and certified installers in States that have approved programs have not been considered. One commenter described the on-site rule as the manufactured housing industry trying to shift the burden to retailers and installers. Other commenters claimed that the rule adds unnecessary administrative paperwork that will restrict the manufacturer and retailer's ability to use the new process effectively.

    HUD Response: Rather than adding layers of administrative paperwork, HUD believes that this final rule streamlines the approval process for on-site construction. This final rule adds only minimal burdens for retailers and installers. The final rule requires retailers to provide a copy of the consumer notice to prospective purchasers before sale; however, under current AC practices, they are already required to provide such a notice to purchasers. The only burden shifted to installers is the inclusion of the completion of peak flip and peak cap construction as installation, rather than construction, when the roof pitch is less than 7:12 and the home is designed to be located in Wind Zone I. Manufacturers continue to remain responsible for successful completion of all site work to conform to HUD's standards and regulations.

    Rule Should Clearly Identify Excluded Close-up and Related Work

    Comment: Several commenters, citing language in the preamble of the proposed rule, agreed with the exclusion of close-up work from the proposed rule but recommended that the rule specify the types of close-up work that would be excluded from the rule. These commenters recommended that close-up work excluded from the rule include: (1) Duct connection from half to half and additional crossovers; (2) dryer vent, range cook-top exhaust termination vents; (3) ridge vents; (4) plumbing connections in the attic; (5) gas line connections between the halves; (6) the main power supply connection; (7) electrical crossover connections; (8) front and rear siding; and (9) floor and roof connections (e.g., lags, straps, etc.). According to the commenters, specifying the types of close-up work excluded from the rule will avoid future disputes regarding the scope of on-site completion and reduce unnecessary costs for manufacturers and consumers.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees that specifying the types of close-up work excluded from the rule will avoid future disputes; however, the specific types of close-up work cited by the commenters are already covered under various provisions of HUD's Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards, or would be considered as components for construction qualifying for on-site completion under § 3282.602(a) of this final rule.

    Comment: A commenter recommended that HUD remove terms such as “reasonably” and “practically” from the final rule since these terms are not quantifiable and meaningless in the regulation.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter and has removed the terms “reasonably” and “practicably” from the final rule.

    Rule Should Adopt a More Streamlined and Less Redundant Labeling and Reporting Method

    Comment: Several commenters described HUD's method of designating homes constructed on-site with an “SC” designation as a prudent and necessary requirement. These commenters recommended, however, that manufacturers should have the flexibility of including the “SC” designation as either a prefix or a suffix, or in the middle of the serial number. According to these commenters, many manufacturers use the serial number for various types of recordkeeping and invoicing. Requiring manufacturers to use the “SC” designation as a prefix is unnecessarily restrictive and will necessitate cumbersome and extensive changes to current database programs and recordkeeping practices.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenters and has revised § 3282.605(a) of the final rule to permit the “SC” designation to be used as either a prefix or suffix in the serial number for homes or sections of homes completed under this rule.

    Comment: Several commenters strongly opposed the use of a green on-site completion certification label. These commenters stated that use of a different color permanent label for a home completed on-site will lead to significant disorder in the market, which already suffers from confusion between manufactured homes, modular homes, and park models. According to these commenters, the label is utilized by consumers, code inspectors, zoning officials, lenders, and appraisers as the primary distinguishing feature to differentiate between these different types of factory-built housing. The commenters recommended that the proposal to require a data plate with an “SC” designation, combined with a notice to the consumer, would be sufficient to meet the objectives of this proposal. These commenters also stated that consumer notice should be provided at the time the buyer enters into a contract to purchase the home rather than requiring it to be posted in the home. This will ensure that the buyer has complete knowledge of the status of the home and knows that it will not be complete until a certificate of occupancy is provided. Another commenter stated that there is no way to get the text required by § 3282.605(b)(2) on a 2in x 4in label and make it legible.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenters and is revising § 3282.605(b) of the final rule to remove the requirement that the manufacturer include a green, on-site certification label. Rather, the current label required by § 3282.362(c)(2) will be required for homes completed on-site. The final rule continues to require, however, that the consumer notice be provided to prospective purchasers before sale of the home is completed.

    Comment: A commenter stated that HUD's existing label method should be viewed to signify compliance of the home prior to delivery from the factory. According to the commenter, a label placed on the unit at the factory cannot signify more because future on-site construction and inspections have not yet occurred.

    HUD Response: The placement of the label on the home at the factory is consistent with the current AC process, which requires the IPIA to inspect the unit at the site to verify that all work that could not be completed at the factory is satisfactorily completed on-site. This final rule requires the IPIA to inspect all work that could not be completed at the factory and to verify that the home complies with the Department's Standards when completed on-site. Further, under this final rule, a home cannot be occupied until a successful inspection has been completed by the IPIA.

    Comment: Several commenters questioned the requirement that the manufacturer notify the appropriate State or local jurisdiction of any add-on to the home that has not been inspected by the State or local jurisdiction as unnecessary and inappropriately placing responsibility on the manufacturer to certify that the home meets the Federal Manufactured Home Construction Safety Standards. The commenters suggested that this requirement may raise liability issues by extending responsibility for construction issues not covered by the Construction and Safety Standards to the manufacturer.

    HUD Response: The requirement in § 3282.608(n) of the proposed rule for the manufacturer to notify the State or local jurisdiction of any add-on to the home has been removed from this final rule.

    Frequency of On-site Inspections

    Comment: Several commenters expressed concern regarding the provision requiring an on-site inspection to be completed by the IPIA for every home prior to occupancy. According to the commenters, the reporting requirements in the proposed rule are redundant and have the potential to cause unnecessary, costly delays in loan closings and settlements; increase costs for the homebuyer; and reduce consumer satisfaction. The commenters questioned, for example, whether it was necessary to require both the IPIA and the manufacturer to prepare a site inspection report. According to the commenters, the required DAPIA approved “on-site” inspection checklist can be used by all parties to provide the necessary information and assurances that the on-site work was completed in accordance with the DAPIA approved design. The checklist can be expanded to include the necessary manufacturer's certification, and the identifying items specified in § 3282.605(d)(2) of the proposed rule, e.g., serial numbers, names and addresses, etc. This expanded inspection checklist can be used for the necessary reporting requirements and can be used to obtain the certificate of occupancy and can serve as the necessary documentation for lenders, settlement agents, State Administrative Agencies (SAA's) and HUD.

    HUD Response: HUD does not agree with the commenters and a successful on-site inspection must be independently completed by the IPIA prior to occupancy for all site completed homes, as required by this final rule.

    Comment: Several commenters recommended that site work be treated as yet another “stage of production” whereby each unit is inspected in at least one stage of its production. The commenters recommended that the rule be changed to reflect current inspection practices and extend flexibility to the IPIA for determining frequency of on-site inspections as they deem necessary based on complexity of the design and history of past inspections. As an option, the commenters recommended that HUD modify the rule to allow a manufacturer to elect either 100 percent on-site inspection offset by reduced in-plant inspections, or audit type inspections subject to frequency adjustments based on demonstrated compliance levels.

    HUD Response: HUD believes that the construction completed on-site is part of the final production necessary to complete the home. HUD believes that IPIA inspection of each home completed on-site is required to ensure compliance with its Safety and Construction Standards since on-site construction necessarily involves the completion of a variety of unique design specification and quality control procedures that may be performed by staff or representatives assigned by retailers or manufacturers for which there is no way for HUD to ensure their knowledge and qualifications.

    Comment: One commenter stated that the proposed rule allows 10 days after IPIA approval for the manufacturer to provide the report to the consumer. According to the commenter, this time frame is unrealistic and contrary to a number of State laws defining completion of sale.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter and has revised § 3282.605(d)(4) of the final rule to require that the report be provided 5 days after IPIA approval to facilitate the completion of sale.

    Non-IPIA Inspections of On-site Work

    Comment: Several commenters supported provisions in the proposed rule prohibiting non-IPIA inspections of on-site work. According to these commenters, allowing non-IPIA inspections of the on-site work would erode HUD's authority and is contrary to the existing and effective inspection process in the current regulations. In addition, it would be a disincentive for States to become HUD-approved State IPIAs under the current regulations, and would complicate the current inspection process. These commenters stated that if SAAs wish to become IPIAs as provided under the current procedural and enforcement regulations, they have every opportunity to do so through the appropriate approval process.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenters. As previously indicated, only IPIAs or representatives of IPIAs are authorized to perform on-site completion inspections under this final rule.

    Comment: Another commenter stated that completion of manufactured homes on-site should be left to the State or local authority having jurisdiction over the work site, working from manufacturer/DAPIA approved methods of site assembly. According to the commenter, if State or local authorities having jurisdiction are not allowed to inspect on-site construction, a large segment of the consumer protection will have been lost from the manufactured housing program and it may increase the cost to consumers as local authorities having jurisdiction will still invoice, issue permits, and inspect other on-site work.

    HUD Response: HUD disagrees with the commenter. Using State or local jurisdictions to perform the on-site inspections would be both outside of HUD's regulatory system, as established under 24 CFR part 3282, and would create inconsistencies in interpretation, tracking, and reporting between those entities and the Department and may result in unnecessary costs for consumers. In addition, some State or local jurisdictions may not have the ability or resources to perform the inspection.

    Rule Imposes Additional Burdens and Confusion on Local and State Building Code Enforcers

    Comment: Several comments stated that the rule will cause many local municipalities and State building code enforcers to reexamine their current programs. According to these commenters, current building codes were enacted under the assumption that every section of manufactured housing would be constructed in accordance with approved designs and inspected under an approved quality assurance program. On-site completion would change this and shift compliance responsibilities to local and State officials who will have to reexamine their current programs to include these responsibilities.

    HUD Response: HUD does not believe that the rule will impact current programs of State or local building code enforcers or create additional confusion for consumers. The final rule makes no changes from current AC procedures for inspection or acceptance of the work being completed on-site and therefore should not impact current programs of State or local building code enforcers.

    B. Specific Issues for Comment

    To assist in HUD's development of this final rule, HUD solicited feedback on specific questions and issues associated with its on-site completion procedures. Each question will be followed by the comments received and HUD's responses to those commenters in developing this final rule.

    1. How should the rule define the limits on the construction work that may be completed on-site

    Comment: Several commenters recommended that the rule retain a broad definition of “substantial completion” to not limit future technological advances. One commenter, for example, suggested that an external heating/cooling technology may become available that would differ based upon the geography or other physical feature of the job site, which might go beyond the “box” of the home. As a result, the commenter stated that HUD's final rule should maintain flexibility in defining the type of work that may be completed on-site. Other commenters agreed stating that there should not be a defined limit due to the infinite combinations of on-site construction. The commenters suggest that limits be left to the DAPIAs and manufacturers, who are well-suited to determine and clarify on-site construction. Other commenters stated that § 3283.602 provides adequate examples that qualify for on-site completion and provide adequate direction to enable manufacturers and DAPIAs to determine when on-site construction protocol is warranted. Another commenter stated that extending on-site completion to certain installation work, such as a hinged roof, is appropriate since this work is performed under the guidance of the manufacturer.

    HUD Response: HUD shares an interest in promoting technological advances in the design and manufacture of manufactured housing and agrees that manufacturers and manufacturer's DAPIAs and IPIAs should have flexibility in determining the scope of construction that may be approved to be completed on-site. HUD also agrees that § 3282.602(a) of this final rule contains adequate examples to determine whether a particular type of construction may qualify for on-site completion. This flexibility should encourage and not inhibit future technological advancements. Further, the final rule does not change current practice with regard to which site work is considered construction and which is considered installation, except for the inclusion of peak flip or peak cap construction with roof slopes less than 7:12, when homes are designed to be located in Wind Zone I.

    2. Should the proposed requirements applicable to on-site completion in accordance with the construction and safety standards be extended to repairs of homes in the hands of retailers or distributors or to work proposed to be defined as installation, especially close-up details for multiple and single sections?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that repairs should not be included in the rule. These commenters submitted that repairs do not fit the scope of this rule and including them will inevitably lead to consumer dissatisfaction. The commenters stated that subjecting repairs to the on-site process would also result in increased cost to consumers where there has been no indication of changes required from present practice.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees. This final rule does not include any additional requirements for repairs of manufactured homes in the possession of retailers or distributors beyond those requirements currently in effect under 24 CFR part 3282, subpart F.

    3. Has HUD drawn the proper lines between aspects of work on the home to be finalized as part of installation and those aspects that would be considered completion of construction under a special approval for either on-site or AC?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the distinction between on-site construction work and installation work should be clarified. According to these commenters, more clearly defining the work subject to on-site construction process would provide greater flexibility in the on-site inspection process and ensure uniform, preemptive Federal regulation and oversight of on-site work.

    HUD Response: HUD believes that the distinction between on-site construction work and installation work is adequately provided by § 3282.602 of this final rule and related provisions in HUD's Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards, 24 CFR part 3285. In addition, HUD clarified the distinction for certain types of roof construction by allowing peak flip and peak cap construction with a roof pitch of less than 7:12, when located in Wind Zone I, to be considered as installation.

    Comment: Another commenter stated that the rule cites examples of work to which the new rule would apply (e.g., completion of dormer windows, additions of sidings/stone/stucco, certain types of hinged roofs, and assembly of multistory designs) which would be part of the construction standards if factory installed. The commenter continued, however, that this work also becomes part of the home installation if it is to performed on-site. According to the commenter, the rule does not clearly distinguish “on-site construction” from “installation.” As a result, it may be difficult to determine whether HUD's Construction and Safety or Installation Standards apply.

    HUD Response: HUD does not agree with the commenter, and believes that this final rule distinguishes between on-site construction work that could or should have been completed in the factory and work that is considered part of the installation of the home.

    Comment: Several commenters stated that including the on-site installation of certain components such as the field installation of double exterior doors and of fireplace hearths that cross the mating line are too broad and should be questioned. According to the commenters, allowing unregulated entities to provide alternate or additional building components without the benefit of proper oversight should not be permitted. The commenters stated that some appliances are likely to be installed in new manufactured homes that will not only take the home out of compliance, but also defeat some of the safeguards provided in the present Construction and Safety Standards.

    HUD Response: As stated in response to a previous comment, the field completion and installation of these components are permitted under § 3282.602(a)(4) and (a)(5) of this final rule. Site installation of these types of building components, including appliances and fireplaces, are subject to final inspection and oversight by the IPIA under this final rule.

    Comment: Several commenters expressed disagreement with HUD's decision to codify the Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards in part 3285 rather than incorporating them in the Construction and Safety Standards in part 3280 of the Code of Federal Regulations. However, despite this disagreement, the commenters agreed with HUD that on-site work covered by the proposed rule clearly entails final “construction” of the home and is subject to the Federal preemption.

    HUD Response: The National Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act does not permit “installation” to be considered as “construction” and does not authorize codification of the Model Installation Standards under the preemptive provisions of 24 CFR part 3280.

    4. What is the best method for assuring that the on-site construction work is inspected for compliance with the construction and safety standards prior to occupancy?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that on-site inspection is a natural extension of the manufacturing process and, as a result, the inspection process should do the same. According to these commenters, each unit in the factory is inspected by an IPIA in at least one stage of its production. Further, manufacturer's personnel are responsible for inspection of all stages of production. The commenters submitted that this process should be applied to on-site construction and that the manufacturer's personnel certify completion, subject to sampling by the IPIA and that the frequency of inspections would be determined by the IPIA, based on the manufacturer's performance.

    HUD Response: As the personnel and work crew at each home site typically varies, HUD considers the on-site construction work at each site to be similar to conducting a plant certification during which both the manufacturer and IPIA are responsible for inspecting each phase of the production to ensure the quality assurance system is properly functioning and the work performed conforms to the Standards. As such, the final rule makes the manufacturer responsible for satisfactory completion of all on-site work for each home and requires the IPIA to inspect all of the on-site construction work for each home.

    5. Should the IPIA be the only entity permitted to conduct the on-site inspections required under this rule or should the rule be amended to permit a State to conduct the on-site inspections?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the inspection process needs to be uniform nationally, and recommend that only HUD-approved IPIAs be permitted to conduct on-site inspections. These commenters supported the provisions in the rule prohibiting parties other than the plant's IPIA from being responsible for inspections of on-site work performed by individuals that may be unqualified since to do otherwise may result in insufficient oversight. Several commenters opposed requiring or permitting on-site inspections by any State entity other than an approved State stating that such an approach would discourage States from becoming SAAs and, thereby, weakening and undermining the Federal-State partnership envisioned by the Act. According to the commenters, a State option or mandate could also allow States to exercise IPIA-type enforcement powers without meeting all the requirements for HUD approval as an IPIA, thereby undermining HUD superintendence and control of the regulation of manufactured housing as provided by Federal law.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with these commenters. Inspections need to be uniform nationally and performed by entities that are knowledgeable with the requirements of the Standards. As a result and as stated in response to a previous comment, only IPIAs are authorized to conduct site completion inspections under this final rule.

    Comment: Several commenters also stated that allowing non-IPIA agencies to regulate inspections of the on-site work would erode HUD's authority and is contrary to the existing and effective inspection process established by the current regulations. These commenters stated that inspections by non-IPIA agencies may expose consumers to inconsistent, ineffective, and more costly and/or improper regulation.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with these commenters and reiterates that only IPIAs are authorized to conduct site completion inspections under this final rule.

    Comment: Other commenters, however, suggested that the final rule allow manufacturers to elect between on-site inspections by IPIAs or by other HUD-approved, non-IPIA licensed and insured individuals or entities, such as Registered Professional Engineers or Certified Architect-Engineers. According to the commenters, permitting on-site inspections by HUD-approved, independent, licensed professionals would result in more effective competition and more affordable inspection prices and ensure proper accountability for errors or omissions.

    HUD Response: HUD's interest in ensuring that inspections are conducted by entities knowledgeable with the Construction and Safety Standards requires that it authorize only IPIAs to conduct site completion inspections under this final rule. However, an IPIA may authorize or designate a professional engineer or architect or other inspection professionals to conduct inspections on their behalf.

    6. Should the IPIA inspect all homes completed on-site, or should the IPIA undertake inspections only for a certain number or percentage of homes completed on-site?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that not every home needs to be inspected and recommended that the IPIA should inspect a percentage of homes that convinces them that the process is being completed as directed. They suggested that the IPIA determine how many inspections should be performed, based on the complexity and multiple uses of an approval across different models and in accordance with the regulations. The commenters based their recommendation on the fact that IPIA personnel do not inspect each home at every stage of production and are not required to inspect homes at any specific stage of production, or specifically upon completion in a production facility.

    HUD Response: As noted in response to a previous comment, HUD believes that construction completed on-site is part of the final production necessary to complete the home. Notwithstanding, on-site construction necessarily involves the completion of a variety of unique design specification and quality control procedures which may be performed by staff or representatives assigned by the retailer or manufacture. HUD does not have a means to ensure that such staff has the proper qualifications and knowledge to perform the work. As a result, HUD believes that IPIA inspection of each home completed on-site is required to ensure compliance with the Safety and Construction Standards.

    Comment: Commenters also suggested that manufacturers be allowed to exercise an election regarding the inspection of homes completed on-site, in place of the one-size-fits-all, 100 percent inspection mandated by the proposed rule. According to the commenters, such an approach would reduce costs and create flexibility for the IPIA and HUD to increase the frequency of inspection as warranted by a particular manufacturer's compliance with its DAPIA approved on-site design and the Standards. One commenter recommended that HUD modify the rule to permit manufacturers to elect 100 percent on-site inspection, offset by reduced in-plant inspections, or audit type inspections subject to frequency adjustments based on demonstrated compliance levels.

    HUD Response: HUD does not agree with the commenters. Initially, given the scope and complexity of construction that may be completed on-site, inspection of each home at the construction site is not a “one-size-fits-all” procedure. Further, providing manufacturers the option of reducing in plant inspections for each on-site inspection misses the fact that inspections on-site differ in scope and purpose from in plant inspections. Consequently, IPIA inspection of each home completed on-site is required by this final rule to ensure conformance to the Standards and the manufacturer's designs and specifications.

    Comment: Some commenters expressed concern that requiring an on-site inspection to be completed by the IPIA for every home prior to occupancy will result in lengthy delays in the construction and sales process, add unnecessary costs for the homebuyer, and reduce consumer satisfaction. Other commenters suggested that the rule be changed to reflect current inspection practices and extend flexibility to the IPIA for determining the frequency of on-site inspections as they deem necessary based on complexity of the design and history of past inspection.

    HUD Response: HUD does not anticipate that the inspection of each home completed on-site will result in any additional time or delay than is currently required for IPIAs to conduct inspections under AC procedures.

    7. Should authorized inspectors be limited to State and local inspection officials, rather than permitting IPIAs to choose some other qualified independent inspector?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the IPIA should designate who may act on its behalf. They also stated that the qualifications of individuals selected to act on behalf of the IPIA should be no different than those required of individuals conducting in-plant inspections.

    HUD Response: Each IPIA may designate and authorize independent inspection professionals to conduct inspections on their behalf, as permitted by § 3282.607(d) of this final rule. Any IPIA that permits others to act on its behalf assumes full regulatory responsibility for those individuals.

    8. Does HUD need to identify those aspects of completion of the home that are not subject to Federal Construction and Safety Standards and inform local inspectors that they may inspect those aspects?

    Comment: Some commenters stated that designating those aspects subject to local inspection would be helpful as long as some consistency is maintained. However, other commenters stated that there should be no need for HUD's involvement in on-site work items that are not covered by or subject to the Standards. In addition, commenters also stated that when permits are required, those items are covered and inspected by the jurisdiction issuing the permit and these construction elements are the responsibility of others and outside the control of the manufacturer. Other commenters stated that this is not part of the regulatory responsibility of manufacturers under Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and should not be required.

    HUD Response: The final rule requires the IPIA, rather than a State or local authority having jurisdiction, to conduct the inspection. HUD does not agree with the commenters' suggestion to permit entities other than IPIAs to perform the final site inspection. HUD believes that entities such as State or local jurisdictions are often unfamiliar with the requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards and are not are authorized to conduct these inspections on HUD's behalf.

    9. Should the DAPIA be permitted to determine whether the complex work also requires special criteria or qualification for the IPIA inspector in order to perform the on-site inspection?

    Comment: One commenter stated that the manufacturer, not the DAPIA, is responsible for the proper completion of all on-site work and, in conjunction with its IPIA, should be responsible for the proper inspection of such work. According to the commenter, 24 CFR part 3282, subpart I, makes the manufacturer responsible for noncompliances and defects in the home. As a result, the commenter recommended that the manufacturer and IPIA determine the appropriate qualifications for the on-site inspector in a given situation.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter. As a result, HUD has removed from this final rule the requirement proposed by § 3282.604(c) that would have made the DAPIA responsible for determining whether the on-site inspection required special testing or that the IPIA inspector have special qualifications to perform the on-site inspection.

    Comment: Other commenters stated that the qualifications of individuals conducting on-site inspections should not be different than those of an IPIA inspector, and that the manufacturer and the IPIA should have responsibility for determining the appropriate qualifications of the on-site inspector in a given situation. Other commenters stated that the functions of the DAPIA and IPIA should complement each other rather than have barriers that prevent direct and open communication. As a result, these commenters stated that DAPIA oversight functions should not include responsibility for determining the specific skills necessary for an individual to conduct the on-site inspections.

    HUD Response: As stated in the preceding response, HUD agrees with those comments and has removed from this final rule the provision that would have made the DAPIA responsible for determining whether the IPIA inspector requires special skills to conduct on-site inspections.

    10. Should the rule establish, or provide that the DAPIA may establish in its approval a deadline for completion of the work on-site and final inspection?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the rule should address completion timelines and not permit nonuniform deadlines. However, other commenters disagreed and stated that completion time deadlines have no place in a construction standard. These commenters stated that unforeseen circumstances may arise which, if addressed in the rule, would subject the manufacturer and the IPIA to legal liability or regulatory consequences. Another commenter stated that time frame deadlines are almost always a part of the contractual negotiation with the consumer. Another commenter stated that for display models, deadlines for completion would not be possible to predict.

    HUD Response: HUD believes that the deadlines for completion should be negotiated by the parties to the transaction. As a result, HUD has not added completion timelines or deadlines to this final rule.

    11. Should HUD specify requirements for the retailer to notify the manufacturer that a home subject to the on-site completion process is ready for the manufacturer's final inspection, or should the requirements be left to private arrangements?

    Comment: Several commenters suggested that arranging for the final inspection be left to private arrangements. Another commenter stated that HUD should specify that the retailer is responsible for notifying the manufacturer that a home is ready for final inspection.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter that recommended that arranging for the final inspection be left to private arrangements.

    12. Should the regulations in 24 CFR 3282 subpart F be extended to provide that some or all of the procedures for manufacturer and IPIA inspection of the work on-site also apply to repairs, on-site or in retailer lots, of manufactured homes that are completed and labeled in the factory, but that are substantially damaged before being sold by a retailer?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the retailer is responsible for such items and the manufacturer should not be held responsible. Other commenters state that repairs should be left to the private arrangements between the manufacturer and the retailer.

    HUD Response: If a home is damaged on a retailer's lot, it cannot be sold by the retailer to a consumer until the home is brought into compliance with the Standards. If the manufactured home is damaged on-site by some other entity, the manufacturer of the home remains responsible for its required repairs. Under the final rule, the manufacturer is to complete the work and any repairs and may authorize a licensed contractor or similarly qualified person to complete the work or repairs.

    13. Should the rule address more explicitly what happens if the manufactured home does not pass the on-site inspection?

    Comment: One commenter stated that it should be left to the IPIA and the manufacturer to determine what happens if a home does not pass inspection and if they cannot reach consensus in a timely manner then the homeowner has legal rights to remedy the situation. Another commenters stated that, this should be left to private arrangements and noted that the rule is clear that the home may not be occupied absent a satisfactory inspection.

    HUD Response: This final rule requires that each home must successfully pass a final on-site completion inspection. The rule leaves it to the IPIA and manufacturer to determine how to resolve any areas that do not pass inspection so that a successful final inspection can be completed.

    14. Is the proposed labeling procedure workable?

    HUD responded to comments submitted in response to this question in Section A, General Comments, of this preamble.

    15. What mechanism can be used to ensure that the prospective purchaser is provided with the Consumer Information Notice?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the retailer or manufacturer will advise the customer of any requirements applicable under the on-site construction approval during contract negotiations. Commenters recommended that the Consumer Information Notice be provided to the consumer when the contract is signed and that the homebuyer be required to sign the notice. Commenters stated that there is no need for notice to be posted in the home because this does not ensure that the consumer has read or will read the notice.

    HUD Response: HUD believes the value in displaying the notice in the home is that it alerts perspective purchasers at the earliest opportunity that additional construction needs to be completed at the site before the home can be occupied. The final rule requires that the notice be both prominently displayed in the home and that a copy of the notice be given to prospective purchasers before the purchasers enter into a sales agreement to purchase the home. Removal or failure to provide the notice by any entity constitutes a violation of the regulations.

    Comment: One commenter stated that times have changed and that unlike in the past, when retailers would purchase inventory to be sold off the lot, today's process is much different. According to the commenter, with few exceptions a potential customer will visit a model center and make decisions about floor plans, colors, exteriors, etc., and then have their home built. This is the point, according to the commenter, when the consumer needs to be informed about any SC approvals and the possible delay of their expected move‐in. The commenter also stated that the display of the notice in the unit is unnecessary and of little value since it is unlikely that a retailer would display a unit that required SC approval.

    HUD Response: Under the final rule it is the responsibility of the retailer to provide the notice to all prospective purchasers before the prospective purchaser enters into an agreement to purchase the home, as required by § 3282.606(c).

    16. Should the rule clarify what is the “date of manufacture” for units completed under this procedure, for purposes of the information required to be included in the data plate?

    Comment: One commenter stated that the rule should provide guidance on the issue to ensure uniformity and an even playing field for all regulated parties. Other commenters stated that regardless of what method HUD decides to use, the date of manufacture should be the date the label is affixed at the factory, prior to shipment, to allow completion of all paperwork that goes with the home. This will eliminate the need for additional paperwork, avoid miscommunications between the factory and the site, and ensure uniformity.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenters that the date of manufacture is the date the label is affixed to a manufactured home at the factory, as specified in § 3282.7(h).

    17. Can monthly reporting to HUD of on-site production be achieved better, such as through the use of individual reports, rather than combining the required extra information with the existing production report (Form 302) information?

    Comment: One commenter stated that the current AC reporting process (quarterly) be applied to this rule. Another commenter stated that any new paperwork and related costs under the rule should be minimized to the greatest degree possible, consistent with safety. The commenter agreed, however, that the existing form be used.

    HUD Response: The final rule has been revised to require an SC numeric identification with the monthly 302 production form, in lieu of the brief description of the work performed that was indicated in the proposed rule. This will provide HUD with the most up-to-date information with regard to homes produced for site completion. Under the final rule, each IPIA is required to maintain complete inspection records of all on-site inspections for at least 5 years.

    18. Are there special concerns about the ability of a State PIA to conduct out-of-state inspections and about the costs for those State PIA inspections that should be addressed in the rule?

    Comment: Some commenters indicated that IPIAs will be challenged to perform on-site inspections, especially those conducted out of State. These commenters also stated that any such concerns should be addressed outside of this rule, either in the regulations relating to State plans or as part of the regulations governing the qualification and approval of State IPIAs. Other commenters suggested that this issue be left to private arrangements between the State IPIA and the manufacturer. These commenters stated the IPIA, whether a State or private agency, must have the flexibility to select other qualified third-party inspectors for any on-site inspections.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees that these arrangements are best addressed outside of the rule through private arrangements as suggested by some of the commenters. As a result, the final rule provides that the IPIA, whether State or private, is responsible for conducting the required on-site inspections by using its own inspectors or by independent qualified inspectors acceptable to the IPIA as its representative. The manufacturer is responsible for coordinating for these required inspections by the IPIA.

    19. If the inspection requirements for on-site approvals are changed from the levels proposed, should the inspection requirements vary according to the kind of work involved?

    Comment: Some commenters suggested that inspection requirements should be left to the manufacturer designing and the DAPIA approving the design, who are the most qualified to determine the appropriate inspection levels on-site. Other commenters suggested that changing inspection requirements might reduce compliance costs but that it would also create confusion, disputes, and need for a more intricate inspection system.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees with those commenters that stated that multiple inspection requirements would add unnecessary complexity to the rule and create confusion for the public. As a result, under the final rule, the inspection requirements are the same regardless of the type of site construction work that is being completed.

    20. Are there any special processing or inspection requirements that should be included in a final rule if HUD permits completion on-site of multistory and high-slope-roof style homes designed to be located in Wind Zones II and III?

    Comment: Commenters stated that special inspection requirements have no place in a construction standard and reiterate that inspection requirements should be left to the manufacturer and the DAPIA. Other commenters stated that there is no evidence that this issue would require special processing or inspection requirements.

    HUD Response: There are no provisions in the final rule for the DAPIA to require special processing or inspection requirements. At the option of the DAPIA, it may determine whether any special processing or inspection requirements are needed for site completion of the home. In addition, this final rule is not applicable to completion of multistory homes and does not apply to attached garages as this subject is under current review by the MHCC and is expected to be addressed in future rulemaking by HUD.

    21. Are there other jurisdictional concerns about the monitoring of the work completed on-site being the continuing responsibility of the manufacturer's IPIA?

    Comment: A commenter stated that the manufacturer's IPIA must be allowed to use alternate, qualified inspectors outside their organization.

    HUD Response: Section 3282.607(d) of the final rule allows independent, qualified inspectors acceptable to the IPIA to act as its representative or designee in making the required inspections.

    22. What procedures should be established if an exclusive State IPIA is unable to conduct out-of-State inspections on homes approved for completion under this new process?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the manufacturer's IPIA must be allowed to use alternate, qualified inspectors outside their organization. These commenters stated that if the IPIA is unable or unwilling to help select a qualified party for the inspection, the manufacturer should be given the authority to select the inspection agent.

    HUD Response: Please see HUD's prior responses regarding the use of other professionals to conduct inspections on behalf of the IPIA.

    23. Should the manufacturer be required to provide a copy of the final site inspection report, or any other information about the on-site approval, to the SAA of the State in which the home is sited?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that submitting related paperwork prior to a consumer complaint should not be necessary and that additional paperwork is a barrier to streamlining the process and is contrary to HUD's intention in issuing this rule. A commenter also stated that SAAs can request service records from the manufacturer when they receive a consumer complaint. Other commenters stated that additional paperwork would unnecessarily increase costs without providing corresponding benefits for consumers.

    HUD Response: In response to these comments, HUD has revised § 3282.608(m) of the final rule to require the manufacturer to provide a copy of the site report to an SAA, upon request.

    24. Should the rule extend authority to revoke or amend an approval to the SAA in the State where the factory is located, the SAA in the State where the home is sited, both, or neither?

    Comment: Commenters stated that SAAs do not need to be involved in the SC process, unless, and until, they receive a consumer complaint. These commenters stated that the appropriate role of the SAA is to address consumer complaints and conduct monitoring as per the current procedural enforcement regulations.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees. SAAs are not authorized to revoke or amend site construction approvals. Section 3282.609 of the final rule provides regulatory remedies if manufacturers fail to comply with the provisions of this final rule.

    25. Should the final rule limit the on-site installation of all appliances except furnaces and water heaters due to problems experienced with improper venting and installation of these appliances?

    Comment: Several commenters suggested that the rule only require SC for fuel-burning, built-in appliances and be limited to those appliances furnished by the manufacturer. The commenters also stated that a customer who decides to furnish his own appliances should assume responsibility for installing them properly.

    HUD Response: HUD considered these comments and concluded that the final rule should continue to allow for the installation of all appliances, subject to a final site inspection by the IPIA.

    26. Are the manufacturer's inspection responsibilities as outlined in § 3282.605(c) sufficiently clear?

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the manufacturer's responsibilities are clearly outlined in § 3282.605(c)

    HUD Response: HUD agrees that the manufacturer's responsibilities are clearly delineated in the final rule.

    C. Comments on Specific Sections of the Regulation

    Comment on § 3282.252(b): One commenter stated that the proposed amendment attempts to redefine when the “completion of the entire sales transaction” occurs and refers to the term “set-up,” which is not defined in either the Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations or this proposed rule.

    HUD Response: HUD appreciates this comment and has changed the term “set-up” to “installation” in the final rule to be consistent with the terminology used in other parts of the rule.

    Comment on § 3282.603(d): One commenter stated that this section would provide that all nine items delineated in paragraphs (d)(1) to (d)(9) must be included with each request for approval. According to the commenter, this is overly cumbersome. More specifically, the commenter recommended that paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(4), and (d)(6), be generalized and applicable to the process of SC as a whole and not be specific to and for any individual approval.

    HUD Response: HUD does not agree with commenter. All items are needed and must be provided to the DAPIA for each site construction approval request to ensure that all site work can be completed in accordance with the manufacturers' designs, quality control procedures, standards, and regulations.

    Comment on § 3282.605(d)(1): A commenter stated that there is no time limit for the IPIA to notify the manufacturers of the IPIA's final site inspection report.

    HUD Response: HUD has revised § 3282.605(f) of the final rule to require the IPIA to notify the manufacturer within 5 business days of its acceptance of the manufacturer's final site inspection report.

    Comment on § 605(d)(3)(i) to (iii): One commenter questioned if the IPIA must inspect the on-site completed work concurrently with the manufacturer, why would the IPIA have to “formally” accept or reject the inspection report. According to the commenter, waiting for the IPIA to issue a written acceptance delays the ability of the owner to move in and will inevitably lead to customer dissatisfaction.

    HUD Response: As discussed in response to other comments in this preamble, HUD does not believe that issuance of a written acceptance by the IPIA will result any additional delays as that currently required by the AC procedures. Under the current AC procedures and the on-site procedures provided by this final rule, the IPIA must verify that all site completion work has been successfully completed by the manufacturer.

    Comment on § 3285.801(f): Several commenters expressed concerns about moving single-hinged-roof designs from “installation” to “construction.” According to the commenters, the proposed rule would require that any hinged roof with a ridge box (peak cap) or peak flip (second hinge) be included under the on-site completion regime established by this final rule and, thereby, subject to inspection by the IPIA. They also suggested that this will subject nearly every home with a hinged roof to fall under this rulemaking and add significant cost to consumers. The commenters urged HUD to leave this section unchanged, enabling hinged roofs to be regulated by the installation standards.

    HUD Response: The revisions HUD is making to § 3285.801(f) do not change current practice used to determine which types of hinged roofs are covered by HUD's Model Installation Standards and will only extend these requirements to peak cap or peak flip construction for roof slopes less than 7:12, as suggested by the commenters, when the home is designed to be located in Wind Zone I. Otherwise, the final rule does not change the type of hinged roofs considered as construction and subject to AC under current procedures.

    IV. This Final Rule

    Prior to this rule, HUD reviewed and approved requests for on-site completion of construction of manufactured homes under § 3282.14. This procedure can be lengthy and, when originally implemented, was not intended to address the evolution and sophistication of the current modern manufactured housing construction techniques. Manufactured homes now include home design features, such as stucco or brick, that cannot reasonably be completed in the factory and which are currently being completed on-site under the AC process. HUD also recognizes that many parts of modern manufactured homes, such as components of smoke alarm, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and plumbing systems, are typically shipped loose with the home. It is only when these systems are completed that the homes comply with the Construction and Safety Standards.

    This final rule establishes simplified, uniform procedures at 24 CFR part 3282, subpart M, that permit manufacturers to complete the construction of manufactured housing on-site, rather than in the factory, under certain circumstances, without obtaining advance approval from HUD. Under this final rule, HUD's approved DAPIAs and IPIAs (collectively known as Primary Inspection Agencies (PIAs) are authorized to approve and inspect certain construction for manufactured homes designed to be completed on-site. Delegating this responsibility to HUD's PIAs is consistent with HUD's policy to expand regulatory flexibility, encourage innovation in the construction of manufactured homes, and facilitate the timely completion of manufactured homes on-site.

    As a result of this final rule, manufacturers may now complete the home in the factory, in accordance with the Construction and Safety Standards and an approved quality assurance manual, or may complete work on certain aspects of the home on-site in accordance with procedures established by this rule, which bring the home in conformance with the Construction and Safety Standards. The designs for construction work to be done on-site in accordance with the procedures in this final rule are subject to Construction and Safety Standards; accordingly, State and local jurisdictions are preempted from establishing their own design requirements for these aspects of the home, unless the requirements are identical to the Construction and Safety Standards. Manufacturers also may continue to seek approval through the AC process under the procedures established by § 3282.14 for construction that does not comply with the Construction and Safety Standards.

    The Federal Manufactured Housing program is based upon national Construction and Safety Standards that are enforced through the manufacturer's quality control systems, in-plant compliance inspections by HUD-approved third-party agencies, and performance monitoring of those agencies in the plant. Given these conditions, this final rule does not permit major portions of a home to be completed beyond the plant, as that would avoid the normal inspection and certification process, and may frustrate legitimate local and State code enforcement efforts. Notwithstanding, § 3282.602 of this final rule lists aspects of construction of a manufactured home that may be approved to be completed on-site. Examples of the types of work that are not considered to involve substantial completion and which cannot be reasonably expected to be completed in the factory and to which the final rule applies include:

    (a) Completion of roof dormers;

    (b) Addition of stucco, stone, brick, or other siding that is subject to damage in transit;

    (c) Retailer changes to the home on-site (such as add-ons subject to requirements established by the local authority having jurisdiction), when the home is taken out of compliance with the Construction and Safety Standards and then is brought back into compliance with the Standards. However, this provision does not apply to attached garages as this subject is under current review by the MHCC and is expected to be addressed in future rulemaking by HUD;

    (d) Any hinged roof that is not considered part of the installation of the home (see § 3285.801(f)). Based on the recent recommendations of the MHCC and the comments received, the final rule now allows peak flip and peak cap construction in which the roof pitch of the hinged roof is less than 7:12, when located in Wind Zone I, to be deemed part of installation and exempt from IPIA inspection under the Regulations;

    (e) Site installed appliances that are listed or certified for use in manufactured homes, such as a cooking range, furnace, or water heater; and

    (f) Completion of any high-pitch (i.e., roof pitch equals or exceeds 7:12) hinged roof construction that conforms to the construction and safety standards when finished. Completion of lower-pitched hinged roofs that are not penetrated above the hinge and are designed for Wind Zone I would be considered installation and are not covered by this final rule.

    The procedures established by this final rule eliminate much of the reporting for site inspections of completed homes previously required under the AC process. Under this final rule, the manufacturer is only required to report, to HUD or its agent, the State of first location of the home, its serial number, and a brief description of the work done on-site. This information is to be included on an updated HUD Manufactured Home Monthly Production Report (Form 302), which manufacturers have in the past used to report to their IPIA and to HUD (or their monitoring contractor) certain completion and shipping information on labeled units.

    As stated in this preamble, manufacturers may continue to seek approval through the AC process, under the procedures established by § 3282.14, for construction that does not comply with the Construction and Safety Standards. HUD will utilize § 3282.14, as originally intended, to encourage innovation and the use of new technology that are not in conformance with the Construction and Safety Standards. The AC process is limited to specific circumstances and requires the manufacturer to submit a formal request to HUD and show that the construction it proposes provides performance that is equivalent or superior to that required by the Construction and Safety Standards. Examples of designs in which the completed home does not comply with the Construction and Safety Standards when finished and would therefore continue to require an AC approval include:

    (a) Multistory homes that do not comply with the standards because of distance requirements to reach an exterior door for egress from a bedroom or other requirements;

    (b) A home installed without floor insulation over a basement; that is, the existence of a basement will not substitute for insulation under the construction and safety standards (however, if the floor is properly insulated at the factory, it may be installed over a basement without having to use either the on-site or AC approval processes); and

    (c) Attached garages, as this subject is under current review by the MHCC and is expected to be addressed in future rulemaking by HUD.

    The procedures established by this final rule for on-site completion differ from the AC. Initially, this final rule applies to homes that can be certified as substantially meeting the requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards when labeled in the factory and that comply fully with those Standards when completed on-site. In addition, the on-site completion procedures established by this rule eliminate the direct HUD review and approval currently required under the AC process. Rather, this rule requires that manufacturers work directly with their DAPIAs and IPIAs to obtain approval to complete aspects of construction at the final home site.

    This final rule will encourage the use of innovative designs and techniques that will further demonstrate the adaptability and versatility of manufactured housing. As manufacturers continue to make significant improvements to both the quality and the aesthetics of such homes, providing for simplified, uniform procedures that permit manufacturers to complete the construction of manufactured housing on-site, rather than in the factory, will support the increased recognition of manufactured homes as a viable source of unsubsidized, affordable housing and encourage zoning policies that do not discriminate against manufactured housing.

    A. Section by Section Discussion of 24 CFR Part 3282, Subpart M, of the Final Rule

    1. Purpose and applicability (§ 3282.601). Section 3282.601 establishes a procedure that allows manufacturers to deviate from existing completion requirements when an aspect of construction cannot reasonably be completed in the manufacturer's production facility. Manufacturers may utilize this procedure when all requirements of Subpart M are met. Generally, to be applicable a manufactured home must be: (1) Substantially completed in the factory; (2) meet the requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards upon completion of the site work; and (3) inspected by the manufacturer's IPIA, as provided in this subpart, unless specifically exempted as installation under HUD's Model Installation Standards, 24 CFR part 3285. These special procedures would be available only when the manufacturer, its DAPIA, and its IPIA agree to follow them, and can only be used if all affected homes are substantially completed in the factory, as defined.

    2. Qualifying construction (§ 3282.602). Section 3282.602 describes those aspects of the construction of a manufactured home that may be completed on-site, under the Construction and Safety Standards, in accordance with the requirements of this subpart. Generally, the on-site approval process is available for work to complete a partial structural assembly or system that cannot reasonably be done in the factory. The reasons for this difficulty may result, for example, from transportation limitations, design requirements, or delivery of an appliance ordered by a homeowner. This final rule clarifies when work on certain hinged roofs can be completed under the installation standards, rather than through the on-site process under the Construction and Safety Standards.

    3. Request for approval; DAPIA approval (§ 3282.603). Under this final rule, the manufacturer must request and obtain DAPIA approval to complete, on-site, the final, limited aspects of construction of a manufactured home that would be substantially completed in the factory (i.e., the home leaving the factory must include: (1) A complete chassis; and (2) structural assemblies and plumbing, heating, and air conditioning systems that are complete except for limited construction that cannot reasonably be completed in the manufacturer's production facility and that the DAPIA has approved for completion on-site). Among other things, in the approval, the DAPIA will identify what work will be completed on-site through use of a unique site completion numeric identification for each manufacturer and will authorize a notice that includes a description of this work, identify instructions authorized for completing the work on-site (including any special conditions and requirements), and list all models for which the DAPIA approval is applicable.1 As part of its approval, the DAPIA will stamp or sign each page of any set of designs accepted for completion on-site, and will include an “SC” designation on each page that includes an element of construction that is to be completed on-site.

    1 As with the AC process, an approval for on-site completion may be made more flexible when the DAPIA and manufacturer agree that the approval is not model-specific, but may be extended to additional models. See § 3282.14(c)(3).

    In addition, the DAPIA must approve the part of the manufacturer's written quality assurance manual that is applicable to completing the manufactured homes on-site under the Construction and Safety Standards. When the part of the quality assurance manual applicable to the on-site completion also has received the concurrence of the IPIA, the system may be approved as part of the manufacturer's quality assurance manual. If this approval is not done as part of the initial approval of the entire quality assurance manual, the pertinent part of the manufacturer's manual will be deemed a change to be incorporated into the manual in accordance with established procedures (see §§ 3282.203(e) and 3282.361(c)(4)). The approval will also include other requirements, such as a quality control checklist to verify that all required components, materials, labels, and instructions needed for site completion are provided by the manufacturer and an inspection checklist, developed by the manufacturer and approved by the DAPIA, to be used in the manufacturer's and IPIA's final inspections. As with the procedures followed under an approval for AC, the manufacturer's IPIA is responsible for ensuring that the homes the IPIA inspects under the new procedures comply with the changes in the quality assurance manual, as provided in § 3282.362(a) of the existing regulations, and with the approved design or, where the design is not specific, to the Construction and Safety Standards.

    4. DAPIA responsibilities (§ 3282.604). In addition to the DAPIA's regular duties under § 3282.361, this section provides that the DAPIA is also responsible for:

    (a) Verifying that the manufacturer submits all required information, when a manufacturer seeks a DAPIA's approval to complete any aspect of construction on-site under § 3282.603;

    (b) Reviewing and approving the manufacturer's designs, site completion instructions, and quality assurance manuals for the site work that is to be performed;

    (c) Determining whether there are any other requirements or limitations deemed necessary or appropriate; and

    (d) Revoking or amending its approval for on-site construction, as provided in § 3282.609, after determining that the manufacturer is: (1) Not complying with the terms of the approval or the requirements of § 3282.610; (2) the approval was not issued in conformance with the requirements of § 3282.603; (3) a home produced under the approval fails to comply with the Federal construction and safety standards or contains an imminent safety hazard; or (4) the manufacturer failed to make arrangements for one or more manufactured homes to be inspected by the IPIA prior to occupancy. Upon revocation or amendment of a DAPIA approval, the DAPIA must immediately notify the manufacturer, the IPIA, and HUD.

    5. Requirements applicable to completion of construction (§ 3282.605). After an acceptable final inspection of work completed on-site, the manufacturer must report to HUD or its agent the serial number and a brief description of the work done on-site for each home produced under these procedures. This report must be consistent with the DAPIA approval and is to be submitted, in part, on the updated production Form 302. A copy of this report also must be submitted to the SAAs of the States where the home is substantially completed in the factory and where the home is sited, upon request. The serial numbers as provided by the manufacturer must contain the prefix or suffix “SC,” for site construction.

    Based on the comments received, the final rule does not require a unique on-site completion label as indicated in the proposed rule, but instead requires that homes or sections of such homes have a label affixed in accordance with § 3282.362(c)(2) and be shipped with a Consumer Information Notice that meets the requirements of § 3282.606. Approved designs for completion of aspects of construction outside of the manufacturer's plant must be marked with the identification code for the appropriate approved set of designs, and must be included as a separate part of the manufacturer's approved design package. All aspects of construction that are completed on the final home site remain the responsibility of the manufacturer, which must ensure that the home is properly labeled and, as part of its final on-site inspection report provided to the IPIA, certify that the work is consistent with DAPIA-approved instructions and conforms with approved designs or, as appropriate under § 3282.362(a)(1)(iii), conforms to the Construction and Safety Standards. The IPIA is required to review all of the manufacturer's final on-site inspection reports and to inspect all on-site work completed pursuant to an approval under this new process. If the IPIA determines that the manufacturer is not performing adequately in conformance with the approval, the IPIA may require reinspections, until it is satisfied that the manufacturer is conforming to the conditions included in the approval. Based on public comments HUD has revised § 3282.605(d)(4) to require that the manufacturer provide the purchaser or lessor a copy of the final site inspection report within 5 business days of the IPIA's notification of its acceptance of the report.

    6. Consumer information (§ 3282.606). In addition to the on-site completion certification label, this section requires that the home must be shipped with a “NOTICE” that explains that the home will comply with the requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards only after all of the limited on-site work has been completed in accordance with detailed instructions provided by the manufacturer, and the home has been inspected. The “NOTICE” is to be displayed in a prominent and highly visible location within the home (e.g., a kitchen countertop or front door), and include information instructions for those aspects of construction to be completed on-site and provided with the home. The notice may only be removed after the final inspection report is completed and the purchaser or lessor is provided with a copy of the report.

    The sale or lease of the manufactured home to the purchaser will not be considered complete (see § 3282.252(b)) until the purchaser has been provided with a copy of the manufacturer's final site inspection report, including the certification of completion that has been reviewed and accepted by the IPIA. However, HUD does not intend that failure to provide this report within 5 days of the date of the IPIA's notification will constitute a breach of contract. The manufacturer must maintain in its labeling records an indication that the final on-site inspection report and certification of completion has been provided to the purchaser and the retailer.

    7. Responsibilities of the IPIA (§ 3282.607). The responsibilities of the IPIA include, in addition to the IPIA's regular duties under § 3282.362:

    (a) Working with the manufacturer and the manufacturer's DAPIA to ensure that the manufacturer's quality control system has the proper procedures and controls to assure that the on-site construction work will conform to DAPIA-approved designs and HUD's construction and safety standards;

    (b) Providing the certification labels that the manufacturer may use to label a home that has been substantially completed in the factory;

    (c) Monitoring the manufacturer's system for tracking the status of homes built under the approval until the on-site work and necessary inspections have been completed, to assure that the work is being performed properly on all applicable homes;

    (d) Performing the required inspections of the manufacturer's reports and site work, to verify compliance with the manufacturer's quality control system, the approved designs, and, as appropriate, the Construction and Safety Standards. Only the IPIA, or other qualified independent inspector acceptable to and acting on behalf of the IPIA, may perform these inspections. The inspector must be free of any conflict of interest (see § 3282.359) and not be involved in the sale or site completion of the home; and

    (e) Maintaining a copy of each final site inspection report submitted by a manufacturer and each inspection report prepared or accepted by the IPIA, and reporting to HUD, the DAPIA, and manufacturer if one or more manufactured homes has not been site inspected prior to occupancy or if arrangements have not been made to site inspect one or more manufactured homes.

    8. Manufacturer's responsibilities (§ 3282.608). The manufacturer's responsibilities include:

    (a) Certifying the completed home is constructed in conformance with the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards, as indicated on the label, in § 3282.362(c)(2) of the Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations;

    (b) Completing all work performed on a home that is necessary to assure compliance with the Construction and Safety Standards, regardless of who does the work or where it is completed. Such responsibility would not extend to any limited close-up work for multiple-section homes, as defined as installation work in the model installation standards;

    (c) Working with the DAPIA and IPIA to obtain approval and concurrence on the quality control system the manufacturer will use to assure that the on-site work is performed according to DAPIA-approved designs, and to incorporate this system into the manufacturer's quality assurance manual;

    (d) Working with the DAPIA to develop an approved checklist, providing the IPIA with the checklist to be used when the IPIA inspects the home after completion on-site, and notifying the IPIA that the home is ready to be inspected;

    (e) Maintaining a system for tracking the status of homes built under the approval, to ensure that each home installed on a building lot has the on-site work and necessary inspections completed;

    (f) Paying IPIA costs for performing on-site inspections;

    (g) Providing inside the home and to the IPIA, a copy of the instructions for completing the work on-site, for monitoring/inspection purposes (the copy provided in the home may be provided with the installation instructions in the home). Either before, or at the time on-site work commences, the manufacturer must provide the IPIA with a copy of any applicable, DAPIA-approved quality assurance manual for on-site completion changes; the approved instructions for completing the construction work on-site; and the approved inspection checklist;

    (h) Satisfactory completion of all on-site work construction and required repairs or authorizing a licensed contractor or similarly qualified person to complete all site inspection and repairs.

    (i) Providing a copy of the final site inspection report and certificate of completion to the IPIA; first purchaser or lessor of the home, prior to occupancy; to the appropriate retailer, and to the SAA upon request;

    (j) Maintaining a copy of the site inspection report and the notification of the IPIA's approval or acceptance of this report;

    (k) Notifying the appropriate State or local jurisdiction of any add-on to the home, as referenced in § 3282.8(j), that is not covered by the manufacturer's inspection and certification of completion, but about which the manufacturer knows or reasonably should have known. The manufacturer is not required to provide this notification if the manufacturer knows that the State or local jurisdiction has already inspected the add-on; and

    (l) Providing cumulative quarterly production inspection reports to HUD or its agent.

    9. Enforcement (§§ 3282.609, 3282.610, and 3282.611). A manufacturer or IPIA found to be in violation of the requirements for this procedure may lose the discretion to utilize the on-site completion procedure in the future. HUD or the DAPIA also may withdraw or amend an approval for on-site construction if the manufacturer does not comply with the requirements for the approval or produces a home that does not comply with the Federal Construction and Safety Standards. Other remedies provided separately under the Act and HUD's regulations will also continue to be available, as applicable, but HUD would consider a manufacturer or IPIA that complies with the requirements for on-site completion to be in compliance with the certification requirements of the Act and regulations for aspects of construction that are covered by the on-site completion approval.

    B. Conforming Changes

    This final rule includes conforming changes to 24 CFR part 3280. Initially, HUD is revising § 3280.5 to require that the manufacturer's data plate contain information, if applicable, stating that, except for the components completed on-site, the home has been substantially completed in accordance with an approved design and has been inspected in accordance with the Construction and Safety Standards.

    In addition, and as discussed in the preamble of the proposed rule, HUD is revising the structural design requirements in § 3280.305 for attic areas with high- or low-pitched roofs. As discussed in the preamble of the June 23, 2010, proposed rule, HUD stated that this rule as proposed would apply to the completion of any high-pitched (i.e., the roof pitch equals or exceeds 7:12), hinged roof construction that conforms to the Construction and Safety Standards when finished. HUD sought public comment on whether different treatment for high-pitched roofs was needed since a portion of the attic would meet the ceiling-height/living-spaces requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards and, as such, would require the attic floor to be designed for floor live loads of 40 pounds per square inch. In response to this request, most commenters stated that extending on-site completion to certain installation work, such as a hinged roof, would be appropriate since this work is done under the guidance of the manufacturer. Another commenter stated that HUD should not allow the inspection of certain roof pitches to be under the installation standards, while requiring inspection of others under the provisions of the on-site construction rule. No commenter addressed whether HUD should conform the Construction and Safety Standards for high-pitched roofs that create attic space to be designed to resist a minimum design live load of 40 pounds per square foot, in accordance with 3280.305(g) of the standards, the design standard for floors, or that roofs with slopes of less than 7:12 that contain an attic area for storage be required to be designed for a storage live load of 20 pounds per square foot. As a result, as provided in the June 23, 2010, proposed rule, HUD is conforming the Construction and Safety Standards to address these elements of the home that results when the roof is raised via construction on-site in this final rule.

    The final rule includes conforming changes to three other sections of 24 CFR part 3282. A conforming amendment is made to § 3282.252 (b) to change the term “dealer” to “retailer.” HUD is also conforming this section to this final rule by providing that the sale is complete upon delivery to the site, except that sales under this final rule will not be considered complete until the purchaser or lessor has been provided with a final site inspection report. A conforming amendment is also made to § 3282.552 to specify the information that is included on the reports currently submitted under 24 CFR part 3282. Finally, HUD is also using this rulemaking to make a technical correction to the heading of § 3282.8(a), which would be updated from “mobile homes” to “manufactured homes”.

    V. Findings and Certifications Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if the regulation is necessary, to select the regulatory approach that maximizes net benefits. Because this final rule allows manufactured housing manufacturers to complete construction of certain homes at the installation site without seeking advance approval from HUD, and thereby eliminating costly processing and construction delays, the rule was determined to not be a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and therefore was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    This final rule establishes simplified, uniform procedures at 24 CFR part 3282, subpart M, that permit manufacturers to complete the construction of manufactured housing on-site, rather than in the factory, under certain circumstances, without obtaining advanced approval from HUD. Given the objective of the Federal Manufactured Housing program, this final rule does not permit major portions of a home to be completed beyond the plant, as that would avoid the normal inspection and certification process, and may frustrate legitimate local and State code enforcement efforts. Notwithstanding, this final rule lists numerous aspects of construction of a manufactured home that may be approved to be completed on-site.

    This final rule will encourage the use of innovative designs and techniques that will further demonstrate the adaptability and versatility of manufactured housing and eliminate the need for manufactures to apply for advance approval to complete construction of a manufactured home on-site. Easing the process for on-site construction of manufactured homes supports achievement of the goal of widely available safe, durable, and affordable manufactured housing.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule contains provisions that are subject to review by the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD published a description of these provisions, with estimates of annual reporting, recordkeeping, and notice requirements, on June 15, 2015, at 80 FR 34165. Interested persons are encouraged to review and provide comment on HUD's proposed information collection. The 180-day delayed effective date for this rule will provide HUD the opportunity to complete the approval process for this final rule prior to its effective date. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This final rule does not impose any Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector within the meaning of UMRA.

    Environmental Review

    A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment was approved at the proposed rule stage in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The FONSI is available for public inspection between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., weekdays, in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at 202-402-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (this is a toll-free number).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. It is HUD's position that this final rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. HUD and MHCC have recognized the benefit of maximizing opportunities for housing manufacturers to complete construction of some homes at the installation site without seeking advance approval from HUD. This final rule promotes this shared goal. The manufactured housing industry is rapidly expanding its offerings, and the inclusion of new design elements is viewed as key to the growth of this industry. On-site installation of innovative design elements will improve the aesthetic quality and overall attractiveness of the manufactured housing product, increasing the appeal of these homes to the public and improving cost effectiveness for the manufacturers, by allowing them to complete these structures at the construction site by installing these features there.

    This rule also alleviates burden for all manufacturers, large and small, because it makes tangible streamlined improvements to the system regulating on-site construction of manufactured homes. This rule establishes procedures whereby manufacturers could complete construction of new manufactured housing on-site without being required to apply for HUD approval for on-site construction. This rule would apply only to work done to complete the manufacturing process required by the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards. It would not affect the installation of homes subject to the model Manufactured Home Installation Standards, or apply in instances where a major portion of the home is to be constructed on site. In addition, this rule applies only to a subset of the total number of manufactured housing manufacturers—those that decide to incorporate the new design elements into their products. It is not a requirement that all manufacturers do so.

    Finally, this final rule will have a beneficial effect by reducing the paperwork burden and costs of construction delays for all housing manufacturers, large or small. These manufacturers will no longer be required to apply repeatedly for variances regarding on-site construction utilizing design elements and innovations that are expected to become commonplace over time. Easing the process for on-site construction of manufactured homes supports achievement of the goal of widely available safe, durable, and affordable manufactured housing.

    Accordingly, the undersigned certifies that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments and is not required by statute or the rule preempts State law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive order. This final rule does not have federalism implications and would not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments or preempt State law within the meaning of the Executive order.

    List of Subjects 24 CFR Part 3280

    Fire prevention, Housing standards.

    24 CFR Part 3282

    Administrative practice and procedure, Consumer protection, Intergovernmental relations, Investigations, Manufactured homes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    24 CFR Part 3285

    Housing standards, Incorporation by reference, Installation, Manufactured homes.

    Accordingly, for the reasons discussed in this preamble, HUD amends 24 CFR parts 3280, 3284 and 3285 as follows:

    PART 3280—MANUFACTURED HOME CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY STANDARDS 1. The authority citation for parts 3280 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 5403, and 5424.

    2. In 3280.5, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 3280.5 Data plate.

    (c) The applicable statement:

    This manufactured home is designed to comply with the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards in force at the time of manufacture.or

    This manufactured home has been substantially completed in accordance with an approved design and has been inspected (except for the components specifically identified in the instructions for completion on-site) in accordance with the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and the requirements of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in effect on the date of manufacture.

    3. In 3280.305 add paragraph (k) to read as follows:
    § 3280.305 Structural design requirements.

    (k) Attics. (1) For roofs with slopes 7:12 or greater, the area of the attic floor that meets the ceiling-height/living-space requirements of these construction and safety standards must be designed to resist a minimum design live load of 40 pounds per square foot (psf) in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.

    (2) For roofs with slopes less than 7:12 that contain an attic area or for portions of roofs with slopes 7:12 or greater that do meet the ceiling height/living space requirements of the standards, the attic floor must be designed for a storage live load of 20 pounds per square foot (psf).

    PART 3282—MANUFACTURED HOME PROCEDURAL AND ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS 4. The authority citation for part 3282 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d); 42 U.S.C. 5424.

    5. In § 3282.7, redesignate paragraph (kk) as paragraph (ll) and add new paragraph (kk) to read as follows:
    § 3282.7 Definitions.

    (kk) Substantial completion. A manufactured home is substantially completed if all aspects of construction that can be finished in the manufacturer's plant are completed, except as provided in § 3282.603.

    6. In § 3282.8, revise the heading to paragraph (a) read as follows:
    § 3282.8 Applicability.

    (a) Manufactured homes.

    7. In § 3282.203, add a sentence at the end of paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 3282.203 DAPIA services.

    (e) * * * When applicable under § 3282.605, the IPIA must concur in the change before it can be approved by the DAPIA.

    8. In § 3282.252, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 3282.252 Prohibition of sale.

    (b) This prohibition applies to any affected manufactured homes until the completion of the entire sales transaction. A sales transaction with a purchaser is considered completed when all the goods and services that the retailer agreed to provide at the time the contract was entered into have been provided. Completion of a retail sale will be at the time the retailer completes installation of the manufactured home, if the retailer has agreed to provide the installation, or at the time the retailer delivers the home to a transporter, if the retailer has not agreed to transport or install the manufactured home. The sale is also complete upon delivery to the site if the retailer has not agreed to provide installation as completion of sale, except that any sale or lease under subpart M and as provided in § 3286.117(a) will not be considered complete until the purchaser or lessor, as applicable, has been provided with a final site inspection report.

    9. In § 3282.361, revise the first sentence of paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:
    § 3282.361 Design Approval Primary Inspection Agency (DAPIA).

    (c) * * *

    (4) Manual change approval. Each change the manufacturer wishes to make in its quality assurance manual must be approved by the DAPIA, and, when subject to § 3282.604, concurred in by the IPIA. * * *

    10. Amend § 3282.362 by adding paragraph (d)(5), to read as follows:
    § 3282.362 Production Inspection Primary Inspection Agencies (IPIAs).

    (d) * * *

    (5) Records of all site inspections made as required under procedures applicable to approval of AC or on-site completion pursuant to §§ 3282.14 or 3282.610.

    11. Revise § 3282.552 to read as follows:
    § 3282.552 Manufacturer reports for joint monitoring fees.

    The manufacturer must submit to the IPIA in each of its manufacturing plants, and to HUD or to the Secretary's agent, a monthly production report that includes the serial numbers of each manufactured home manufactured and labeled at that plant during the preceding month. The report must also include the date of manufacture, State of first location of these manufactured homes after leaving the plant, type of unit, and any other information required under this part. For all homes to be completed pursuant to subpart M of these regulations, the production report must also include a brief description of the work to be completed on site. The State of first location is the State of the premises of the retailer or purchaser to whom the manufactured home is first shipped. The monthly report must be submitted by the 10th day of each month and contain information describing the manufacturer's previous month's activities. The manufacturer is encouraged to submit the report electronically, when feasible.

    12. Add a new subpart M to read as follows: Subpart M—On-Site Completion of Construction of Manufactured Homes Sec. 3282.601 Purpose and applicability. 3282.602 Construction qualifying for on-site completion. 3282.603 Request for approval; DAPIA review, notification, and approval. 3282.604 DAPIA responsibilities. 3282.605 Requirements applicable to completion of construction. 3282.606 Consumer information. 3282.607 IPIA responsibilities. 3282.608 Manufacturer responsibilities. 3282.609 Revocation or amendment of DAPIA approval. 3282.610 Failure to comply with the procedures of this subpart. 3282.611 Compliance with this subpart.
    § 3282.601 Purpose and applicability.

    (a) Purpose of section. Under HUD oversight, this section establishes the procedure for limited on-site completion of some aspects of construction that cannot be completed at the factory.

    (b) Applicability. This section may be applied when all requirements of this subpart are met. To be applicable a manufactured home must:

    (1) Be substantially completed in the factory;

    (2) Meet the requirements of the Construction and Safety Standards upon completion of the site work; and

    (3) Be inspected by the manufacturer's IPIA as provided in this subpart, unless specifically exempted as installation under HUD's Model Installation Standards, 24 CFR part 3285. This subpart does not apply to Alternative Construction (see § 3282.14) that does not comply with the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards.

    § 3282.602 Construction qualifying for on-site completion.

    (a) The manufacturer, the manufacturer's DAPIA acting on behalf of HUD, and the manufacturer's IPIA acting on behalf of HUD may agree to permit certain aspects of construction of a manufactured home to be completed to the Construction and Safety Standards on-site in accordance with the requirements of this subpart. The aspects of construction that may be approved to be completed on-site are the partial completion of structural assemblies or systems (e.g., electrical, plumbing, heating, cooling, fuel burning, and fire safety systems) and components built as an integral part of the home, when the partial completion on-site is warranted because completion of the partial structural assembly or system during the manufacturing process in the factory would not be practicable (e.g., because of the home design or which could result in transportation damage or if precluded because of road restrictions). Examples of construction that may be completed on-site include:

    (1) Hinged roof and eave construction, unless exempted as installation by § 3285.801(f) of the Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards and completed and inspected in accordance with the Manufactured Home Installation Program;

    (2) Any work required by the home design that cannot be completed in the factory, or when the manufacturer authorizes the retailer to provide an add-on, not including an attached garage, to the home during installation, when that work would take the home out of conformance with the construction and safety standards and then bring it back into conformance;

    (3) Appliances provided by the manufacturer, installer, retailer, or purchaser, including fireplaces to be installed on site;

    (4) Components or parts that are shipped loose with the manufactured home and that will be installed on-site, unless exempted as installation by the installation standards;

    (5) Exterior applications such as brick siding, stucco, or tile roof systems; and

    (6) Other construction such as roof extensions (dormers), site-installed windows in roofs, removable or open floor sections for basement stairs, and sidewall bay windows.

    (b) The manufacturer or a licensed contractor or similarly qualified professional with prior authorization from the manufacturer may perform the on-site work in accordance with the DAPIA approvals and site completion instructions. However, the manufacturer is responsible for the adequacy of all on-site completion work regardless of who does the work, and must prepare and provide all site inspection reports, as well as the certification of completion, and must fulfill all of its responsibilities and maintain all records at the factory of origin as required by § 3282.609.

    § 3282.603 Request for approval; DAPIA review, notification, and approval.

    (a) Manufacturer's request for approval. The manufacturer must request, in writing, and obtain approval of its DAPIA for any aspect of construction that is to be completed on-site under this subpart. The manufacturer, its IPIA, and its DAPIA must work together to reach agreements necessary to enable the request to be reviewed and approved.

    (b) DAPIA notification. The DAPIA, acting on behalf of HUD, must notify the manufacturer of the results of the DAPIA's review of the manufacturer's request, and must retain a copy of the notification in the DAPIA's records. The DAPIA shall also forward a copy of the approval to HUD or the Secretary's agent as provided under § 3282.361(a)(4). The notification must either:

    (1) Approve the request if it is consistent with this section and the objectives of the Act; or

    (2) Deny the proposed on-site completion and set out the reasons for the denial.

    (c) Manner of DAPIA approval. Notification of DAPIA approval must include, by incorporation or by listing, the information required by paragraph (d) of this section, and must be indicated by the DAPIA placing its stamp of approval or authorized signature on each page of the manufacturer's designs submitted with its request for approval. The DAPIA must include an “SC” designation on each page that includes an element of construction that is to be completed on-site and must include those pages as part of the approved design package.

    (d) Contents of DAPIA approval. Any approval by the DAPIA under this section must:

    (1) Include a unique site completion numeric identification for each approval for each manufacturer (i.e., manufacturer name or abbreviation, SC-XX);

    (2) Identify the work to be completed on-site;

    (3) List all models to which the approval applies, or indicate that the approval is not model-specific;

    (4) Include acceptance by the DAPIA of a quality assurance manual for on-site completion meeting the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section;

    (5) Include the IPIA's written agreement to accept responsibility for completion of the necessary on-site inspections and accompanying records;

    (6) Identify instructions authorized for completing the work on-site that meet the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section;

    (7) Include the manufacturer's system for tracking the status of homes built under the approval until the on-site work and necessary inspections have been completed, to assure that the work is being performed properly;

    (8) Include a quality control checklist to be used by the manufacturer and IPIA and approved by the DAPIA to verify that all required components, materials, labels, and instructions needed for site completion are provided in each home prior to shipment;

    (9) Include an inspection checklist developed by the IPIA and manufacturer and approved by the DAPIA, that is to be used by the final site inspectors;

    (10) Include a Consumer Information Notice developed by the manufacturer and approved by the DAPIA that explains the on-site completion process and identifies the work to be completed on-site; and

    (11) Include any other requirements and limitations that the DAPIA deems necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purposes of the Act.

    (e) Quality assurance manual for on-site completion requirements. The portion of the quality assurance manual for on-site completion required by paragraph (d)(3) of this section must receive the written concurrence of the manufacturer's IPIA with regard to its acceptability and applicability to the on-site completion of the affected manufactured homes. It must include a commitment by the manufacturer to prepare a final site inspection report that will be submitted to the IPIA for its review. When appropriate, this portion of the quality assurance manual for on-site completion will be deemed a change in the manufacturer's quality assurance manual for the applicable models, in accordance with §§ 3282.203 and 3282.361.

    (f) Instructions for completion on-site. The DAPIA must include instructions authorized for completing the work on-site as a separate part of the manufacturer's approved design package. The manufacturer must provide a copy of these instructions and the inspection checklist required by paragraph (d)(9) of this section to the IPIA for monitoring and inspection purposes.

    § 3282.604 DAPIA responsibilities.

    The DAPIA, acting on behalf of HUD, for any manufacturer proceeding under this section is responsible for:

    (a) Verifying that all information required by § 3282.603 has been submitted by the manufacturer;

    (b) Reviewing and approving the manufacturer's designs, quality control checklist, site inspection checklist, site completion instructions, and quality assurance manuals for site work to be performed;

    (c) Maintaining all records and approvals for at least 5 years;

    (d) Revoking or amending its approvals in accordance with § 3282.609; and

    (e) Reviewing its approvals under this section at least every 3 years or more frequently if there are changes made to the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards, 24 CFR part 3280, to verify continued compliance with the Standards.

    § 3282.605 Requirements applicable to completion of construction.

    (a) Serial numbers of homes completed on-site. The serial number of each home completed in conformance with this section must include the prefix or suffix “SC”.

    (b) Labeling. A manufacturer that has received a DAPIA approval under § 3282.604 may certify and label a manufactured home that is substantially completed in the manufacturer's plant at the proper completion of the in-plant production phase, even though some aspects of construction will be completed on-site in accordance with the DAPIA's approval. Any such homes or sections of such homes must have a label affixed in accordance with § 3282.362(c)(2) and be shipped with a Consumer Information Notice that meets the requirements of § 3282.606.

    (c) Site inspection. Prior to occupancy, the manufacturer must ensure that each home is inspected on-site. The manufacturer is responsible for inspecting all aspects of construction that are completed on-site as provided in its approved designs and quality assurance manual for on-site completion.

    (d) Site inspection report. (1) In preparing the site inspection report, the manufacturer must use the inspection checklist approved by the DAPIA in accordance with § 3282.603(d)(9), and must prepare a final site inspection report and provide a copy to the IPIA within 5 business days of completing the report. Within 5 business days after the date that the IPIA notifies the manufacturer of the IPIA's approval of the final site inspection report, the manufacturer must provide a copy of the approved report to the lessor or purchaser prior to occupancy and, as applicable, the appropriate retailer and any person or entity other than the manufacturer that performed the on-site construction work.

    (2) Each approved final site inspection report must include:

    (i) The name and address of the manufacturer;

    (ii) The serial number of the manufactured home;

    (iii) The address of the home site;

    (iv) The name of the person and/or agency responsible for the manufacturer's final site inspection;

    (v) The name of each person and/or agency who performs on-site inspections on behalf of the IPIA, the name of the person responsible for acceptance of the manufacturer's final on-site inspection report on behalf of the IPIA, and the IPIA's name, mailing address, and telephone number;

    (vi) A description of the work performed on-site and the inspections made;

    (vii) When applicable, verification that any problems noted during inspections have been corrected prior to certification of compliance; and

    (viii) Certification by the manufacturer of completion in accordance with the DAPIA-approved instructions and that the home conforms with the approved design or, as appropriate under § 3282.362(a)(1)(iii), the construction and safety standards.

    (3) The IPIA must review each manufacturer's final on-site inspection report and determine whether to accept that inspection report.

    (i) Concurrent with the manufacturer's final site inspection, the IPIA or the IPIA's agent must inspect all of the on-site work for homes completed using an approval under this section. The IPIA must use the inspection checklist approved by the DAPIA in accordance with § 3282.603(d)(9).

    (ii) If the IPIA determines that the manufacturer is not performing adequately in conformance with the approval, the IPIA must redtag and reinspect until it is satisfied that the manufacturer is conforming to the conditions included in the approval. The home may not be occupied until the manufacturer and the IPIA have provided reports, required by this section, confirming compliance with the Construction and Safety Standards.

    (iii) The IPIA must notify the manufacturer of the IPIA's acceptance of the manufacturer's final site inspection report. The IPIA may indicate acceptance by issuing its own final site inspection report or by indicating, in writing, its acceptance of the manufacturer's site inspection report showing that the work completed on-site is in compliance with the DAPIA approval and the Construction and Safety Standards.

    (4) Within 5 business days of the date of IPIA's notification to the manufacturer of the acceptance of its final site inspection report, the manufacturer must provide to the purchaser or lessor, as applicable, the manufacturer's final site inspection report. For purposes of establishing the manufacturer's and retailer's responsibilities under the Act and subparts F and I of this part, the sale or lease of the manufactured home will not be considered complete until the purchaser or lessor, as applicable, has been provided with the report.

    (e) Report to HUD. (1) The manufacturer must report to HUD through its IPIA, on the manufacturer's monthly production report required in accordance with § 3282.552, the serial number and site completion numeric identification (see § 3282.603(d)(1)) of each home produced under an approval issued pursuant to this section.

    (2) The report must be consistent with the DAPIA approval issued pursuant to this section.

    (3) The manufacturer must submit a copy of the report, or a separate listing of all information provided on each report for homes that are completed under an approval issued pursuant to this section, to the SAAs of the States where the home is substantially completed in the factory and where the home is sited, as applicable.

    § 3282.606 Consumer information.

    (a) Notice. Any home completed under the procedures established in this section must be shipped with a temporary notice that explains that the home will comply with the requirements of the construction and safety standards only after all of the site work has been completed and inspected. The notice must be legible and typed, using letters at least 1/4 inch high in the text of the notice and 3/4 inch high for the title. The notice must read as follows:

    IMPORTANT CONSUMER INFORMATION NOTICE

    WARNING: DO NOT LIVE IN THIS HOME UNTIL THE ON-SITE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THE MANUFACTURER HAS PROVIDED A COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT THAT CERTIFIES THAT THE HOME HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED INSTRUCTIONS FOR MEETING THE CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY STANDARDS.

    This home has been substantially completed at the factory and certified as having been constructed in conformance with the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards when specified work is performed and inspected at the home site. This on-site work must be performed in accordance with manufacturer's instructions that have been approved for this purpose. The work to be performed on-site is [insert description of all work to be performed in accordance with the construction and safety standards].

    This notice may be removed by the purchaser or lessor when the manufacturer provides the first purchaser or lessor with a copy of the manufacturer's final site inspection report, as required by regulation. This final report must include the manufacturer's certification of completion. All manufactured homes may also be subject to separate regulations requiring approval of items not covered by the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards, such as installation and utility connections.

    (b) Placement of notice in home. The notice required by paragraph (a) of this section must be displayed in a conspicuous and prominent location within the manufactured home and in a manner likely to assure that it is not removed until, or under the authorization of, the purchaser or lessor. The notice is to be removed only by the first purchaser or lessor. No retailer, installation or construction contractor, or other person may interfere with the required display of the notice.

    (c) Providing notice before sale. The manufacturer or retailer must also provide a copy of the Consumer Information Notice to prospective purchasers of any home to which the approval applies before the purchasers enter into an agreement to purchase the home.

    (d) When sale or lease of home is complete. For purposes of establishing the manufacturer's and retailer's responsibilities for on-site completion under the Act and subparts F and I of this part, the sale or lease of the manufactured home will not be considered complete until the purchaser or lessor, as applicable, has been provided with a copy of the final site inspection report required under § 3282.605(d) and a copy of the manufacturer's certification of completion required under § 3282.609(k) and (l). For 5 years from the date of the sale or lease of each home, the manufacturer must maintain in its records an indication that the final on-site inspection report and certification of completion has been provided to the lessor or purchaser and, as applicable, the appropriate retailer.

    § 3282.607 IPIA responsibilities.

    The IPIA, acting on behalf of HUD, for any manufacturer proceeding under this section is responsible for:

    (a) Working with the manufacturer and the manufacturer's DAPIA to incorporate into the DAPIA-approved quality assurance manual for on-site completion any changes that are necessary to ensure that homes completed on-site conform to the requirements of this section;

    (b) Providing the manufacturer with a supply of the labels described in this section, in accordance with the requirements of § 3282.362(c)(2)(i)(A);

    (c) Overseeing the effectiveness of the manufacturer's quality control system for assuring that on-site work is completed to the DAPIA-approved designs, which must include:

    (1) Verifying that the manufacturer's quality control manual at the installation site is functioning and being followed;

    (2) Monitoring the manufacturer's system for tracking the status of each home built under the approval until the on-site work and necessary inspections have been completed;

    (3) Reviewing all of the manufacturer's final on-site inspection reports; and

    (4) Inspecting all of the on-site construction work for each home utilizing an IPIA inspector or an independent qualified third-party inspector acceptable to the IPIA and acting as the designee or representative:

    (i) Prior to close-up, unless access panels are provided to allow the work to be inspected after all work is completed on-site; and

    (ii) After all work is completed on-site, except for close-up;

    (d) Designating an IPIA inspector or an independent qualified third-party inspector acceptable to the IPIA, as set forth under § 3282.358(d), who is not associated with the manufacturer and is not involved with the site construction or completion of the home and is free of any conflict of interest in accordance with § 3282.359, to inspect the work done on-site for the purpose of determining compliance with:

    (1) The approved design or, as appropriate under § 3282.362(a)(1)(iii), the Construction and Safety Standards; and

    (2) The DAPIA-approved quality assurance manual for on-site completion applicable to the labeling and completion of the affected manufactured homes;

    (e) Notifying the manufacturer of the IPIA's acceptance of the manufacturer's final site inspection report (see § 3282.605(d)(3)(iii));

    (f) Preparing final site inspection reports and providing notification to the manufacturer of its acceptance of the manufacturer's final site inspection report within 5 business days of preparing its report. The IPIA is to maintain its final site inspection reports and those of the manufacturer for a period of at least 5 years. All reports must be available for HUD and SAA review in the IPIA's central record office as part of the labeling records; and

    (g) Reporting to HUD, the DAPIA, and the manufacturer if one or more homes has not been site inspected prior to occupancy or when arrangements for one or more manufactured homes to be site inspected have not been made.

    § 3282.608 Manufacturer responsibilities.

    A manufacturer proceeding under this section is responsible for:

    (a) Obtaining DAPIA approval for completion of construction on-site, in accordance with § 3282.603;

    (b) Obtaining the IPIA's agreement to perform on-site inspections as necessary under this section and the terms of the DAPIA's approval;

    (c) Notifying the IPIA that the home is ready for inspection;

    (d) Paying the IPIA's costs for performing on-site inspections of work completed under this section;

    (e) Either before or at the time on-site work commences, providing the IPIA with a copy of any applicable DAPIA-approved quality assurance manual for on-site completion, the approved instructions for completing the construction work on-site, and an approved inspection checklist, and maintaining this information on the job site until all on-site work is completed and accepted by the IPIA;

    (f) Satisfactorily completing all on-site construction and required repairs or authorizing a licensed contractor or similarly qualified person to complete all site construction and any needed repairs;

    (g) Providing a written certification to the lessor or purchaser, when all site construction work is completed, that each home, to the best of the manufacturer's knowledge and belief, is constructed in conformance with the Construction and Safety Standards;

    (h) Ensuring that the consumer notification requirements of § 3282.606 are met for any home completed under this subpart;

    (i) Maintaining a system for tracking the status of homes built under the approval until the on-site work and necessary inspections have been completed, such that the system will assure that the work is performed in accordance with the quality control manual and other conditions of the approval;

    (j) Ensuring performance of all work as necessary to assure compliance with the Construction and Safety Standards upon completion of the site work, including § 3280.303(b) of this chapter, regardless of who does the work or where the work is completed;

    (k) Preparing a site inspection report upon completion of the work on-site, certifying completion in accordance with DAPIA-approved instruction and that the home conforms with the approved design or, as appropriate under § 3282.362(a)(1)(iii), the construction and safety standards;

    (l) Arranging for an on-site inspection of each home upon completion of the on-site work by the IPIA or its authorized designee prior to occupancy to verify compliance of the work with the DAPIA-approved designs and the Construction and Safety Standards;

    (m) Providing its final on-site inspection report and certification of completion to the IPIA and, after approval, to the lessor or purchaser and, as applicable, the appropriate retailer, and to the SAA upon request;

    (n) Maintaining in its records the approval notification from the DAPIA, the manufacturer's final on-site inspection report and certification of completion, and the IPIA's acceptance of the final site inspection report and certification, and making all such records available for review by HUD in the factory of origin;

    (o) Reporting to HUD or its agent the serial numbers assigned to each home completed in conformance with this section and as required by § 3282.552; and

    (p) Providing cumulative quarterly production reports to HUD or its agent that include the site completion numeric identification number(s) for each home (see § 3282.603(d)(1)); the serial number(s) for each home; the HUD label number(s) assigned to each home; the retailer's name and address for each home; the name, address, and phone number for each home purchaser; the dates of the final site completion inspection for each home; and whether each home was inspected prior to occupancy.

    (q) Maintaining copies of all records for on-site completion for each home, as required by this section, in the unit file to be maintained by the manufacturer.

    § 3282.609 Revocation or amendment of DAPIA approval.

    (a) The DAPIA that issued an approval or the Secretary may revoke or amend, prospectively, an approval notification issued under § 3282.603. The approval may be revoked or amended whenever the DAPIA or HUD determines that:

    (1) The manufacturer is not complying with the terms of the approval or the requirements of this section;

    (2) The approval was not issued in conformance with the requirements of § 3282.603;

    (3) A home produced under the approval fails to comply with the Federal construction and safety standards or contains an imminent safety hazard; or

    (4) The manufacturer fails to make arrangements for one or more manufactured homes to be inspected by the IPIA prior to occupancy.

    (b) The DAPIA must immediately notify the manufacturer, the IPIA, and HUD of any revocation or amendment of DAPIA approval.

    § 3282.610 Failure to comply with the procedures of this subpart.

    In addition to other sanctions available under the Act and this part, HUD may prohibit any manufacturer or PIA found to be in violation of the requirements of this section from carrying out their functions of this Subpart in the future, after providing an opportunity for an informal presentation of views in accordance with § 3282.152(f). Repeated infractions of the requirements of this section may be grounds for the suspension or disqualification of a PIA under §§ 3282.355 and 3282.356.

    § 3282.611 Compliance with this subpart.

    If the manufacturer and IPIA, as applicable, complies with the requirements of this section and the home complies with the construction and safety standards for those aspects of construction covered by the DAPIA approval, then HUD will consider a manufacturer or retailer that has permitted a manufactured home approved for on-site completion under this section to be sold, leased, offered for sale or lease, introduced, delivered, or imported to be in compliance with the certification requirements of the Act and the applicable implementing regulations in this part 3282 for those aspects of construction covered by the approval.

    PART 3285—MODEL MANUFACTURED HOME INSTALLATION STANDARDS 13. The authority citation for 24 CFR part 3285 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 5403, 5404, and 5424.

    14. In § 3285.5, in alphabetic order, add definitions for “peak cap construction” and “peak flip construction” to read as follows:
    § 3285.5 Definitions.

    Peak cap construction means any roof peak construction that is either shipped loose or site constructed and is site installed to complete the roof ridge/peak of a home.

    Peak flip construction means any roof peak construction that requires the joining of two or more cut top chord members on site. The cut top chords must be joined at the factory by straps, hinges, or other means.

    15. In § 3285.801, revise paragraph (f)(2) to read as follows:
    § 3285.801 Exterior close-up.

    (f) * * *

    (2) In which the roof pitch of the hinged roof is less than 7:12, including designs incorporating peak cap construction or peak flip construction; and

    Dated: August 25, 2015. Edward L. Golding, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing. Approved: August 25, 2015. Laura H. Hogshead, Chief Operating Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21774 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [TD 9736] RIN 1545-BK98 Integrated Hedging Transactions of Qualifying Debt AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Final regulations and removal of temporary regulations.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains final regulations that address certain integrated transactions that involve a foreign currency denominated debt instrument and multiple associated hedging transactions. The regulations provide that if a taxpayer has identified multiple hedges as being part of a qualified hedging transaction, and the taxpayer has terminated at least one but less than all of the hedges (including a portion of one or more of the hedges), the taxpayer must treat the remaining hedges as having been sold for fair market value on the date of disposition of the terminated hedge.

    DATES:

    Effective Date. These regulations are effective on September 8, 2015.

    Applicability Date. These regulations apply to leg-outs within the meaning of § 1.988-5(a)(6)(ii) that occur on or after September 6, 2012.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sheila Ramaswamy, at (202) 317-6938 (not a toll-free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On September 5, 2012, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued temporary regulations (TD 9598) (the “Temporary Regulations”) that revised the legging out rules of § 1.988-5(a)(6)(ii) applicable to hedging transactions under section 988(d). No public hearing was requested or held. One comment was received, which is available at www.regulations.gov or upon request. After consideration of the comment, the Temporary Regulations are adopted as final regulations without substantive change. The Temporary Regulations are removed.

    Summary of Comments and Explanation of Revisions

    The only comment received on the Temporary Regulations suggested that the promulgation of the Temporary Regulations was unnecessary because the prior regulations did not support the taxpayer reporting position that the Temporary Regulations were designed to prevent. The comment considered the taxpayer position addressed in the Temporary Regulations to be inconsistent with both the purposes of section 988(d) and the economic substance of the transaction. Although the comment finds the Temporary Regulations ultimately unnecessary, it acknowledges that the section 988 hedging rules are a complicated area of law and that the prior regulations could be improved to provide greater certainty to taxpayers. The Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that the Temporary Regulations are useful in clarifying the section 988(d) integration rules—as well as in preventing unintended approaches to legging out under those rules—and thus should be adopted as final.

    The comment recommended that the Treasury Department and the IRS consider aligning the hedge integration regime under section 988 with the approach taken in regulations under section 1275 on the basis that the section 1275 approach is more consistent with economic reality. The § 1.1275-6 regulations generally allow the integration of a qualifying debt instrument with a hedge or combination of hedges if the combined cash flows of the components are substantially equivalent to the cash flows on a fixed or variable rate debt instrument. However, a financial instrument that hedges currency risk cannot be integrated as a § 1.1275-6 hedge. See § 1.1275-6(b)(2). Under the legging out rules of § 1.1275-6, a taxpayer that legs out of an integrated transaction is treated as terminating the synthetic debt instrument for its fair market value and recognizing any gain or loss. If the taxpayer remains liable on the qualifying debt instrument after the leg-out, adjustments are made to reflect any difference between the fair market value of the qualifying debt instrument and its adjusted issue price. If the taxpayer remains a party to the § 1.1275-6 hedge, the hedge is treated as entered into at its fair market value. By contrast, subject to § 1.988-5T(a)(6)(ii)(F), the legging out rules under § 1.988-5 treat a taxpayer that legs out of a synthetic debt instrument under section 988 as having disposed of any remaining hedges, and those hedges cannot be part of a qualified hedging transaction for any period after the leg-out date.

    The Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that achieving greater alignment between the hedge integration regimes under sections 988 and 1275 is beyond the scope of this project and unnecessary to achieve the purpose of the Temporary Regulations. The limited purpose of the Temporary Regulations was to clarify the application of the legging out rules under § 1.988-5 to a particular fact pattern rather than to undertake a more general revision of those rules. When some of the hedge components of a qualified hedging transaction are disposed of on a leg-out date, deeming a disposition of all remaining components is sufficient to achieve a clear reflection of income. Continuing to treat the remaining components as integrated, as under the rule of § 1.1275-6, would represent a departure from the approach taken in the original § 1.988-5 regulations. Nonetheless, the Treasury Department and the IRS will continue to consider whether the hedge integration regimes under sections 988 and 1275 should be modified and brought into closer conformity.

    As further support for the recommendation to achieve better alignment between §§ 1.988-5 and 1.1275-6, the comment also suggested that the provision in § 1.988-5T(a)(6)(ii)(F) of the Temporary Regulations, which was also included in the prior final regulations, would be unnecessary if the regulations were modified to conform to § 1.1275-6. Under § 1.988-5T(a)(6)(ii)(F), if a taxpayer legs out of a qualified hedging transaction and realizes a gain with respect to the debt instrument or hedge that is disposed of or otherwise terminated, then the taxpayer is not treated as legging out if during the period beginning 30 days before the leg-out date and ending 30 days after that date the taxpayer enters into another transaction that, taken together with any remaining components of the hedge, hedges at least 50 percent of the remaining currency flow with respect to the qualifying debt instrument that was part of the qualified hedging transaction. Section 1.988-5T(a)(6)(ii)(F) also provides a similar rule where a taxpayer has a qualified hedging transaction comprised of multiple components. In such a case, the taxpayer will not be treated as legging out of the qualified hedging transaction if the taxpayer terminates all or a part of one or more of the components and realizes a net gain with respect to the terminated component, components, or portions thereof, provided that the remaining components of the hedge by themselves hedge at least 50 percent of the remaining currency flow with respect to the qualifying debt instrument that was part of the qualified hedging transaction.

    The comment suggests that this provision of the section 988 hedging rules is unnecessarily complex, as well as incomplete because it does not cover situations in which, upon legging out, a taxpayer recognizes a loss on the debt instrument or hedge that is disposed of or otherwise terminated. However, as stated in this preamble, in issuing the Temporary Regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS only sought to clarify the application of the section 988 hedging rules to a particular fact pattern and did not seek to undertake a more general revision of those rules. Accordingly, the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that modifications to § 1.988-5T(a)(6)(ii)(F) are beyond the scope of this guidance project. However, the Treasury Department and the IRS will continue to consider whether any modifications to the rule are necessary or appropriate.

    Finally, the comment also recommended that, even if the final regulations do not adopt the recommendation to align with the approach taken in § 1.1275-6, the Temporary Regulations should be modified to provide that, when an issuer of a qualifying debt instrument legs out but continues to be the obligor on the qualifying debt instrument, the issuer should be deemed to repurchase and reissue the debt instrument for its then fair market value. The Temporary Regulations instead provide that, in such a case, the debt instrument is “treated as sold for its fair market value.” The comment notes that the sale of a debt instrument has no tax consequences for the issuer of the instrument. The Treasury Department and the IRS agree that this aspect of the Temporary Regulations should be modified and, for the sake of consistency, these final regulations adopt the phrasing “treated as sold or otherwise terminated by the taxpayer for its fair market value,” which is used in § 1.988-5(a)(6)(i)(C) (regarding legging in).

    The final regulations also update the dates in two existing examples, to be consistent with the applicability date of the revised legging out rules. Additionally, the final regulations reflect minor wording changes to the Temporary Regulations for purposes of improving clarity. The Treasury Department and the IRS do not intend these changes to be interpreted as substantive changes to the Temporary Regulations.

    Special Analyses

    Certain IRS regulations, including this one, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory impact assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. It is hereby certified that these regulations will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based upon the fact that these regulations merely clarify an existing standard and do not impose a collection of information on small entities. Accordingly, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, the notice of proposed rulemaking preceding this regulation was submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these regulations is Sheila Ramaswamy, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (International). However, other personnel from the IRS and the Treasury Department participated in their development.

    List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Adoptions of Amendment to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 2. Section 1.988-5 is amended by:

    1. Revising paragraph (a)(6)(ii). 2. Adding Example 11 to paragraph (a)(9)(iv). 3. Revising paragraph (a)(10)(iv).

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    § 1.988-5 Section 988(d) hedging transactions.

    (a) * * *

    (6) * * *

    (ii) Legging out. With respect to a qualifying debt instrument and hedge that are properly identified as a qualified hedging transaction, “legging out” of integrated treatment under this paragraph (a) means that the taxpayer disposes of or otherwise terminates all or any portion of the qualifying debt instrument or the hedge before maturity of the qualified hedging transaction. For purposes of the preceding sentence, if the taxpayer changes a material term of the qualifying debt instrument (for example, exercises an option to change the interest rate or index, or the maturity date) or the hedge (for example, changes the interest or exchange rates underlying the hedge, or the expiration date) before maturity of the qualified hedging transaction, the taxpayer will be deemed to have disposed of or otherwise terminated all or any portion of the qualifying debt instrument or the hedge, as applicable. A taxpayer that disposes of or terminates a qualified hedging transaction (that is, disposes of or terminates both the qualifying debt instrument and the hedge in their entirety on the same day) is considered to have disposed of or otherwise terminated the synthetic debt instrument rather than legging out. See paragraph (a)(9)(iv) of this section, Example 10 for an illustration of this rule. If a taxpayer legs out of integrated treatment, the following rules apply:

    (A) The transaction will be treated as a qualified hedging transaction during the time the requirements of this paragraph (a) were satisfied.

    (B) If all of the instruments comprising the hedge (each such instrument, a component) are disposed of or otherwise terminated, the qualifying debt instrument is treated as sold or otherwise terminated by the taxpayer for its fair market value on the date the hedge is disposed of or otherwise terminated (the leg-out date), and any gain or loss (including gain or loss resulting from factors other than movements in exchange rates) from the identification date to the leg-out date is realized and recognized on the leg-out date. The spot rate on the leg-out date is used to determine exchange gain or loss on the debt instrument for the period beginning on the leg-out date and ending on the date such instrument matures or is disposed of or otherwise terminated. Proper adjustment must be made to reflect any gain or loss taken into account. The netting rule of § 1.988-2(b)(8) applies. See paragraph (a)(9)(iv) of this section, Example 4 and Example 5 for an illustration of this rule.

    (C) If a hedge has more than one component (and such components have been properly identified as being part of the qualified hedging transaction) and at least one but not all of the components that comprise the hedge has been disposed of or otherwise terminated, or if part of any component of the hedge has been terminated (whether a hedge consists of a single or multiple components), the date such component (or part thereof) is disposed of or terminated is considered the leg-out date and the qualifying debt instrument is treated as sold or otherwise terminated by the taxpayer for its fair market value in accordance with the rules of paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(B) of this section on such leg-out date. In addition, all of the remaining components (or parts thereof) that have not been disposed of or otherwise terminated are treated as sold by the taxpayer for their fair market value on the leg-out date, and any gain or loss from the identification date to the leg-out date is realized and recognized on the leg-out date. To the extent relevant, the spot rate on the leg-out date is used to determine exchange gain or loss on the remaining components (or parts thereof) for the period beginning on the leg-out date and ending on the date such components (or parts thereof) are disposed of or otherwise terminated. See paragraph (a)(9)(iv) of this section, Example 11 for an illustration of this rule.

    (D) If the qualifying debt instrument is disposed of or otherwise terminated in whole or in part, the date of such disposition or termination is considered the leg-out date. Accordingly, the hedge (including all components making up the hedge in their entirety) that is part of the qualified hedging transaction is treated as sold by the taxpayer for its fair market value on the leg-out date, and any gain or loss from the identification date to the leg-out date is realized and recognized on the leg-out date. To the extent relevant, the spot rate on the leg-out date is used to determine exchange gain or loss on the hedge (including all components thereof) for the period beginning on the leg-out date and ending on the date such hedge is disposed of or otherwise terminated.

    (E) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(8)(iii) of this section (regarding identification by the Commissioner), the part of the qualified hedging transaction that has not been disposed of or otherwise terminated (that is, the remaining debt instrument in its entirety even if partially hedged, or the remaining components of the hedge) cannot be part of a qualified hedging transaction for any period after the leg-out date.

    (F) If a taxpayer legs out of a qualified hedging transaction and realizes a net gain with respect to the debt instrument that is disposed of or otherwise terminated, then paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(B), (C), and (D) of this section, as appropriate, will not apply if during the period beginning 30 days before the leg-out date and ending 30 days after that date the taxpayer enters into another transaction that, taken together with any remaining components of the hedge, hedges at least 50 percent of the remaining currency flow with respect to the qualifying debt instrument that was part of the qualified hedging transaction or, if appropriate, an equivalent amount under the hedge (or any remaining components thereof) that was part of the qualified hedging transaction. Similarly, in a case in which a hedge has multiple components that are part of a qualified hedging transaction, if the taxpayer legs out of a qualified hedging transaction by terminating one such component or a part of one or more such components and realizes a net gain with respect to the terminated component, components, or portions thereof, then paragraphs (a)(6)(ii)(B), (C), and (D) of this section, as appropriate, will not apply if the remaining components of the hedge (including parts thereof) by themselves hedge at least 50 percent of the remaining currency flow with respect to the qualifying debt instrument that was part of the qualified hedging transaction. See paragraph (a)(9)(iv) of this section, Example 11 for an illustration of this rule.

    (9) * * *

    (iv) * * *

    Example 11.

    (i) K is a domestic corporation with the U.S. dollar as its functional currency. On January 1, 2013, K borrows 100 British pounds (£) for two years at a 10% rate of interest payable on December 31 of each year with no principal payment due until maturity on December 31, 2014. Assume that the spot rate on January 1, 2013, is £1=$1. On the same date, K enters into two swap contracts with an unrelated counterparty that economically results in the transformation of the fixed rate £100 borrowing to a floating rate dollar borrowing. The terms of the swaps are as follows:

    (A) Swap #1, Currency swap. On January 1, 2013, K will exchange £100 for $100.

    (1) On December 31 of both 2013 and 2014, K will exchange $8 for £10;

    (2) On December 31, 2014, K will exchange $100 for £100.

    (B) Swap #2, Interest rate swap. On December 31 of both 2013 and 2014, K will pay LIBOR times a notional principal amount of $100 and will receive 8% times the same $100 notional principal amount.

    (ii) Assume that K properly identifies the pound borrowing and the swap contracts as a qualified hedging transaction as provided in paragraph (a)(8)(i) of this section and that the other relevant requirements of paragraph (a) of this section are satisfied.

    (iii) On January 1, 2014, the spot exchange rate is £1=$2; the U.S. dollar LIBOR rate of interest is 9%; the market value of K's note in pounds has not changed; and K terminates swap #2. Because interest rates have increased from 8% to 9%, K will incur a loss of ($.92) (the present value of the ($1) difference between the 8% and 9% interest payments discounted at the current interest rate of 9%) with respect to the termination of such swap on January 1, 2014. Pursuant to paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(C) of this section, K must treat swap #1 as having been sold for its fair market value on the leg-out date, which is the date swap #2 is terminated. K must realize and recognize gain of $100.92 (the present value of £110 discounted in pounds to equal £100 × $2 ($200) less the present value of $108 ($99.08)). The loss inherent in the pound borrowing from January 1, 2013 to January 1, 2014 is realized and recognized on January 1, 2014. Such loss is exchange loss in the amount of $100 (the present value of £110 that was to be paid at the end of the year discounted at pound interest rates to equal £100 times the change in exchange rates: (£100 × $1, the spot rate on January 1, 2013)−(£100 × $2, the spot rate on January 1, 2014)). Pursuant to paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(E) of this section, except as provided in paragraph (a)(8)(iii) of this section (regarding identification by the Commissioner), the pound borrowing and currency swap cannot be part of a qualified hedging transaction for any period after the leg-out date.

    (iv) Assume the facts are the same as in paragraph (iii) of this Example except that on January 1, 2014, the U.S. dollar LIBOR rate of interest is 7% rather than 9%. When K terminates swap #2, K will realize gain of $0.93 (the present value of the ($1) difference between the 8% and 7% interest payments discounted at the current interest rate of 7%) received with respect to the termination on January 1, 2014. Fifty percent or more of the remaining pound cash flow of the pound borrowing remains hedged after the termination of swap #2. Accordingly, under paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(F) of this section, paragraphs (a)(6)(ii)(B) and (C) of this section do not apply, and the gain on swap #1 and the loss on the qualifying debt instrument are not taken into account. Thus, K will include in income $0.93 realized from the termination of swap #2.

    (10) * * *

    (iv) Effective/applicability dates for legging in and legging out rules. (A) The rules of paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this section are effective for qualified hedging transactions that are legged into after March 17, 1992.

    (B) The rules of paragraph (a)(6)(ii) and Example 11 of paragraph (a)(9)(iv) of this section apply to leg-outs that occur on or after September 6, 2012.

    § 1.988-5 [Amended]
    Par. 3. For each section listed in the table, remove the language in the “Remove” column and add in its place the language in the “Add” column as set forth below: Section Remove Add § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (i), second, third and fourth sentences January 1, 1990 January 1, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1990 December 31, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1991 December 31, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1992 December 31, 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iii)(B) 1990 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iii)(B) 1991 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iii)(B) 1992 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iii)(D), second sentence 1992 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iv), first, second, fourth, fifth, and sixth sentences January 1, 1991 January 1, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iv), first, fourth, and fifth sentences January 1, 1990 January 1, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iv), third sentence 1990 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 4, paragraph (iv), sixth and seventh sentences December 31, 1992 December 31, 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (i), second, fourth, and fifth sentences January 1, 1990 January 1, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1990 December 31, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1991 December 31, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (i), table December 31, 1992 December 31, 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), second and third sentences January 1, 1991 January 1, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), second sentence January 1, 1990 January 1, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), third sentence December 31, 1991 December 31, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), third sentence December 31, 1992 December 31, 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), third sentence 1991 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (ii), third sentence 1992 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii), second sentence January 1, 1990 January 1, 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii), second sentence January 1, 1991 January 1, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(B) 1990 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(B) 1991 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(B) 1992 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(C), first sentence 1990 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(C), first sentence 1991 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(C), first sentence 1992 2015. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iii)(D), second sentence 1990 2013. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iv), first, second, third, and sixth sentences January 1, 1991 January 1, 2014. § 1.988-5(a)(9)(iv), Example 5, paragraph (iv), fourth sentence 1990 2013.
    § 1.988-5T [Removed]
    Par. 4. Section 1.988-5T is removed.
    John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Approved: August 25, 2015. Mark J. Mazur, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
    [FR Doc. 2015-22554 Filed 9-3-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0447; FRL-9933-43-Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plan AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Alaska (the State). The submission addresses transportation conformity and general conformity requirements. The EPA is approving the submission in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (the Act).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on November 9, 2015, without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by October 8, 2015. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0447, by any of the following methods:

    www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected]

    Mail: Karl Pepple, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-150, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101

    Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Karl Pepple, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-150. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0447. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA 98101.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karl Pepple at telephone number: (206) 553-1778, email address: [email protected], or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document wherever “we”, “us” or “our” is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. Information is organized as follows:

    Table of Contents I. Background II. What is the EPA's analysis of the state's submittal? III. Final Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

    On September 27, 1995, the EPA approved the general conformity rules in Article 7 of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) Title 18, Chapter 50 into the Alaska SIP (60 FR 49765). General conformity is a requirement of section 176(c) of the CAA to ensure that no federally supported actions outside of highway and transit projects interfere with the purpose of the approved SIP, i.e. the SIP's protection of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). General conformity requirements currently apply to the following criteria pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide. The general conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93, subpart B and in 40 CFR 51.851.

    On December 29, 1999, the EPA approved the transportation conformity rules in Article 7 of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) Title 18, Chapter 50 into the Alaska SIP (64 FR 72940). Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the Act to ensure that federally supported highway, transit projects, and other activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the SIP. Transportation conformity currently applies to areas that are designated nonattainment, and to areas that have been redesignated to attainment after 1990 (maintenance areas) with plans developed under section 175A of the Act, for the following transportation related criteria pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide. The transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A, and in 40 CFR 51.390.

    On August 10, 2005, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users” (SAFETEA-LU) transportation act was signed into law, and among other things, it amended the CAA to eliminate the requirement for states to adopt and submit general conformity SIPs. On April 5, 2010 (75 FR 17254), the EPA updated the general conformity SIP regulations to be consistent with the transportation act by eliminating the Federal regulatory requirement for states to adopt and submit general conformity SIPs. See 40 CFR 51.851. On May 7, 2015, with a supplementary letter received July 29, 2015, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) submitted a request to update the transportation conformity regulations and to remove the general conformity regulations from the Alaska SIP.

    II. What is the EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?

    We reviewed the State of Alaska's (the State) transportation conformity and general conformity SIP submittal to ensure consistency with the current CAA, as amended by the transportation act, and EPA regulations governing state procedures for both transportation and general conformity.

    Alaska's submittal revises transportation conformity criteria and procedures related to interagency consultation, and enforceability of certain transportation related control and mitigation measures. Alaska's SIP revision updates the State's transportation conformity provisions, Article 7 of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) Title 18, Chapter 50 (18 AAC 50), to be consistent with the Act as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR 51.390). The EPA has reviewed the submittal to assure consistency with the Act as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR 51.390) governing state procedures for transportation conformity and interagency consultation and has concluded that the submittal is approvable. Details of our review are set forth in a technical support document (TSD), which has been included in the docket for this action. Specifically, in the TSD, the EPA identifies how the submitted procedures, as clarified by the State's July 29, 2015, supplement, satisfy the requirements under 40 CFR 93.105 for interagency consultation with respect to the development of transportation plans and programs, SIPs, and conformity determinations, the resolution of conflicts, and the provision of adequate public consultation, and our requirements under 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c) for enforceability of control measures and mitigation measures.

    Alaska's SIP revision also addresses general conformity requirements. The revision removes the general conformity regulations from the Alaska SIP. These regulations are no longer necessary since the establishment of the SAFETEA-LU removed the requirement for states to maintain general conformity regulations. Specifically, 40 CFR 51.851(a) was changed to indicate that states “may,” not “must” submit to the EPA a general conformity SIP because, as 40 CFR 51.851(b) indicates, Federal agencies shall use the provisions of 40 CFR part 93, subpart B in addition to any existing applicable state or tribal requirements to review the conformity of Federal actions in nonattainment or maintenance areas. Alaska's removal of general conformity rules from its SIP meets the requirements set forth in section 110(l) of the CAA with respect to adoption and submission of SIP revisions. 40 CFR part 93, subpart B continues to subject certain Federal actions to general conformity requirements without the need for identical state rules and SIPs. Therefore, repealing the state rule will not impact continuity of the general conformity program in Alaska, and consequently meets the requirements of section 110(l). Alaska's request to remove the general conformity regulations from the Alaska SIP is approvable.

    III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving and incorporating by reference into the Alaska SIP the revisions to 18 AAC 50 Article 7, Transportation Conformity, and supporting definitions in 18 AAC 50 Article 9, General Provisions, submitted by the State of Alaska on May 7, 2015, and supplemented on July 29, 2015. The revisions are State effective April 17, 2015. We note that we are not approving the revision to 18 AAC 50.735 because the State determined it was submitted in error, and requested in the July 29, 2015 supplement that the EPA not approve the revision. The State intends to rescind the rule section in the near future. We also note that the May 7, 2015 submittal included a number of rule revisions to 18 AAC 50 Articles 1 and 2, which are not related to transportation and general conformity. We intend to address those rule revisions in a separate action.

    The EPA is approving but not incorporating by reference supplementary letter submitted by Alaska on July 29, 2015. The July 29, 2015 supplement clarifies that Alaska Statute (AS) 40.25.110 and AS 40.25.115, and implementing regulations at 2 AAC 96, Public Information, adequately address availability of materials and reasonable costs associated with access to public records with respect to Transportation Conformity.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the provisions set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

    • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);

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

    • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);

    • does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);

    • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

    • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

    • is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

    • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and

    • does not provide the 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 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the 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).

    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. The EPA will submit a report containing this action 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 9, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. 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, Carbon monoxide, General conformity, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Transportation conformity, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 13, 2015. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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.

    Subpart C—Alaska 2. In § 52.70: a. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by: i. Removing the heading entitled “18 AAC 50 Article 7. Conformity” and adding “18 AAC 50 Article 7. Transportation Conformity” in its place; ii. Revising the entries “18 AAC 50.700”, “18 AAC 50.705”, “18 AAC 50.715”, “18 AAC 50.720”, and “18 AAC 50.990”; iii. Removing the entries “18 AAC 50.710”, “18 AAC 50.725”, and “18 AAC 50.730”; and iv. Adding the entries “18 AAC 50.712”, “18 AAC 50.740”, “18 AAC 50.745”, and “18 AAC 50.750” in numerical order; and b. The table in paragraph (e) under the heading “Section III Area wide Pollutant Control Program”, is amended by: i. Revising the entry “I. Transportation Conformity”; and ii. Adding, after the new entry for “I. Transportation Conformity”, an entry for “Transportation Conformity Supplement” .

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 52.70 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Alaska Regulations and Statutes State citation Title/Subject State effective date EPA Approval date Explanations Alaska Administrative Code Title 18 Environmental Conservation, Chapter 50 Air Quality Control (18 AAC 50) *         *         *         *         *         *         * 18 AAC 50 Article 7. Transportation Conformity 18 AAC 50.700 Purpose 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.705 Applicability 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.712 Agency Responsibilities 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.715 Interagency Consultation Procedures 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.720 Public Involvement 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         * 18 AAC 50.740 Written Commitments 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.745 Resolving Conflicts 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] 18 AAC 50.750 Exempt Projects 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         * 18 AAC 50 Article 9. General Provisions *         *         *         *         *         *         * 18 AAC 50.990 Definitions 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation]

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved Alaska Nonregultaory Provisions And Quasi-Regulatory Measures Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date EPA Approval date Comments State of Alaska Air Quality Control Plan: Volume II. Analysis of Problems, Control Actions *         *         *         *         *         *         * Section III Area wide Pollutant Control Program *         *         *         *         *         *         * I. Transportation Conformity Statewide 4/17/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] Transportation Conformity Supplement Statewide 7/29/15 September 8, 2015 [Insert Federal Register citation] Clarification re: Access to Public Records: AS 40.25.110, AS 40.25.115, and 2 AAC 96. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2015-21938 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0164; FRL-9933-50-Region 9] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Feather River Air Quality Management District; Correction AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a direct final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on July 8, 2015. The document approved revisions to various sections of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This document adds the appropriate amendatory language to § 52.220, Subpart F.

    DATES:

    Effective on September 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3073, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The EPA published a document in the Federal Register on July 8, 2015, (80 FR 38959) approving revisions to various sections of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) in § 52.220, Subpart F. This correction adds the appropriate amendatory language.

    Correction

    In FR Doc. 2015-16627 appearing on page 38964 in the Federal Register on July 8, 2015 (80 FR 38959) make the following correction:

    § 52.220 [Corrected]
    On page 38964, in the third column, line 25 from the top of the column, correct paragraph (c)(460) to read as follows:

    “(460) The following plan revision was submitted on September 29, 2014, by the Governor's designee.

    (i) [Reserved]

    (ii) Additional Material.

    (A) Feather River Air Quality Management District.

    (1) Reasonably Available Control Technology Analysis and Negative Declarations (“2014 RACT SIP”), as adopted on August 4, 2014.”

    Dated: August 21, 2015. Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21939 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 42 CFR Part 52i [Docket Number NIH-2007-0931] RIN 0925-AA61 National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Endowments AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH), through the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is issuing regulations governing the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) endowment grants awarded to section 736 and section 464z-4 Centers of Excellence to facilitate minority health disparities research and other health disparities research.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective October 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jerry Moore, NIH Regulations Officer, Office of Management Assessment, NIH, 6011 Executive Boulevard, Room 601, MSC 7669, Rockville, MD 20852; by email at [email protected]; by fax on 301-401-0169 (not a toll free number); or by telephone on 301-496-4607 (not a toll-free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 464z-3 (42 U.S.C. 285t) of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act authorizes the Director of the NIMHD to carry out a program to facilitate minority health disparities research and other health disparities research by providing research endowments to eligible centers of excellence under sections 736 and 464z-4 of the PHS Act. The program is called the NIMHD Research Endowment Program (Endowment Program). The objective of the Endowment Program is to build research and training capacity and infrastructure at eligible section 736 health professions schools (42 U.S.C. 293) and section 464z-4 biomedical and behavioral research institutions (42 U.S.C. 285t-1) to facilitate minority health and other health disparities research to close the disparity gap in the burden of illness and death experienced by racial and ethnic minority Americans and other health disparity populations. Endowment Program activities may include strengthening the research infrastructure through the renovation of facilities, purchasing of state-of-the-art instruments and equipment, and enhancing information technology; enhancing the academic environment by recruiting a diverse faculty and creating relevant courses in such topics as research methodology and health disparities as additions to the existing curriculum; enhancing recruitment of individuals currently underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences; or other relevant activities.

    Section 464z-4 of the PHS Act authorizes the NIMHD Director to make awards to designated biomedical and behavioral research institutions, alone or as a participant in a consortium, that meet certain criteria for the purpose of assisting the institutions in supporting programs of excellence in training for individuals who are members of minority health disparity populations or other health disparity populations. This program is called the NIMHD Centers of Excellence Program. Section 464z-4(f) of the PHS Act permits the NIMHD Director to expend a portion of such an award for research endowment.

    To be eligible to apply for the Endowment Program, Centers of Excellence (funded under section 736 or section 464z-4 of the PHS Act) must have an institutional endowment that is equal to or less than 50 percent of the national median of endowment funds at institutions that conduct similar biomedical research and training of health professionals. Endowment Program applications filed by institutions meeting eligibility requirements undergo peer review by outside experts to evaluate the scientific and technical merit of the proposed activities and the adequacy of the endowment fund management plan. Reviewers use the criteria of significance, investigators, innovation, approach, and environment to determine the overall impact of the application. After receiving an Endowment Program award, a grantee must provide documentation to the NIMHD over a 20-year period regarding endowment fund activity, including investments, income, and expenditures for activities consistent with its strategic plan.

    This final rule specifies the endowment research grants or endowment portion of an award to which the regulations apply (section 52i.1), the definitions (section 52i.2), who is eligible (section 52i.3) and how to apply for a grant under the program (section 52i.5), and under what conditions an eligible institution that is a recipient may transfer to a foundation a research endowment grant (section 52i.4). Additionally, the final rule specifies how endowment grant applications will be evaluated (section 52i.6), the nature of the grant awards (52i.7), how much endowment fund income a grantee may withdraw and spend and for what purpose (sections 52i.9 and 52i.10), what a grantee must record and report (section 52i.11), and when and for what purposes a grantee may spend the endowment fund corpus (section 52i.8). This final rule also specifies what happens if a grantee fails to administer the research endowment grant in accordance with applicable regulations (section 52i.12), what other HHS policies and regulations apply (section 52i.13), and what additional conditions the NIMHD Director may impose when, in the Director's judgment, the conditions are necessary (section 52i.14).

    NIH announced its intentions to take this rulemaking action, through HHS, in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled “National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Endowments” published in the Federal Register on June 14, 2013 (78 FR 35837-35844). In the NPRM, we provided a sixty day public comment period. The comment period expired August 13, 2013. We received a total of five comments, two of which were identical.

    Three respondents, two of whom submitted identical comments, expressed general support for the regulations. One of these respondents cited the importance of clarity regarding eligibility, the application process, and other required terms and conditions. The other two respondents discussed health disparities in the United States and research as a means to support health equity for all people in the United States. These supportive comments did not result in any necessary changes to this final rule.

    One respondent stated that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) should require all municipalities and States that receive Federal funds from HHS for the provision of health care to notify HHS of the reasons for not considering or exploring solicited or non-solicited health disparities proposals they have received within 90 days. Since this comment is not related to any of the provisions of the Endowment Program, we did not consider the comment relevant to this rulemaking.

    A fifth respondent provided comments addressing a number of issues relevant to the rulemaking, which are discussed below. This respondent requested clarification of the definition of a “Center of Excellence,” specifically, whether the act of receiving funds under section 736 or section 464z-4 is necessary for an institution to meet the definition of a Center of Excellence for purposes of the Endowment Program. The designation as a Center of Excellence for the purposes of the Endowment Program requires both receiving funding under section 736 or section 464z-4 of the Public Health Service Act and meeting certain specific nonfinancial institutional operational requirements as specified in section 736(c)(2)-(5) or section 464z-4(c)(1), respectively. The funding component of the definition in section 52i.2 is intended to clarify that an institution must be an active Center of Excellence under section 736 or section 464z-4 to be eligible for an endowment grant under this program. An institution is not eligible merely because it may be able to satisfy the nonfinancial requirements to qualify for funding under section 736 or section 464z-4.

    This respondent also requested that institutions be allowed to apply for another Endowment Program grant prior to their last year of funding. We disagree with the comment. The intent of the language in the regulation is to prevent an eligible entity with an active award from having more than a single endowment grant at any given time.

    This respondent additionally inquired whether awardee institutions may now directly conduct health disparities research projects instead of capacity building for the conduct of research projects because Endowment Program applications undergo scientific peer review. This is not the case. At the NIH, the peer review of applications determines the technical and scientific merit of the proposed project. The process of peer review does not in itself convey any meaning regarding the particular activities allowed under a grant program. The Endowment Program supports the development of research infrastructure and capacity which is the underpinning of the conduct of research projects.

    This respondent raised concerns regarding the scientific peer review of applications and the expertise of the members of the review groups, suggesting that applicants be able to suggest potential candidates for each review group. We disagree with the comment. One of the hallmarks of the NIH is objective, peer review of applications for financial support. The organizational units within NIH that are responsible for the review of applications take deliberate steps to ensure that the reviewers have the appropriate expertise for the applications to be reviewed. Allowing applicants to suggest potential reviewers would interfere with NIH procedures designed to prevent possible financial and scientific conflicts of interest in the review of applications.

    This respondent also expressed the belief that requiring the endowment fund corpus to be maintained for 20 years after the end of the award period is too restrictive, suggesting that awardees be given greater flexibility and allowed to expend a proportion of the endowment fund corpus earlier than 20 years. We disagree with the comment. Institutional endowments, in general, are designed to create a long-term asset capable of generating income for an extended period of time. Since the focus of the Endowment Program is to build institutional capacity and infrastructure to conduct health disparities research, any diminution of the endowment corpus in the short-term would be at odds with the goals and objectives of the Endowment Program.

    This respondent requested clarity on what actions would satisfy the requirement that awardees take “appropriate actions” in cases where the investments have eroded into the value of the endowment corpus. We have not specified a strict definition for “appropriate actions” in order to allow each institution the flexibility to manage their endowment funds effectively. Certainly, a review and change of investment strategy to a more conservative approach would be an option. A temporary suspension of investment due to adverse market conditions could also be an appropriate action. We did not want to be prescriptive, but would expect actions to be reasonable and consistent with prevailing practices in the management of institutional endowments.

    This respondent also inquired as to whether management costs for the endowment fund can be paid from the endowment fund itself. Section 52i.11(a)(4) of the proposed rule provided that expenses and charges associated with the management of the endowment funds may be paid from “the grant funds.” Since the endowment fund corpus cannot be used for this purpose, section 52i.11(a)(4) has been amended to replace “the grant funds” with “endowment fund income” to clarify the issue. Awardees are expected to ensure that those costs are appropriately recorded.

    This respondent suggested adding a reference to an “institution's policies and procedures” to section 52i.9(b) regarding the expenditure of endowment fund income. We disagree with the comment. Section 52i.7(b) already specifies the need for the awardee to adhere to the institution's spending rules and policies, provided that such spending rules are not inconsistent with applicable federal regulations and policies.

    This respondent requested clarification on the timing for the filing of the final Financial Status Report under section 52.11(d). Upon approval of an application for the Endowment Program, NIMHD agrees to provide financial support for a specified project period, usually five years. Due to the unique nature of the program, it is reasonable for the long-term reporting requirement to begin at the end of the project period. To clarify the filing requirement, section 52i.11(d) has been amended to replace “date of the original award” with “end of the project period.” In addition, sections 52i.7(e) and 52i.8(a) have been amended in a consistent manner to replace “date of award” with “end of the project period.”

    Finally, with regard to actions that may be taken if a grantee fails to administer the endowment in accordance to the regulations, this respondent believes that the awardee should be given an opportunity to rectify an error, unless such an error or failure was intentional. We agree with the comment with the following qualification. The specific language in section 52i.12 is consistent with the financial stewardship responsibilities of the Federal government. The opportunity for a full and fair hearing is provided and the Director of NIMHD has discretion regarding any action to be taken depending on the circumstances of the breach in responsibilities. Limiting the range of actions available to the NIH in situations of an awardee's poor endowment fund management, even if non-intentional, would not be appropriate.

    The published NPRM contained two typographical errors that have been corrected in this final rule. First, under the definition of “endowment fund” in section 52i.2, the reference to “section 464z-4” should have been “section 464z-3” of the PHS Act. Second, in the discussion of the sections of the proposed regulations that contain requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the reference to section “52i.9” should have been specified as section “52i.9(b)”. That error has been corrected in the final rule, consistent with the correct identification of section 52i.9(b) in the Reporting part of the Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden table included in the NPRM and this final rule. The published NPRM contained a table on the cost burdens for reporting and recordkeeping for the NIMHD Research Endowment Program. In the final rule it has been labeled “ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN TO THE RESPONDENTS FOR REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING UNDER THE NIMHD RESEARCH ENDOWMENT PROGRAM.” An additional column (designated as the 4th) was added to the table as “Average Burden per Respondents (in hours)” and columns 1, 2 3, 5, and 6 were re-titled as “Final Rule Citations,” “Number of Respondents,” Number of Responses per Respondent,” “Hourly Wage Rate,” and “Total Cost Burden,” respectively. The dollar amounts in the Hourly Wage Rate column were edited to reflect the actual cost per hour for responses. In addition, the footnotes for the table were edited to be consistent with the table.

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act section of the final rule has been revised to clarify that while all eligible institutions are considered small entities, the impact of the final rule will not exceed five percent of revenues of the entities.

    Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIA)

    We have examined the impacts of this rule as required by Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30, 1993); Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (January 18, 2011); the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612); the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); and Executive Order 13132, Federalism (August 4, 1999).

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in one year). Based on our analysis, we believe that the final rule does not constitute an economically significant regulatory action. Additionally, if a regulatory action is deemed to fall within the scope of the definition of the term “significant regulatory action” contained in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, pre-publication review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required. This final rule was reviewed under the criteria of Executive Order 12866 and was not deemed a “significant regulatory action.”

    Executive Orders 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). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.

    Benefits

    The final rule will add transparency for potential applicants regarding who is eligible and how to apply for a grant under the program, how grant applications will be evaluated, and under what conditions an eligible institution that is a recipient may transfer to a foundation a research endowment grant. Additionally, the final rule specifies the nature of the grants, how much endowment fund income a grantee may withdraw and for what purpose, what a grantee must record and report, and when and for what purposes a grantee may spend the endowment fund corpus.

    This final rule also enhances compliance and effective fiduciary responsibilities for the federal government. It specifies what happens if a grantee fails to administer the research endowment grant in accordance with applicable regulations, what other HHS policies and regulations apply, and additional conditions the NIMHD Director may impose when, in the Director's judgment, the conditions are necessary. The Director may, with respect to any grant award, impose additional conditions prior to, or at the time of, any award when in the Director's judgment the conditions are necessary to ensure the carrying out of the purposes of the award, the interests of the public health, or the conservation of grant funds.

    Costs

    Based on the provisions of the PHS Act, approximately twelve Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) are eligible for the NIMHD Research Endowment Program. Costs for participation can be subdivided into those associated with the application process and those required for the necessary recordkeeping. The application process includes a competitive submission, as well as noncompetitive progress report for those institutions awarded funds under the NIMHD Research Endowment Program for subsequent years within the project period. Based on estimates provided in the PHS 424 instructions, an average application should require approximately 22 hours to complete and 15 hours for a subsequent progress report, according to the PHS 2590 instructions. The contribution of various professional disciplines such as biomedical researchers, contract/grants specialists, and technical staff to the reporting and recordkeeping requirements varies. Cost estimates are based on a blended analysis of institutional salary structure and prevailing market conditions for certain categories of personnel. In addition, fiscal year 2012 NIH salary limitations were included in the derivation of cost estimates, where applicable.

    Estimated Annualized Cost Burden to the Respondents for Reporting and Recordkeeping Under the NIMHD Research Endowment Program Final rule citations Number of
  • respondents 1
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • respondents
  • (in hours)
  • Hourly wage rate 2 Total cost
  • burden 3
  • Reporting: § 52i.3(b)(2) 4 1 4 4 $33.65 $538.40 § 52i.4(a) 4 1 1 5 33.65 134.60 § 52i.4(c) 4 1 1 6 33.65 134.60 § 52i.5(a) 4 1 22 7 163.73 14,408.00 § 52i.9(b) 4 1 4 8 86.39 1,382.24 § 52i.11(b) 12 1 15 9 118.33 21,300.00 § 52i.11(d) 12 1 2 10 100.00 2,400.00 Subtotal 49 40,297.84 Recordkeeping: § 52i.10 12 1 2 11 200.00 4,800.00 § 52i.11(a)(1) 12 1 2 12 33.65 807.60 § 52i.11(a)(2) 12 1 2 13 33.65 807.60 § 52i.11(a)(3) 12 1 2 14 33.65 807.60 § 52i.11(a)(4) 12 1 2 15 33.65 807.60 § 52i.11(b) 12 1 8 16 33.65 3,230.40 Subtotal 18 11,260.80 Total 67 51,558.64 1 There is currently a total of twelve institutions eligible for the NIMHD Research Endowment Program. Historically, requests for applications are solicited every three years. 2 Average cost per hour. 3 Number of respondents × average burden per response × hourly wage rate. 4 5 6 Based on contracts/grants staff costs. 7 Based on the contributions of the principal investigator, participating faculty, contracts/grants staff, financial investment advisors, and administrative support. Aggregate cost is $173.73/hour. 8 Based on principal investigator costs. 9 Based on the contributions of the principal investigator, participating faculty, contracts/grants staff, financial investment advisors, and administrative support. Aggregate cost is $118.33/hour. 10 Based on financial analyst/auditor costs. 11 Based on financial investment advisor costs. 12 13 14 15 16 Based on contracts/grants staff costs.
    Alternatives

    The unique and complex nature of the NIMHD Research Endowment Program with regard to the management of endowment funds, restrictive nature of expenditures, and strict reporting provides a challenge to the necessary federal oversight. The final rule provides the guidelines for the creation of an operation structure of the institutional program. The implementation of the final rule will provide clarity to eligible and participating institutions with regard to expectations as a grantee under the program, as well as enhance the ability of the federal government to ensure the grantees are in compliance with all the applicable provisions of the statute.

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires agencies to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of the rule on small entities. For the purposes of this analysis, small entities include small business concerns as defined by the Small Business Administration, usually businesses with fewer than 500 employees. Also a nonprofit entity is defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act as small if it is not dominant in its field, regardless of the number of employees. Eligibility requirements of the Research Endowment program, as codified in Public Law 111-148, limits the universe of potential applicants to approximately twelve institutions of higher education (IHEs). Utilizing sources of information such as local business bureaus, workforce statistics, and institution Web sites, a reasonable determination was made as to the approximate number of employees at eligible institutions. The range estimates are from 175-550 for the smallest institution to 3,976 for the largest and none are considered dominant in their field. While all eligible institutions are considered small entities, the impact of the final rule will not exceed five percent of revenues of the entities. Accordingly, the Secretary certifies that this rule will not have a significant impact on a significant number of small entities.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation [with base year of 1995]) in any 1 year.” The current inflation-adjusted statutory threshold is approximately $141 million based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator. The Secretary certifies that this rule does not mandate any spending by state, local or tribal government in the aggregate or by the private sector. Participation in the NIMHD Research Endowment Program is voluntary and not mandated.

    Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, Federalism, requires federal agencies to consult with state and local government officials in the development of regulatory policies with federalism implications. The Secretary reviewed this rule as required under the Executive Order and determined that it does not have federalism implications. The Secretary certifies that this rule will not have an effect on the states or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains requirements that are subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as amended (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Sections 52i.3(b)(2), 52i.4(a), 52i.4(c), 52i.5(a), 52i.9(b), 52i.11(b), and 52i.11(d) contain reporting and information collection requirements that are subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Sections 52i.10, 52i.11(a)(1), 52i.11(a)(2), 52i.11(a)(3), 52i.11(a)(4), and 52i.11(b) contain recordkeeping requirements that are subject to OMB review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The title, program description, and respondent description of the information collection and recordkeeping requirements contained in this rule will be submitted to OMB for review. Organizations and individuals can submit comments on the information collection and recordkeeping requirements, including the burden estimates, to: (1) Seleda Perryman, Project Clearance Officer, National Institutes of Health, Rockledge Center 1, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Room 3509, Bethesda, MD 29817, telephone 301-594-7949 (not a toll-free number); and (2) the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, [email protected] or by fax to 202-395-6974, and mark “Attention: Desk Officer for the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.” After we obtain OMB approval, we will publish the OMB control number in the Federal Register.

    Title: National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Endowments.

    Description: The NIMHD Research Endowment Program builds research capacity and research infrastructure in order to facilitate minority health research and research regarding other health disparity populations at eligible institutions under sections 736 and 464z-4 of the PHS Act.

    Respondent Description: Institutions currently funded under Section 736 or Section 464z-4 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act).

    Estimated Annualized Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden NIMHD Research Endowment Program Citations Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • respondent
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Reporting: § 52i.3(b)(2) 4 1 4 16 § 52i.4(a) 4 1 1 4 § 52i.4(c) 4 1 1 4 § 52i.5(a) 4 1 22 88 § 52i.9(b) 4 1 4 16 § 52i.11(b) 12 1 15 180 § 52i.11(d) 12 1 2 24 Subtotal 49 332 Recordkeeping: § 52i.10 12 1 2 24 § 52i.11(a)(1) 12 1 2 24 § 52i.11(a)(2) 12 1 2 24 § 52i.11(a)(3) 12 1 2 24 § 52i.11(a)(4) 12 1 2 24 § 52i.11(b) 12 1 8 96 Subtotal 18 216 Total 67 548
    Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance

    The Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance-numbered program applicable to this rule is: 93.307—Minority Health and Health Disparities Research.

    List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 52i

    Grant programs—Health, Medical research.

    For reasons described in the preamble, title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended by adding part 52i to read as follows.

    PART 52i—NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON MINORITY HEALTH AND HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH ENDOWMENT PROGRAMS Sec. 52i.1 To what programs does this part apply? 52i.2 Definitions. 52i.3 Who is eligible to apply? 52i.4 Under what conditions may an eligible institution designate a foundation as the recipient of a research endowment grant? 52i.5 How to Apply for a Grant. 52i.6 Evaluation and Disposition of Research Endowment Grant Applications. 52i.7 Grant Awards. 52i.8 When and for what purposes may a grantee spend the endowment fund corpus? 52i.9 How much endowment fund income may a grantee spend and for what purposes? 52i.10 How shall a grantee calculate the amount of endowment fund income that it may withdraw and spend? 52i.11 What shall a grantee record and report? 52i.12 What happens if a grantee fails to administer the research endowment grant in accordance with applicable regulations? 52i.13 Other HHS policies and regulations that apply. 52i.14 Additional conditions. Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 216, 285t-285t-1.

    § 52i.1 To what programs does this part apply?

    This part applies to grants awarded under section 464z-3(h) of the Public Health Service Act (the Act), which authorizes the Director of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) to carry out a program of research endowment grants to eligible institutions to facilitate minority health and health disparities research (the NIMHD Research Endowment Program), and, with the exception of §§ 52i.5 and 52i.6, applies to that portion of an award made under section 464z-4(f) of the Act authorized by the NIMHD Director for research endowment.

    § 52i.2 Definitions.

    As used in this part:

    Act means the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.).

    Center of Excellence means, for purposes of grants authorized by section 464z-3(h) of the Act, an institution designated as a Center of Excellence and receiving a grant under section 736 (42 U.S.C. 293) or section 464z-4 (42 U.S.C. 285t-1) of the Act.

    Director means the Director, NIMHD, of the National Institutes of Health.

    Endowment fund means a fund that is established by state law, by an institution, or by a foundation associated with an institution that is exempt from taxation and is maintained for the purpose of generating income for the support of minority and health disparities research or research training if the funds are from a grant made under section 464z-3 of the Act. The principal or corpus of the fund may not be spent except as noted in § 52i.8(b).

    Endowment fund corpus means an amount equal to the total grant funds awarded under this part or equal to the amount designated as endowment under section 464z-4 of the Act.

    Endowment fund income means the income generated from investing the corpus, i.e., the amount of which exceeds the endowment fund corpus.

    Health disparities research means basic, clinical, and behavioral research on health disparity populations (including individual members and communities of such populations) that relates to health disparities, including the causes of such disparities and methods to prevent, diagnose, and treat such disparities.

    Health disparity population means a population that, as determined by the Director of the NIMHD after consultation with the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, has a significant disparity in the overall rate of disease incidence, prevalence, morbidity, mortality, or survival rates in the population as compared to the health status of the general population.

    Health disparity students means students of minority health disparity populations or other health disparities populations.

    Institutional endowment (IE) means the corporate or system-wide endowment fund that is the sum total of the endowment assets of all campuses and their components. This includes, but is not limited to, endowments managed by an institution's foundations/associations as well as state university systems.

    Institution system-wide means all campuses and components.

    Minority health conditions means, with respect to individuals who are members of minority groups, all diseases, disorders, and conditions (including with respect to mental health and substance abuse):

    (1) Unique to, more serious, or more prevalent in such individuals;

    (2) For which the factors of medical risk or types of medical intervention may be different for such individuals, or for which it is unknown whether such factors or types are different for such individuals; or

    (3) With respect to which there has been insufficient research involving such individuals as subjects or insufficient data on such individuals.

    Minority health disparities research means basic, clinical, and behavioral research on minority health conditions, including research to prevent, diagnose, and treat such conditions.

    Racial and ethnic minority or minority group means American Indians (including Alaska Natives, Eskimos, and Aleuts), Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders, Blacks, and Hispanics. Hispanic means individuals whose origin is Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin.

    Secretary means the Secretary of Health and Human Services and any other officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services to whom the authority involved has been delegated.

    § 52i.3 Who is eligible to apply?

    (a) To be eligible for a grant under section 464z-3(h) of the Act an applicant:

    (1) Must be a Center of Excellence under section 736 (42 U.S.C. 293) or section 464z-4 (42 U.S.C. 285t-1) of the Act, and

    (2) Must have an institutional endowment that is equal to or less than 50 percent of the national median of endowment funds at institutions that conduct similar biomedical research and training of health professionals.

    (b) To be eligible for a portion of a grant award to be expended as a research endowment under section 464z-4(f) of the Act, an applicant:

    (1) Must be a designated biomedical and behavioral research institution under section 464z-4 of the Act, and

    (2) Must submit those materials prescribed by the Director, NIMHD.

    § 52i.4 Under what conditions may an eligible institution designate a foundation as the recipient of a research endowment grant?

    A number of universities and other organizations have established closely affiliated, but separately incorporated, organizations to facilitate the administration of research and other programs supported by federal funds. Such legally independent entities are often referred to as “foundations,” although this term does not necessarily appear in the name of the organization. An institution awarded an endowment grant under section 464z-3(h) of the Act or using designated grant funds for endowment purposes under section 464z-4(f) of the Act may designate a foundation associated with the institution to receive the endowment funds only for investment purposes if:

    (a) The institution assures in its application that the foundation is legally authorized to receive the endowment funds and to administer the endowment funds in accordance with the regulations set forth in this part;

    (b) The foundation agrees to administer the endowment funds in accordance with the regulations in this part;

    (c) The institution agrees to be liable for any violation by the foundation of any applicable regulation, including any violation resulting in monetary liability; and

    (d) The grantee institution has control and is responsible for the administration of the grant accounts.

    § 52i.5 How to apply for a grant.

    (a) Each institution interested in applying for a grant under section 464z-3(h) of the Act must submit an application at such time and in such form and manner as the Secretary may prescribe.

    (b) An institution described in § 52i.3 that has received a grant under this part may apply for another grant under this part if:

    (1)(i) The institution still meets the eligibility requirements in § 52i.3; and

    (ii) The institution is in the last year of funding provided by NIH under this part; or

    (2) The institution no longer has an active grant under this part from NIH.

    § 52i.6 Evaluation and award of research endowment grant applications.

    All applications filed in accordance with this part and meeting the minimal eligibility requirements shall be evaluated and recommended by technical and scientific peer review. The review evaluation shall take into account, among other pertinent factors:

    (a) The scientific and technical merit of the proposed project to facilitate minority health disparities research and other health disparities research;

    (b) The likelihood of its producing meaningful results;

    (c) The adequacy of the applicant's resources available for the project; and

    (d) The adequacy of the applicant's plan for managing the endowment fund.

    § 52i.7 Grant awards.

    (a) Within the limits of funds, and upon such review and recommendation as may be required by law, the Director shall award a grant to those applicants whose approved projects will in the Director's judgment best promote the purposes of this part.

    (b) An institution described in § 52i.3 that receives a grant under this part or an institution described in section 464z-4(f) of the Act authorized to use grant funds for endowment purposes shall follow the spending rules under the law of the state in which the institution is located and the spending rules/policies adopted by the recipient institution, provided that such spending rules are not inconsistent with applicable federal regulations/policies.

    (c) Grants awarded under this part or grant funds designated for endowment purposes as described under section 464z-4(f) of the Act must be invested no later than 90 days after the start date of the grant.

    (d) The institution, in investing the endowment fund established under this section, shall exercise the judgment and care, under the circumstances then prevailing, that a person of prudence, discretion, and intelligence would exercise in the management of such person's own affairs and avoid all appearances of conflict of interest in the management of this fund.

    (e) The total amount of an endowment grant under this part or the designated amount of the grant under section 464z-4(f) of the Act must be maintained as corpus by the institution for 20 years from the end of the project period.

    (f) In the case of situations in which investment conditions result in the corpus referred to in paragraph (e) of this section having a net market value less than the value of the funds at the time of their receipt, appropriate actions must be taken (e.g., careful review of the investment strategy) in order to preserve the value of the endowment corpus.

    (g) An institution described in § 52i.3 receiving an endowment grant under section 464z-3(h) of the Act may not simultaneously receive endowment funds under section 464z-4(f) of the Act.

    (h) Consistent with section 464z-4(f) of the Act, the Director, NIMHD, may designate for a research endowment some of the funds awarded to a Center of Excellence for research education and training.

    § 52i.8 When and for what purposes may a grantee spend the endowment fund corpus?

    (a) A grantee may not withdraw or spend any part of the endowment fund corpus for a total of 20 years from the end of the project period.

    (b) At the end of the 20-year period, during which the endowment corpus must be maintained, the grantee institution is encouraged to preserve the endowment fund corpus but may use the endowment fund corpus for any purpose that expands or develops the institution's minority health and/or health disparities research and/or training capacity.

    § 52i.9 How much endowment fund income may a grantee spend and for what purposes?

    (a) Any endowment income realized in the initial year following the grant award under this part shall not be expended to support programmatic activities until after conclusion of the initial year of the grant.

    (b) After the first year of the grant, a grantee awarded funds under this part may spend endowment income realized from funds it receives solely in accordance with the regulations of this part, the terms and conditions of the award, NIMHD policies and procedures, and the grantee's strategic plan that has been approved by the NIMHD and includes priorities for the use of the endowment fund income.

    § 52i.10 How shall a grantee calculate the amount of endowment fund income that it may withdraw and spend?

    A grantee awarded funds under this part shall calculate the amount of endowment fund income that it may withdraw and spend at a particular time as follows:

    (a) On each date that the grantee plans a withdrawal of endowment fund income, the grantee must determine the amount of the income by calculating the value of the fund that exceeds the endowment fund corpus.

    (b) If the total value of the endowment fund exceeds the endowment fund corpus, the grantee may withdraw and spend the excess amount, i.e., the endowment fund income, in accordance with § 52i.9.

    § 52i.11 What shall a grantee record and report?

    A grantee awarded funds under this part shall:

    (a) Maintain appropriate records in compliance with this part and other requirements as referenced in terms of the award, including documentation of:

    (1) The type and amount of investments of the endowment fund;

    (2) The amount of endowment fund income and corpus;

    (3) The amount and purpose of expenditures of endowment fund income; and

    (4) The expenses and charges associated with the management of the endowment funds if such expenses and charges were paid from endowment fund income.

    (b) Retain records in accordance with 45 CFR 74.53. The endowment fund corpus, fund income, and fund expenditures must be reported over a 20-year period, and supporting records are to be retained for 3 years after the submission of the final report to the NIMHD;

    (c) Permit authorized officials the authority to conduct a review, as set forth in 45 CFR 74.53(e) (which states that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) awarding agencies, the HHS Inspector General, the U.S. Comptroller General, and any of their duly authorized representatives “have the right of timely and unrestricted access to any books, documents, papers, or other records of recipients that are pertinent to the awards, in order to make audits, examinations, excerpts, transcripts, or copies of such documents”); and

    (d) Submit Financial Status Reports, as set forth in 45 CFR 74.52, as required by the NIMHD and in the form prescribed. A final Financial Status Report shall be required 20 years after the end of the project period.

    § 52i.12 What happens if a grantee fails to administer the research endowment grant in accordance with applicable regulations?

    (a) The Director, after giving notice and an opportunity for a hearing, may authorize the termination of a grant awarded and/or recovery of funds under this part during the 20-year period if the grantee:

    (1) Withdraws or spends any part of the endowment fund corpus in violation of this part;

    (2) Spends any portion of the endowment fund income not permitted to be spent in this part;

    (3) Fails to invest the endowment fund corpus in accordance with the investment standards set forth in this part;

    (4) Fails to meet the requirements in § 52i.7; or

    (5) Otherwise fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the award.

    (b) Recovery of funds may include up to the amount of endowment awards plus any income earned.

    § 52i.13 Other HHS policies and regulations that apply.

    Several other regulations and policies apply to grants under this part. These include, but are not limited to:

    (a) 2 CFR part 376—HHS Nonprocurement debarment and suspension.

    (b) 42 CFR part 50, subpart D—Public Health Service grant appeals procedure.

    (c) 42 CFR part 93—Public Health Service policies on research misconduct.

    (d) 45 CFR part 16—Procedures of the Departmental Grant Appeals Board.

    (e) 45 CFR part 46—Protection of human subjects.

    (f) 45 CFR part 74—Uniform administrative requirements for awards and subawards to institutions of higher education, hospitals, other nonprofit organizations, and commercial organizations; and certain grants and agreements with states, local governments, and Indian tribal governments.

    (g) 45 CFR part 80—Nondiscrimination under programs receiving federal assistance through the Department of Health and Human Services effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    (h) 45 CFR part 81—Practice and procedure for hearings under part 80 of this chapter.

    (i) 2 CFR part 382—Requirements for drug-free workplace (financial assistance).

    (j) 45 CFR part 84—Nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

    (k) 45 CFR part 86—Nondiscrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

    (l) 45 CFR part 91—Nondiscrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance from HHS.

    (m) 45 CFR part 92—Uniform administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements to State, local, and tribal governments.

    (n) 45 CFR part 93—New restrictions on lobbying.

    (o) NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules at http://osp.od.nih.gov/sites/default/files/NIH_Guidelines_0.pdf. Further information may be obtained from the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities via email at [email protected] or the OBA Web site at http://osp.od.nih.gov/office-biotechnology-activities.

    (p) NIH Guidelines on the Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html. Further information may be obtained from the NIH Office of Research on Women's Health via email at [email protected] or the ORWH Web site at http://ORWH.od.nih.gov.

    (q) NIH Grants Policy Statement (October 1, 2013). This version is located on the NIH Web site at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2013. [Note: this policy is subject to change, and interested persons should contact the Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration (OPERA), Office of Extramural Research, NIH, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Suite 350, MSC 7974, Bethesda, MD 20892-7974 (telephone 301-435-0938 or toll-free 800-518-4726), to obtain references to the current version and any amendments. Information may be obtained also by contacting the OPERA Division of Grants Policy via email at [email protected] Previous versions of the NIH Grants Policy Statement are archived at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.]

    (r) Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, NIH (Revised August 2002). [Note: this policy is subject to change, and interested persons should contact the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, NIH, Rockledge 1, Suite 360, MSC 7982, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892-7982 (telephone 301-594-2382, not a toll-free number), to obtain references to the current version and any amendments. Information may be obtained also via the OLAW Web site at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm.]

    § 52i.14 Additional conditions.

    The Director may, with respect to any grant award, impose additional conditions prior to, or at the time of, any award when in the Director's judgment the conditions are necessary to ensure the carrying out of the purposes of the award, the interests of the public health, or the conservation of grant funds.

    Dated: August 13, 2015. Francis S. Collins, Director, National Institutes of Health. Approved: August 24, 2015. Sylvia M. Burrell, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22018 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 0, 2, 11, 15, 18, 73, 74, 76, 78, 80, 90, 95, and 97 [FCC 15-81] Reorganization of the Enforcement Bureau's Field Operations AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Communications Commission (the Commission) acts to improve the Commission's efficiency, effectively manage Commission resources, and align the Commission's field enforcement activities with contemporary needs for a field enforcement presence. The Commission, the Office of Managing Director and the Enforcement Bureau will take several actions to realign the mission and resources of its 24 field offices. The Bureau's field offices will primarily support the enforcement of the Commission's radio frequency spectrum rules and other key regulations in a manner likely to have the greatest impact, in the most cost effective way possible.

    DATES:

    Effective September 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Davenport, Enforcement Bureau, (202) 418-1034.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's Order; FCC 15-81, adopted and released on July 16, 2015. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554 or at the following Internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-plan-modernize-field-operations-0. Alternative formats are available to persons with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format); to obtain, please send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    I. Introduction

    1. Through this Order, we act to improve the Commission's efficiency, effectively manage Commission resources, and align the Commission's field enforcement activities with contemporary needs for a field enforcement presence. With its 24 field offices (“Field”) and Equipment Development Group, the Enforcement Bureau resolves interference issues, assists with disaster recovery, and enforces technical compliance with Commission rules and the Communications Act. The current model of the Field was adopted approximately 20 years ago.1 Since then, technological changes and increasingly limited resources have created the need to take a fresh look at the Bureau's Field operations. The Commission has completed a full review of the mission, processes, and organization of the Field. Our review concludes that our Field resources should be concentrated in urban areas where the need for them is greatest. This Order refocuses the Field on enforcement of our radio frequency spectrum rules and other key regulations in a high impact and cost effective manner that is better aligned with the priorities of the Commission and the Bureau as a whole.

    1 Amendment of Part 0 of the Commission's Rules to Reflect Reorganization of the Compliance and Information Bureau, Order, 11 FCC Rcd 1725 (1996).

    II. Discussion

    2. The Commission has determined to make changes to the Field in order to create a more effective organization within the limits of our budgetary constraints. By this action we restructure the Enforcement Bureau's field operations to implement the changes. The Field reorganization will better align the Field's mission with the priorities of the Commission, increase efficiency in terms of both employee performance and management oversight, and enable updating the employee skillset and equipment deployed in the Field. We take this action after extensive outreach to internal and external stakeholders, including a survey of field personnel and interviews with field staff, current and former management, outside experts, regulatees, and other government agencies. We also reviewed field operations by other federal agencies and examined the Bureau's enforcement activity database to assess the Field's caseload, efficiency, and effectiveness.

    3. Based on that comprehensive review, the Commission, the Office of Managing Director and the Enforcement Bureau will take several actions to realign the mission and resources of the Field. The Bureau's field offices will primarily support the enforcement of the Commission's radiofrequency interference requirements and other key rules. These enforcement efforts will be guided by the priorities of the Commission and the Enforcement Bureau and occur in the manner likely to have the greatest impact, in the most cost effective way possible.

    4. The Field will embark on a program to update its equipment and employee skillset to address the likely issues that will accompany new and expanded uses of spectrum. This program will include the expanded use of remotely operated monitoring equipment to supplement field staff, as well as the identification and use of portable devices capable of assessing interference issues in bands expected to experience heavy spectrum use. Upon completion of all required implementation steps, the Commission will first apply the net savings resulting from this reorganization effort to this program, before applying those monies to the agency's general fund. The net savings will not be used to increase the number of full-time non-field-related employees in the headquarters office of the Enforcement Bureau.

    5. The Bureau will close its field offices in or near Anchorage, Alaska; Buffalo, New York; Detroit, Michigan; Houston, Texas; Kansas City, Missouri; Norfolk, Virginia; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; San Diego, California; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Seattle, Washington; and Tampa, Florida. Relatedly, the Enforcement Bureau field offices in or near Atlanta, Georgia; Columbia, Maryland; and San Francisco, California will relocate to FCC-owned properties nearby or in the same metropolitan areas. In addition, recognizing that current work volume does not require full-time employees, the Bureau will contract with local personnel to maintain a field presence in Alaska and Puerto Rico and will also periodically dispatch field agents to Kansas City, Missouri.

    6. All Bureau field agents shall have electrical engineering backgrounds.

    7. The relocated offices identified in paragraph 5 and the remaining offices in or near New York City, New York; Miami, Florida; Dallas, Texas; Chicago, Illinois; Boston, Massachusetts; Denver, Colorado; Honolulu, Hawaii; New Orleans, Louisiana; Portland, Oregon; and Los Angeles, California will be staffed and equipped to maintain the Commission's Field program.

    8. Within 6 weeks of release of this Order, the Bureau will establish procedures for industry and public safety complainants to escalate their complaints within the Field organization.

    9. The Commission will continue to work with outside stakeholders to develop a comprehensive policy and enforcement approach to the issue of unlicensed radio broadcasting.

    10. The Commission will implement a nationwide outplacement effort to assist all displaced employees to find positions in the public or private sectors, including other vacancies within the Commission for which they are qualified and selected.

    11. The amendments adopted herein pertain to agency organization, procedure, and practice. Some of the amendments are administrative updates to rules that were inadvertently not revised during prior agency organization efforts.2 Other amendments add references to the FCC Web site where parties and the Commission may obtain information more efficiently than they could by the current practice of addressing requests to the Field. The remainder of the amendments conform the rules to the current practice. Consequently, the requirement of notice and comment and the effective date provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (d), do not apply. Authority for the amendments adopted herein is contained in Sections 4(f)(1), 4(g), 4(i), 5(b), 5(c)(1) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(f)(1), (g), (i), 155(b), 155(c)(1), and 303(r).

    2See e.g., Establishment of the Enforcement Bureau and the Consumer Information Bureau, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 17924 (1999); Establishment of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and Other Organizational Changes, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 10867 (2006); Amendment of the Commission's Rule Concerning Commercial Radio Operators, Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 532, 542-43, para. 20 (2013).

    III. Procedural Matters A. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This document does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13.

    B. Congressional Review Act

    The Commission will not send a copy of this Order pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the adopted rules pertain to agency organization, procedure, and practice.

    IV. Ordering Clauses

    12. Accordingly, It is ordered that, pursuant to Sections 4(f)(1), 4(g), 4(i), 5(b), 5(c)(1) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(f)(1), (g), (i), 155(b), 155(c)(1), and 303(r) the Enforcement Bureau's Field operations be restructured.

    13. It is further ordered that the field offices in or near Anchorage, Alaska; Buffalo, New York; Detroit, Michigan; Houston, Texas; Kansas City, Missouri; Norfolk, Virginia; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; San Diego, California; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Seattle, Washington; and Tampa, Florida be closed. The Bureau will contract with local personnel to maintain a field presence in Alaska and Puerto Rico and will also periodically dispatch field agents to Kansas City, Missouri.

    14. It is further ordered that the Enforcement Bureau relocate field offices in or near Atlanta, Georgia; Columbia, Maryland; and San Francisco, California to nearby FCC-owned properties.

    15. It is further ordered that all Enforcement Bureau field agents shall have electrical engineering backgrounds.

    16. It is further ordered that the Commission devote resources to provide its field staff with the training and equipment to address new interference threats in bands that are currently in use, as well as bands that are not yet widely utilized. The equipment should focus on portable, cost-effective devices as well as remotely-operated spectrum monitoring equipment deployable on a permanent or temporary basis. Upon completion of all required implementation steps, the Commission will first apply the net savings resulting from this reorganization effort to this program, before applying those monies to the agency's general fund. The net savings will not be used to increase the number of full time non-field-related employees in the headquarters office of the Enforcement Bureau.

    17. It is further ordered that, within 6 weeks of release of this Order, the Enforcement Bureau will establish procedures for industry and public safety complainants to escalate their complaints within the Field organization.

    18. It is further ordered that the Commission will continue to work with outside stakeholders to develop a comprehensive policy and enforcement approach to the issue of unlicensed radio broadcasting.

    19. It is further ordered that the Commission implement a nationwide outplacement effort to assist all displaced employees to find positions in the public or private sectors, including other vacancies within the Commission for which they are qualified and selected.

    20. It is further ordered that effective upon publication of this Order in the Federal Register that Sections 0.111, 0.314, 0.317, 0.401, 0.421, 0.555, 2.106, 2.405, 11.35, 15.239, 18.115, 18.117, 73.688, 73.1030, 73.1690, 74.24, 74.25, 76.613, 78.11, 78.19, 80.59, 80.1067, 90.425, 95.129, 95.208, 95.209, 95.408, 95.409, 97.13, 97.109, 97.203, 97.309, 97.311, and 97.313 of the Commission's rules are amended as indicated in the Appendix.

    List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 0

    Organization and functions (Government agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    47 CFR Part 2

    Disaster assistance, Radio.

    47 CFR Part 11

    Radio.

    47 CFR Part 15

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    47 CFR Part 18

    Medical devices, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment.

    47 CFR Part 73

    Communications equipment, Radio, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    47 CFR Part 74

    Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Television.

    47 CFR Parts 76 and 78

    Cable television, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    47 CFR Part 80

    Vessels, Marine safety, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    47 CFR Parts 90, 95, and 97

    Communications equipment, Radio.

    Federal Communications Commission. Gloria J. Miles, Federal Register Liaison Officer. Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 0, 2, 11, 15, 18, 73, 74, 76, 78, 80, 90, 95, and 97 as follows:

    PART 0—COMMISSION ORGANIZATION 1. The authority citation for part 0 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Sec. 5, 48 Stat. 1068, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 155, 225, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 0.111 is amended by revising Notes to Paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(11) to read as follows:
    § 0.111 Functions of the Bureau. Note To Paragraph (a)(1):

    The Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau has primary responsibility for addressing individual informal complaints from consumers against common carriers (wireline, wireless and international) and against other wireless licensees, and informal consumer complaints involving access to telecommunications services and equipment for persons with disabilities. The International Bureau has primary responsibility for complaints regarding international settlements rules and policies.

    Note to paragraph (a)(2):

    The Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau has primary responsibility for addressing individual informal complaints from consumers against non-common carriers subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under Title II of the Communications Act and related provisions.

    Note to paragraph (a)(11):

    The Media Bureau has primary responsibility for complaints regarding children's television programming requirements, and for political and related programming matters and equal employment opportunity matters involving broadcasters, cable operators and other multichannel video programming distributors. The relevant licensing Bureau has primary responsibility for complaints involving tower sitting and the Commission's environmental rules. The Media Bureau has primary responsibility for complaints regarding compliance with conditions imposed on transfers of control and assignments of licenses of Cable Television Relay Service authorizations.

    3. Section 0.314 is amended by revising the introductory text to read as follows:
    § 0.314 Additional authority delegated.

    The Regional Directors are delegated authority to act upon applications, requests, or other matters, which are not in hearing status, and direct the following activities necessary to conduct investigations or inspections:

    4. Section 0.317 is revised to read as follows:
    § 0.317 Record of action taken.

    The application, authorization, and other appropriate files of the Enforcement Bureau are designated as the Commission's official records of action taken pursuant to authority delegated under §§ 0.311 and 0.314, and shall constitute the official Commission minutes entry of such actions. The official records of action are maintained in the Reference Information Center in the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau.

    5. Section 0.401 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
    § 0.401 Location of Commission offices.

    (a) * * *

    (4) For the locations of the field offices, contact the Enforcement Bureau.

    6. Section 0.421 is revised to read as follows:
    § 0.421 Application forms.

    All forms for use in submitting applications for radio authorization, together with instructions and information as to filing such forms, may be obtained at http://www.fcc.gov/forms. For information concerning the forms to be used and filing requirements, see part 1 of this chapter and the appropriate substantive rules.

    7. Section 0.555 is amended by removing paragraph (a)(2), redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as paragraph (a)(2), and revising newly redesignated paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
    § 0.555 Disclosure of record information to individuals.

    (a) * * *

    (2) Individuals may request that copies of records be sent directly to them. In such cases, individuals must verify their identity as described in § 0.554(b)(2) and provide an accurate return mailing address or email address. Records shall be sent only to that address.

    PART 2—FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS 8. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise noted.

    9. Section 2.106 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory text following US270 as follows:
    § 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.

    US270 * * *

    (a) The peak envelope power of an amateur station shall not exceed 50 watts in the following areas, unless expressly authorized by the FCC after mutual agreement, on a case-by-case basis, between the Regional Director of the applicable field office and the military area frequency coordinator at the applicable military base. For areas (5) through (7), the appropriate military coordinator is located at Peterson AFB, CO.

    10. Section 2.405 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:
    § 2.405 Operation during emergency.

    (a) That as soon as possible after the beginning of such emergency use, notice be sent to the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau of the Commission at Washington, D.C., stating the nature of the emergency and the use to which the station is being put, and

    (c) That the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau of the Commission at Washington, D.C., shall be notified immediately when such special use of the station is terminated: Provided further,

    PART 11—EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM (EAS) 11. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (o), 303(r), 544(g) and 606.

    12. Section 11.35 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 11.35 Equipment operational readiness.

    (c) If repair or replacement of defective equipment is not completed within 60 days, an informal request shall be submitted to the Regional Director of the FCC field office serving the area in which the EAS Participant is located, or in the case of DBS and SDARS providers to the Regional Director of the FCC field office serving the area where their headquarters is located, for additional time to repair the defective equipment. This request must explain what steps have been taken to repair or replace the defective equipment, the alternative procedures being used while the defective equipment is out of service, and when the defective equipment will be repaired or replaced.

    PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES 13. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 336, 544a, and 549.

    14. Section 15.239 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 15.239 Operation in the band 88-108 MHz.

    (d) A custom built telemetry intentional radiator operating in the frequency band 88-108 MHz and used for experimentation by an educational institute need not be certified provided the device complies with the standards in this part and the educational institution notifies the Office of Engineering and Technology, in writing, in advance of operation, providing the following information:

    PART 18—INDUSTRIAL, SCIENTIFIC, AND MEDICAL EQUIPMENT 15. The authority citation for part 18 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 4, 301, 302, 303, 304, 307.

    16. Section 18.115 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows:
    § 18.115 Elimination and investigation of harmful interference.

    (b) If the operator of ISM equipment is notified by the Commission's Regional Director that operation of such equipment is endangering the functioning of a radionavigation or safety service, the operator shall immediately cease operating the equipment. Operation may be resumed on a temporary basis only for the purpose of eliminating the harmful interference. Operation may be resumed on a regular basis only after the harmful interference has been eliminated and approval from the Regional Director obtained.

    (c) When notified by the Regional Director that a particular installation is causing harmful interference, the operator or manufacturer shall arrange for an engineer skilled in techniques of interference measurement and control to make an investigation to ensure that the harmful interference has been eliminated. The Regional Director may require the engineer making the investigation to furnish proof of his or her qualifications.

    17. Revise § 18.117 to read as follows:
    § 18.117 Report of interference investigation.

    (a) An interim report on investigations and corrective measures taken pursuant to § 18.115 of this part shall be filed with the Regional Director of the local FCC office within 30 days of notification of harmful interference. The final report shall be filed with the Regional Director within 60 days of notification.

    (b) The date for filing the final report may be extended by the Regional Director when additional time is required to put into effect the corrective measures or to complete the investigation. The request for extension of time shall be accompanied by a progress report showing what has been accomplished to date.

    PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 18. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.

    19. Section 73.688 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
    § 73.688 Indicating instruments.

    (c) * * *

    (2) If conditions beyond the control of the licensee prevent the restoration of the meter to service within the above allowed period, informal request in accordance with § 73.3549 may be filed for such additional time as may be required to complete repairs of the defective instrument.

    20. Section 73.1030 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
    § 73.1030 Notifications concerning interference to radio astronomy, research and receiving installations.

    (c) * * *

    (2) In the event that calculated value of expected field exceeds 10 mV/m (−65.8 dBW/m2) at the reference coordinates, or if there is any question whether field strength levels might exceed the threshold value, advance consultation with the FCC to discuss any protection necessary should be considered. Prospective applicants may communicate with the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau.

    21. Section 73.1690 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(7)(ii) to read as follows:
    § 73.1690 Modification of transmission systems.

    (c) * * *

    (7) * * *

    (ii) If the station is located in or near a radio quiet zone, radio coordination zone, or a Commission monitoring station (see § 73.1030 and § 0.121(c) of this chapter), the licensee or permittee must have secured written concurrence from the affected radio quiet zone, radio coordination zone, or the Commission's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau in the case of a monitoring station, to increase effective radiated power PRIOR to implementation. A copy of that concurrence must be submitted with the license application to document that concurrence has been received;

    PART 74—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES 22. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 336 and 554.

    23. Section 74.24 is amended by revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
    § 74.24 Short-term operation.

    (i) Short-term operation of a remote pickup broadcast base station, a remote pickup automatic relay station, an aural broadcast STL station, an aural broadcast intercity relay station, a TV STL station, a TV intercity relay station or a TV translator relay station in the National Radio Quiet Zone, the Table Mountain Radio Receiving Zone, or near FCC monitoring stations is subject to the same advance notification procedures applicable to regular applications as provided for in § 73.1030 of this chapter and § 74.12, except that inasmuch as short-term operation does not involve an application process, the provisions relating to agency objection procedures shall not apply. It shall simply be necessary for the licensee to contact the potentially affected agency and obtain advance approval for the proposed short-term operation. Where protection to FCC monitoring stations is concerned, approval for short-term operation may be given by the Regional Director of a Commission field facility.

    24. Section 74.25 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 74.25 Temporary conditional operating authority.

    (d) Operation under this section shall be suspended immediately upon notification from the Commission or by the Regional Director of a Commission field facility, and shall not be resumed until specific authority is given by the Commission or Regional Director. When authorized by the Regional Director, short test operations may be made.

    PART 76—MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 25. The authority citation for part 76 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 338, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573.

    26. Section 76.613 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
    § 76.613 Interference from a multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD).

    (c) If harmful interference to radio communications involving the safety of life and protection of property cannot be promptly eliminated by the application of suitable techniques, operation of the offending MVPD or appropriate elements thereof shall immediately be suspended upon notification by the Regional Director for the Commission's local field office, and shall not be resumed until the interference has been eliminated to the satisfaction of the Regional Director. When authorized by the Regional Director, short test operations may be made during the period of suspended operation to check the efficacy of remedial measures.

    (d) The MVPD may be required by the Regional Director to prepare and submit a report regarding the cause(s) of the interference, corrective measures planned or taken, and the efficacy of the remedial measures.

    PART 78—CABLE TELEVISION RELAY SERVICE 27. The authority citation for part 78 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Secs. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 48 Stat., as amended, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085; 47 U.S.C. 152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309.

    28. Section 78.11 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 78.11 Permissible service.

    (e) The license of a CARS pickup station authorizes the transmission of program material, and related communications necessary to the accomplishment of such transmission, from the scenes of events occurring in places other than a cable television studio or the studio of another eligible system, to the studio, headend, or transmitter of its associated cable television system or other eligible system, or to such other cable television or other eligible systems as are carrying the same program material. CARS pickup stations may be used to provide temporary CARS studio-to-headend links, studio-to-transmitter links, or CARS circuits consistent with this part without further authority of the Commission: Provided, however, That prior Commission authority shall be obtained if the transmitting antenna to be installed will increase the height of any natural formation or manmade structure by more than 6.1 meters (20 feet) and will be in existence for a period of more than 2 consecutive days: And provided, further, That if the transmitting equipment is to be operated for more than 1 day outside of the area to which the CARS station has been licensed, the Commission, the Regional Director for the area in which the station is licensed to operate, and the Regional Director for the area in which the equipment will be temporarily operated shall be notified at least 1 day prior to such operation. If the decision to continue operation for more than 1 day is not made until the operation has begun, notice shall be given to the Commission and the relevant Regional Directors within 1 day after such decision. In all instances, the Commission and the relevant Regional Directors shall be notified when the transmitting equipment has been returned to its licensed area.

    29. Section 78.19 is amended is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2) to read as follows:
    § 78.19 Interference.

    (e) * * *

    (2) In the event that calculated value of expected field exceeds 10 mV/m (−65.8 dBW/m2) at the reference coordinates, or if there is any question whether field strength levels might exceed the threshold value, advance consultation with the FCC to discuss any protection necessary should be considered. Prospective applicants may communicate with the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

    PART 80—STATIONS IN THE MARITIME SERVICES 30. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Secs. 4, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, unless otherwise noted. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609; 3 UST 3450, 3 UST 4726, 12 UST 2377.

    31. Section 80.59 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 80.59 Compulsory ship inspections.

    (d) Waiver of annual inspection. (1) The Commission may, upon a finding that the public interest would be served, grant a waiver of the annual inspection required by Section 362(b) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 360(b), for a period of not more than 90 days for the sole purpose of enabling a United States vessel to complete its voyage and proceed to a port in the United States where an inspection can be held. An informal application must be submitted by the ship's owner, operator or authorized agent. The application must be submitted to the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at least three days before the ship's arrival. The application must include:

    32. Section 80.1067 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 80.1067 Inspection of station.

    (a) Ships must have the required equipment inspected at least once every 12 months by an FCC-licensed technician holding a GMDSS Radio Maintainer's License. If the ship passes the inspection the technician will issue a Safety Certificate. Safety Certificates may be obtained from the Commission's National Call Center at 1-888-CALL FCC (1-888-225-5322). The effective date of the ship Safety Certificate is the date the station is found to be in compliance or not later than one business day later. The FCC-licensed technician must use the latest FCC Information Bulletin, How to Conduct a GMDSS Inspection, which may be obtained at http://www.fcc.gov.

    PART 90—PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES 33. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7), and Title VI of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156.

    34. Section 90.425 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii) to read as follows:
    § 90.425 Station identification.

    (a) * * *

    (4) * * *

    (ii) In the Industrial/Business Pool, licensees may request the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to approve the use of special mobile unit identifiers in lieu of the assigned call sign. Such requests, however, will not be granted where it appears that harmful interference to international operations may be caused by stations below 50 MHz, or by stations operating in areas within 80 km (50 miles) of an international boundary, or where it appears that the proposed method of identification will not adequately distinguish the mobile units of the applicant from the mobile units of other licensees in the area.

    PART 95—PERSONAL RADIO SERVICES 35. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302(a), 303, and 307(e).

    36. Revise § 95.129 to read as follows:
    § 95.129 Station equipment.

    Every station in a GMRS system must use transmitters the FCC has certificated for use in the GMRS. Transmitters that have been certified for use in the GMRS may be found on the FCC Web site at https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm. All station equipment in a GMRS system must comply with the technical rules in part 95.

    37. Section 95.208 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 95.208 (R/C Rule 8) How high may I put my antenna?

    (d) If your R/C station is located near an airport, and if you antenna structure is more than 6.1 meters (20 feet) high, your may have to obey additional restrictions. The highest point of your antenna must not exceed one meter above the airport elevation for every hundred meters of distance from the nearest point of the nearest airport runway. Differences in ground elevation between your antenna and the airport runway may complicate this formula. If your R/C station is near an airport, see http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/AsrSearch/towairSearch.jsp to help you figure the maximum allowable height of your antenna. Consult part 17 of this chapter for more information.

    38. Section 95.209 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 95.209 (R/C Rule 9) What equipment may I use at my R/C station?

    (b) You may examine a list of certificated transmitters on the FCC Web site at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/radio-control-rc-radio-service.

    39. Section 95.408 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 95.408 (CB Rule 8) How high may I put my antenna?

    (d) If your CB station is located near an airport, and if your antenna structure is more than 6.1 meters (20 feet) high, you may have to obey additional restrictions. The highest point of your antenna must not exceed one meter above the airport elevation for every hundred meters of distance from the nearest point of the nearest airport runway. Differences in ground elevation between your antenna and the airport runway may complicate this formula. If your CB station is near an airport, see http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/AsrSearch/towairSearch.jsp to help you figure the maximum allowable height of your antenna. Consult part 17 of this chapter for more information.

    40. Section 95.409 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 95.409 (CB Rule 9) What equipment may I use at my CB station?

    (a) You must use an FCC certificated CB transmitter at your CB station. You can identify an FCC certificated transmitter by the certification label placed on it by the manufacturer. You may examine a list of certificated equipment on the FCC Web site at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/citizens-band-cb-service. Use of a transmitter which is not FCC certificated voids your authority to operate the station.

    PART 97—AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE 41. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.

    42. Section 97.13 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 97.13 Restrictions on station location.

    (b) A station within 1600 m (1 mile) of an FCC monitoring facility must protect that facility from harmful interference. Failure to do so could result in imposition of operating restrictions upon the amateur station pursuant to § 97.121. Geographical coordinates of the facilities that require protection are listed in § 0.121(c) of this chapter.

    43. Section 97.109 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 97.109 Station control.

    (d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator need not be at the control point. Only stations specifically designated elsewhere in this part may be automatically controlled. Automatic control must cease upon notification by a Regional Director that the station is transmitting improperly or causing harmful interference to other stations. Automatic control must not be resumed without prior approval of the Regional Director.

    44. Section 97.203 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
    § 97.203 Beacon station.

    (f) A beacon must cease transmissions upon notification by a Regional Director that the station is operating improperly or causing undue interference to other operations. The beacon may not resume transmitting without prior approval of the Regional Director.

    45. Section 97.309 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 97.309 RTTY and data emission codes.

    (b) Where authorized by §§ 97.305(c) and 97.307(f), a station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using an unspecified digital code, except to a station in a country with which the United States does not have an agreement permitting the code to be used. RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication. When deemed necessary by a Regional Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules, a station must:

    46. Section 97.311 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 97.311 SS emission types.

    (c) When deemed necessary by a Regional Director to assure compliance with this part, a station licensee must:

    47. Section 97.313 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
    § 97.313 Transmitter power standards.

    (f) No station may transmit with a transmitter power exceeding 50 W PEP on the UHF 70 cm band from an area specified in paragraph (a) of footnote US270 in § 2.106, unless expressly authorized by the FCC after mutual agreement, on a case-by-case basis, between the Regional Director of the applicable field facility and the military area frequency coordinator at the applicable military base. An Earth station or telecommand station, however, may transmit on the 435-438 MHz segment with a maximum of 611 W effective radiated power (1 kW equivalent isotropically radiated power) without the authorization otherwise required. The transmitting antenna elevation angle between the lower half-power (−3 dB relative to the peak or antenna bore sight) point and the horizon must always be greater than 10°.

    [FR Doc. 2015-21963 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 22, 25, 28, 30, 42, 50, 52, and 53 [FAC 2005-83; FAR Case 2014-022; Correction; Docket 2014-0022; Sequence No. 1] RIN 9000-AM80 Federal Acquisition Regulation; Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds; Correction AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a correction to FAR Case 2014-022; Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds (Item I), which was published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 38293, July 2, 2015. The changes to 7.104 and 7.107 are removed from the case because those thresholds are controlled by the Small Business Administration. The other changes are made to correct errors.

    DATES:

    Effective: October 1, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202-208-4949, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-83; FAR Case 2014-022; Correction.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Corrections

    In rule FR Doc. 2015-16206 published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 38293, July 2, 2015, make the following corrections:

    7.104 and 7.107 [Corrected]
    1. On page 38296, in the center column, remove Part 7 heading and amendatory instruction numbers 14 and 15, amending sections 7.104 and 7.107 respectively.
    2. On pages 38296 through 38301, renumber amendatory instruction numbers 16 through 95, as 14 through 93 respectively.
    13.003 [Corrected]
    3. On page 38297, first column, correct amendatory instruction number 30.a., now renumbered as 28.a., to read as follows: a. Removing from paragraph (b)(1) “$3,000” and “$15,000” and adding “$3,500” and “$20,000” in their places, respectively.
    52.212-5 [Corrected]
    4. On page 38300, first column, in paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(C), second line, remove “(Oct 2015)” and add “(Oct 2014)” in its place. 5. On page 38300, first column, in paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(M), first line, remove “52.222-4” and add “52.222-54” in its place. Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.

    William Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22060 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    80 173 Tuesday, September 8, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0790] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular, Atlantic Ocean; Jacksonville Beach, FL AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Atlantic Ocean off Jacksonville Beach, Florida during the Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular air show. The event is scheduled to take place from October 22 through October 25, 2015. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Jacksonville or a designated representative. The Coast Guard invites your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before October 8, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2015-0790 using any one of the following methods:

    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.

    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Allan Storm, Sector Jacksonville, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 904-564-7563, email [email protected] If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L. Public Law § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On December 31, 2014, the City of Jacksonville submitted a marine event application to the Coast Guard for the Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular air show that will take place from 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 22 through October 25, 2015. The air show will consist of various flight demonstrations over the Atlantic Ocean, just offshore from Jacksonville Beach, FL. Over the years, there have been unfortunate instances of aircraft mishaps that involve crashing during performances at various air shows around the world. During aircraft crashes, there is typically a wide area of scattered debris that can damage property or cause significant injury or death to the public observing the air shows. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville has determined that a safety zone is necessary to protect the general public from hazards associated with aerial flight demonstrations.

    The purpose of the rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and persons during the air show on the navigable waters of the Atlantic Ocean in Jacksonville Beach, FL. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 22 through October 25, 2015. The safety zone will encompass all waters within an area approximately three nautical miles parallel to the shoreline, and one half mile out into the Atlantic Ocean offshore from Jacksonville Beach, Florida. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of the public and these navigable waters before, during, and after the aerial flight demonstrations. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text the Coast Guard is proposing appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

    The Coast Guard developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. A summary of the statutory analyses, analyses of E.O.s, and discussion of First Amendment rights of protestors is included below.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this safety zone which would impact a small designated area of the Atlantic Ocean for eight and a half hours on each of the three days the air show is occurring. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order, and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.

    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    The Coast Guard analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone that will help protect the general public from hazards associated with aerial flight demonstrations occurring during the air show, and will be in effect from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 22 through October 25, 2015.

    It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided.

    A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on the comment option on the line associated with this NPRM. As stated in the ADDRESSES section, you may also submit your comments by fax, mail, or hand delivery. Please use only one of these four submittal methods.

    The Coast Guard views public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you go to the online docket by following instructions in the next paragraph, and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified whenever comments are submitted or a final rule is published.

    B. Viewing Comments and Documents

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

    C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316). We allow anonymous submissions.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.T07-0790 to subpart F under the undesignated center heading Seventh Coast Guard District to read as follows:
    § 165.T07-0790 Safety Zone; Jacksonville Sea and Sky Spectacular, Atlantic Ocean, Jacksonville Beach, FL.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following regulated area is a safety zone located offshore from Jacksonville Beach, FL. All waters of the Atlantic Ocean encompassed within an imaginary line connecting the following points: Starting at Point 1 in position 30°15′52.3″ N., 081°23′0.18″ W.; thence east to Point 2 in position 30°15′57.91″ N., 081°22′24.22″ W.; thence north to Point 3 in position 30°18′40.81″ N., 081°22′57.97″ W.; thence west to Point 4 in position 30°18′35.19″ N. 081°23′33.93″ W.; thence south back to origin.

    (b) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Jacksonville in the enforcement of the regulated area.

    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Jacksonville or a designated representative.

    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the Port Jacksonville by telephone at 904-564-7511, or a designated representative via VHF-FM radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port Jacksonville or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Jacksonville or a designated representative.

    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area through Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF—FM channel 16.

    (d) Effective date and enforcement periods. This rule is effective from October 22, 2015 through October 25, 2015 and will be enforced daily from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 22, 2015 through October 25, 2015.

    Dated: August 26, 2015. J.F. Dixon, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Jacksonville.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22581 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 9, 22, 85, 86, 600, 1033, 1036, 1037, 1039, 1042, 1065, 1066, and 1068 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 512, 523, 534, 535, 537, and 583 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827; NHTSA-2014-0132; FRL-9933-57-OAR] RIN 2060-AS16; RIN 2127-AL52 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are extending the comment period for the joint proposed rules “Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2,” and also for NHTSA's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The proposed rules were published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2015. The comment period for the proposed rules was to end on September 17, 2015. The DEIS was published to a NHTSA Docket on June 19, 2015, and the comment period for that document was to end on August 31, 2015. The purpose of this action is to extend the comment period for the proposed rules and the DEIS to October 1, 2015.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published July 13, 2015 (80 FR 40139) is extended. Written comments for both documents must be received on or before October 1, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    For EPA, direct your comments to Docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827. For NHTSA, direct your comments to Docket number NHTSA-2014-0132. For NHTSA's DEIS, direct your comments to Docket number NHTSA-2014-0074. Comments may be submitted using the www.regulations.gov Web site, or by mail to the addresses below.

    EPA: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC. 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 Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

    NHTSA: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The telephone number for the docket management facility is (202) 366-9324. The docket management facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions concerning the NHTSA proposed rule should be addressed to NHTSA: Ryan Hagen or Analiese Marchesseault, Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Questions concerning the EPA proposed rule should be addressed to EPA: Tad Wysor, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division (ASD), Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4332; fax number: (734) 214-4050; email address: wysor.tad(at)epa.gov. You may learn more about the jointly proposed rules by visiting NHTSA's or EPA's Web sites at http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy or http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regs-heavy-duty.htm or by searching the rulemaking dockets (NHTSA-2014-0132; EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827) at www.regulations.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In response to requests for an extension, we are extending the public comment period for the Heavy-Duty Phase 2 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (80 FR 40139, July 13, 2015; also available in Docket Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827 and NHTSA-2014-0132) to October 1, 2015. As NHTSA published (to Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0074) an accompanying DEIS for NHTSA's proposed rule, we are also extending the comment period for that document to October 1, 2015. This extension will provide the public additional time to provide comment on the proposed rules and DEIS. Both the proposed rules and the DEIS are available at www.regulations.gov. Instructions for submitting comments to either EPA or NHTSA are described in the Public Participation section of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

    In this joint proposal, there are many issues common to both EPA's and NHTSA's proposals. For the convenience of all parties, comments submitted to the EPA docket will be considered comments submitted to the NHTSA docket, and vice versa. An exception is that comments submitted to the NHTSA docket on NHTSA's (DEIS) will not be considered submitted to the EPA docket. Therefore, the public only needs to submit comments to either one of the two agency dockets, although they may submit comments to both if they so choose. Comments that are submitted for consideration by one agency should be identified as such, and comments that are submitted for consideration by both agencies should be identified as such. Absent such identification, each agency will exercise its best judgment to determine whether a comment is submitted on its proposal.

    Dated: August 27, 2015. Raymond R. Posten, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Dated: August 31, 2015. Benjamin Hengst, Associate Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality Environmental Protection Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22028 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0447; FRL-9933-44-Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Alaska; Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plan AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Alaska (the State). The submission addresses transportation conformity requirements. EPA is approving the submission in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (the Act).

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 8, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0447, by any of the following methods:

    www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected].

    Mail: Karl Pepple, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-150, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Karl Pepple, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-150. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karl Pepple at telephone number: (206) 553-1778, email address: [email protected], or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For further information, please see the direct final action, of the same title, which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register. The EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the EPA views this as a noncontroversial SIP revision and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the direct final rule. If the EPA receives no adverse comments, the EPA will not take further action on this proposed rule.

    If the EPA receives adverse comments, the EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. The EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    Dated: August 13, 2015. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21936 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 54 [WC Docket Nos. 11-42, 09-197 and 10-90; Report No. 3027] Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding Correction

    In proposed rule 2015-21763 appearing on page 53088 in the issue of Wednesday, September 2, 2015, make the following correction:

    On page 53088, in the second column, in the sixth line, “September 11, 2015” should read “September 28, 2015”.

    [FR Doc. C1-2015-21763 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board 49 CFR Parts 1011, 1034, 1102, 1104, and 1115 [Docket No. EP 697] Amtrak Emergency Routing Orders AGENCY:

    Surface Transportation Board.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule, withdrawn.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board is withdrawing the proposed rules and discontinuing the EP 697 rulemaking proceeding which proposed a formal process for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) to seek emergency routing orders. Based on comments received, the Board will continue the practice of appointing an individual who can act immediately on behalf of the Board.

    DATES:

    The proposed rule is withdrawn and the rulemaking proceeding is discontinued on September 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gabriel Meyer, (202) 245-0150. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 6, 2011, the Board issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking public comment on regulations concerning Amtrak.1 The proposed regulations would provide a more formal process for Amtrak to seek emergency routing orders over the lines of other railroads and for the Board to issue such orders. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 24308(b), the Board has statutory authority to require rail carriers to provide facilities immediately when necessary for the movement of Amtrak trains when Amtrak cannot operate its trains via normal routings due to rail line closures or other emergencies.

    1 The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 6, 2011 (76 FR 766).

    The Board solicited comments and, on February 7, 2011, The Kansas City Southern Railway Company (KCSR), the Association of American Railroads (AAR), and Amtrak filed separate comments on the proposed rules. On February 22, 2011, KCSR and Amtrak filed separate replies to the comments. Amtrak expressed concern that, compared with the informal procedures that the Board has historically used, the proposed rules would make it more difficult for Amtrak to obtain emergency relief on an “immediate” basis. KCSR generally opposed the proposed rules, claiming that they allow unannounced access to a carrier's track without waiting for a reply from the affected carrier. AAR raised a similar point to KCSR, and suggested that, to provide greater participation by a host carrier, the Board issue a decision within two days following Amtrak's submission of an application.

    Based on further consideration of these comments, we believe the proposed rules are not practical. Most importantly, the record reveals that the rules do not provide the prompt relief mandated by § 24308(b), which is necessary to handle emergencies that are happening in real-time. The comments thus indicate that the proposed rules, rather than serving the Board's goal of improving the process, would complicate and hinder it. We therefore will not adopt the formal process proposed in the NPRM and will continue the past practice of appointing a Board staff member who can order access immediately on behalf of the Board. Specifically, a staff member in the Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance (OPAGAC) can respond to emergency rerouting requests via telephone in a timely manner and contact appropriate representatives of the involved carriers. We are simultaneously issuing a companion decision appointing the Director of OPAGAC, or in the Director's absence, a Deputy Director to act on behalf of the Board in such circumstances.2

    2Appointment of Agent to Require Emergency Routing of Amtrak Passenger Trains, EP 697 (Sub-No. 1) (STB served Sept. 8, 2015).

    These emergency routing orders allow for the continued operation of Amtrak and typically will not address compensation terms. If the parties cannot agree on such terms and conditions of access, they can subsequently petition the Board to set them. We expect parties to work together and with the Director or a Deputy Director of OPAGAC to reach a practical and efficient resolution of an access issue during an emergency situation.

    This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the conservation of energy resources.

    Decided: August 31, 2015.

    By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Begeman, and Commissioner Miller.

    Brendetta S. Jones, Clearance Clerk.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22543 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
    80 173 Tuesday, September 8, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Document Number AMS-NOP-15-0037; NOP-15-11] Notice of Meeting of the National Organic Standards Board AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, (5 U.S.C. App.), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), Department of Agriculture, is announcing a meeting of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to assist the Department in the development of standards for substances to be used in organic production and to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on any other aspects of the implementation of Organic Foods Production Act.

    DATES:

    The Board will hold two webinars at which it will receive public comment: October 13 and October 20, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. A face-to-face meeting will be held October 26-29, 2015, from approximately 9:00 a.m. to approximately 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Deadline to sign up for oral comment: midnight Eastern Time, 30 days after publication of this notice. Deadline to submit written comments: midnight Eastern Time, 30 days after publication of this notice.

    ADDRESSES:

    The October 13 and 20 meetings will take place via webinar (access information will be available prior to the webinars). The October 26-29, 2015 meeting will take place at the Stoweflake Conference Center, 1746 Mountain Road Stowe, VT 05672, (802) 253-7355, www.stoweflake.com. Detailed information pertaining to the meetings, including instructions about providing written and oral comments can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Michelle Arsenault, Advisory Committee Specialist, National Organic Standards Board, USDA-AMS-NOP, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Room 2642-So., Mail Stop 0268, Washington, DC 20250-0268; Phone: (202) 720-3252; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NOSB makes recommendations to the Department of Agriculture about whether substances should be allowed or prohibited in organic production and/or handling, assists in the development of standards for organic production, and advises the Secretary on other aspects of the implementation of the Organic Foods Production Act (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522). The public meeting allows the NOSB to discuss and vote on proposed recommendations to the USDA, receive updates from the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) on issues pertaining to organic agriculture, and receive comments from the organic community. The meeting is open to the public. The meeting agenda, NOSB proposals and discussion documents, instructions for submitting and viewing public comments, and instructions for requesting time for oral comments will be available on the NOP Web site at www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings. Meeting topics will encompass a wide range of issues, including: substances petitioned for addition to or deletion from the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List), substances on the National List that require NOSB review before their 2017 sunset dates, and guidance on organic policies. At this meeting, the NOSB will complete its review of substances that have a sunset date in 2017, fulfilling the NOSB's responsibilities described in the Organic Foods Production Act's sunset provision (section 2118(e)).

    Public Comments:

    Written comments:

    Written public comments will be accepted on or before midnight Eastern Time, 30 days after publication of this notice via www.regulations.gov. Comments submitted after this date will be provided to the NOSB, but Board members may not have adequate time to consider those comments prior to making a recommendation. The NOP strongly prefers comments to be submitted electronically; however, written comments may also be submitted (i.e. postmarked) by the deadline, via mail to Ms. Michelle Arsenault listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Oral Comments:

    The NOSB is providing the public multiple dates and opportunities to provide oral comments and will accommodate as many individuals and organizations as time permits. Persons or organizations wishing to make oral comments must pre-register by midnight Eastern Time, 30 days after publication of this notice, and can only register for one speaking slot: either during one of the two webinars, October 13 or 20, 2015, or at the face-to-face meeting October 26-29, 2015. Instructions for registering and participating in the webinar can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings or by contacting Michelle Arsenault listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Meeting Accommodations: The meeting hotel is ADA Compliant, and the USDA provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in this public meeting, please notify Michelle Arsenault listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Determinations for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Dated: August 28, 2015. Rex A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-21736 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Office of the Secretary [Docket No. FSIS-2011-0030] Privacy Act of 1974; New System of Records AGENCY:

    Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed new system of records; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposes to establish a new system of records titled USDA/FSIS-03 Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Consumer Complaint Monitoring System (CCMS) II.

    The mission of FSIS is to protect public health by ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, and accurately labeled. Thus, the Agency must detect food safety vulnerabilities as early and as specifically as possible so that the potential for harm can be promptly prevented, reduced, or eliminated. The CCMS II helps FSIS to effectively identify potentially unsafe meat, poultry, or processed egg products regulated by FSIS by recording, sorting, analyzing, and tracking consumer complaints regarding products' potential adverse effects, and by tracking any subsequent analyses and investigations of those complaints.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: October 8, 2015. If no comments are received, the proposal will become effective on above date. If comments are received, they will be considered and, where adopted, the document will be republished with changes.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number FSIS-2011-0030, by one of the following methods.

    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Director, Applied Epidemiology Division, Office of Public Health Science, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250.

    Fax: (202) 720-8213.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general questions, please contact Dr. Karen Becker, Director, Applied Epidemiology Staff, Office of Public Health Systems, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20024; telephone (202) 690-6045. For privacy questions, please contact Ravoyne Payton, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Policy, E-Government and Fair Information Practices, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250; telephone (202) 720-8755.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), requires agencies to publish in the Federal Register a notice of new or revised systems of records maintained by the agency. A system of records contains information that is retrieved by an individual's name or other unique identifier. FSIS is proposing to establish a new Privacy Act system of records, entitled USDA/FSIS-03, FSIS Consumer Complaint Monitoring System II (CCMS II), a relational database that collects information, retrieved by name or a unique identifying number assigned to an individual, to assist FSIS with trace-back or trace-forward investigations and characterization of foodborne hazards. The primary goal of the CCMS II electronic database is to support and augment FSIS analysts in their ability to identify consumer health risks associated with regulated products. The CCMS II will assist FSIS to accomplish its safety mission by quickly and effectively identifying potentially unsafe meat, poultry, or processed egg products. More specifically, CCMS II helps FSIS to analyze, evaluate, and identify foodborne hazards in its regulated products; to assess the risk to human health; and to determine the appropriate response to known, emerging, or potential threats to the food supply or to the agriculture sector. Paper records printed from the electronic database are stored only in limited quantities and on rare occasions and are retrieved when needed as working copies. Such paper records are shredded upon termination of the need for a working copy. Information gathered and entered into CCMS II supports investigations that can involve trace back to sources of foodborne illness outbreaks and tracing hazardous product forward to identify distribution and disposition. Among other activities, CCMS II data and investigations may support complaint-related verification of hazard analysis and critical control points in producing establishments, analysis of school lunch product manufacturing specifications associated with an outbreak involving a National School Lunch Program product, and recall coordination for products identified as being adulterated or unwholesome. If a complaint involves an incident that is determined to be non-routine, alerts will be provided to management.

    A complaint that is put into CCMS II can be initiated in any of the following ways: (1) Calls from consumers or their representatives, or from representatives of State or local health departments and Federal agencies, including USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), (2) electronic hand-off from the USDA's Meat and Poultry Hotline system, and (3) web forms submitted by consumers. Trained analysts review the complaint information. Once reviewed, the case is entered into the system directly or indirectly via a transfer from the Meat and Poultry Hotline System.

    Epidemiologists in the FSIS Office of Public Health Science (OPHS) analyze the information in CCMS II to determine necessary further analyses, investigation, or processing. OPHS leads the management and investigation of all cases entered into the system. Technical and scientific support is provided to other program areas, as necessary.

    Personal information about individuals collected in CCMS II includes first and last name, home or work address, telephone number or email, and details of the complaint, which can include medical symptoms and medical treatment obtained. Specific information about food items eaten also is collected in CCMS II. A unique case number is assigned to each complaint and provided to the individual making the report and can be used in lieu of or in addition to the personal information noted above for retrieving system information.

    Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry Product Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.), and the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.), FSIS is authorized to inspect and regulate the production of meat, poultry, and egg products and to prevent the sale and movement in commerce of adulterated or misbranded articles in order to fulfill its food safety mission. In addition, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to give high priority to enhancing the ability of FSIS “. . . to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of meat and poultry products;” to strengthen the ability of FSIS “to collaborate with relevant agencies within the Department of Agriculture and with other entities in the Federal Government, the States, and Indian tribes . . . through the sharing of information and technology;” and expanding the capacity of FSIS “to protect against the threat of bioterrorism” (21 U.S.C. 679c (a)(1)(3) and (4)).

    In summary, all of these authorities allow FSIS to perform the functions of this system: To gather and maintain information related to foodborne hazards that will support investigations aimed to trace back foodborne illness outbreaks to its sources and to identify potentially unsafe meat, poultry, or processed egg products from entering commerce; to collaborate with federal, State, local, and tribal public health partners in identifying potentially unsafe meat or poultry products; and to assess probable threats or risks to the food supply and devise an adequate response, to ultimately achieve its food safety mission.

    Background

    CCMS II system programs and use of resources comply with procedures for avoiding waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement; for obtaining, reporting, and using reliable and timely information for decision-making; and for appropriately identifying and managing program risks. To enable management and audit oversight, CCMS II includes management controls and performance measures for supported activities to ensure that decision-making is accurate, timely, complete, and effective.

    There are no Privacy Act exemptions being made for this application. Consistent with USDA's public health mission, information stored in CCMS II may be shared with other USDA components, as well as with appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. This sharing will take place only after USDA determines that the receiving component or agency has a need to know the information to carry out national security, law enforcement, immigration, intelligence, or other functions consistent with the routine uses set forth in this system of records notice.

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), as implemented by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-130, FSIS has provided a report of this new system of records to: The Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate; the Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate; the Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives; the Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Governmental Reform, House of Representatives; and the Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.

    Alfred V. Almanza, Acting Administrator. USDA/FSIS-03 System of records name:

    USDA/FSIS-03, FSIS Consumer Complaint Monitoring System (CCMS) II.

    Security classification:

    Unclassified.

    System location:

    Records are maintained at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250, and at USDA's National Information Technology Center facility at 8930 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, Missouri 64114.

    Categories of individuals covered by the system:

    Federal employees and private citizens involved in an FSIS investigation, including individuals who submit complaints; those who work in the food industry under FSIS' inspection, such as private citizens who operate or work at establishments; those who work for operations that may be subject to FSIS surveillance or enforcement, such as private citizens employed at retail operations that grind meat or poultry; members of volunteer organizations who prepare or have prepared food; and State, tribal, and local government employees responsible for food safety or public health.

    Categories of records in the system:

    This system contains information pertaining to investigations of consumer complaints to aid in identifying and tracking potential public health crises. This information includes personal information, such as first and last names, home or work address, telephone number or email, and details concerning medical symptoms and care and cause of complaint. Each record is associated with an assigned case code to ease retrieval.

    Authority for maintenance of the system:

    • Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.);

    • Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); and

    • Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C 1031 et seq.).

    Responsible agency official for system:

    Dr. David Goldman, Assistant Administrator, Office of Public Health Science (OPHS), Food Safety and Inspection Service(FSIS), U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250, Rm. 341-E JLW Bldg. Telephone (202) 720-2644.

    Or Dr. Karen Becker, Director Applied Epidemiology Division, Office of Public Health Science, Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. Telephone (202) 690-6045; Fax:(202) 720-8213.

    Purposes:

    The records provided by and about individuals in this system are used by FSIS to sort, evaluate, and investigate possible adverse effects from FSIS-regulated products. The information also supports trace back to the source of foodborne illness outbreaks and tracing hazardous products forward to identify distribution and disposition. CCMS II data and associated processes help FSIS to analyze, evaluate, and identify foodborne hazards in products regulated by the Agency; to assess the risk to human health; and to determine the appropriate response to known, emerging, or potential threats to the food supply or to the agriculture sector.

    Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses:

    In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, all or a portion of the records or information contained in this system may be disclosed outside USDA as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    1. To the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) (including United States Attorney Offices) or other Federal agency conducting litigation, or in proceedings before any court, adjudicative or administrative body, when it is necessary for the litigation, and one of the following is a party to the litigation or has an interest in the litigation:

    a. USDA or any component thereof;

    b. any employee of USDA in his/her official capacity;

    c. any employee of USDA in his/her individual capacity where DOJ or USDA has agreed to represent the employee; or

    d. the United States or any agency thereof, and USDA determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation and the use of such records is compatible with the purpose for which USDA collected the records.

    2. To a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from that congressional office made at the written request of the individual to whom the record pertains.

    3. To the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) or other Federal government agencies pursuant to records management inspections being conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    4. To an agency, organization, or individual for the purpose of performing audit or oversight operations as authorized by law, but only such information as is necessary and relevant to such audit or oversight function. This would include, but not be limited to the Comptroller General or any of his authorized representatives in the course of the performance of the duties of the Government Accountability Office, or USDA's Office of the Inspector General or any authorized representatives of that office.

    5. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when:

    a. USDA or FSIS suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised;

    b. USDA has determined that, as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise, there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by USDA or another agency or entity), or harm to the individual or individuals that rely upon the compromised information; and

    c. The disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with USDA's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    6. To contractors and their agents, grantees, experts, consultants, and others performing or working on a contract, service, grant, cooperative agreement, or other assignment for USDA, when necessary to accomplish an agency function related to this system of records. Individuals who provided information under this routine use are subject to the same Privacy Act requirements and limitations on disclosure as are applicable to USDA officers and employees.

    7. To an appropriate Federal, State, tribal, local, international, or foreign law enforcement agency or other appropriate authority charged with investigating or prosecuting a violation or enforcing or implementing a law, rule, regulation, or order, where a record, either on its face or in conjunction with other information, indicates a violation or potential violation of law, which includes criminal, civil, or regulatory violations and such disclosure is proper and consistent with the official duties of the person making the disclosure.

    8. To an appropriate Federal, State, tribal, local, international, or foreign law enforcement agency or appropriate authority responsible for protecting public health, preventing or monitoring disease or illness outbreaks, or ensuring the safety of the food supply. This includes the Department of Health and Human Services and its agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, other Federal agencies, and State, tribal, and local health departments. Certain complaint-related information may be shared with the producing establishment for purposes of investigating the complaints. Except as stated, disclosure is made pursuant to requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

    Disclosure to consumer reporting agencies:

    None

    Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage:

    Records in this system are stored electronically in a dedicated virtual server or on paper in secure facilities in a locked drawer behind a locked door within USDA facilities. Electronically stored records, including backup records maintained on their own dedicated virtual server in a separate location, are stored on magnetic disc, tape, digital media, and CD-ROM. (Paper records are printed from electronic storage only in limited quantities and on rare occasions when needed as working copies. Such paper records are kept in secure facilities in a locked drawer behind a locked door within USDA facilities, and immediately are shredded upon termination of the need for a working copy.) Security guards safeguard the buildings where the electronic and the working copies of records reside.

    Retrievability:

    Retrieval is generally performed using the case code (a sequentially assigned, system-generated code created at the time of initial contact) or other database fields, such as establishment number or type of complaint. A name can also be used to retrieve individual records; however, using the case code or other database fields reduces the need for retrieval by information that could identify an individual.

    Safeguards:

    Records in this system are safeguarded in accordance with applicable rules and policies, including all applicable USDA automated systems security and access policies. This includes protection behind firewalls, network protection against intrusion, and vulnerability scanning and protection. Only users with a business need are allowed access through the use of an encrypted password. Role-based access controls are used to restrict access to CCMS II, which is accessible via the FSIS Intranet. Furthermore, multiple levels of access exist, based on the user's system role and job function. Each time users sign in to the application, the login credentials are checked against authorized system user role memberships to ensure the user's access privileges are restricted to assigned level-of-access roles. User activity is also monitored, logged, and audited. Additionally, all users are required to undergo USDA-approved computer security awareness training prior to access and must complete computer security training yearly in order to retain access. An access agreement describes prohibited activities, such as browsing.

    Retention and disposal:

    Records will be destroyed or maintained in accordance with the USDA's published records disposition schedules, as approved by NARA. A backup of the Master File is created at the end of the calendar year, and backup records are maintained in accordance with General Records Schedule Authority N1-462-07-01, Item 2. System inputs are maintained in accordance with General Records Schedule Authority GRS 20, Item 2(a)(4), while system outputs (reports) are maintained in accordance with General Records Schedule Authority GRS 20, Item 16.

    System manager and address:

    Dr. Karen Becker, Director, Applied Epidemiology Staff, Office of Public Health Science, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 355 E Street SW. PPIII, 9th Floor Office 9-232, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone (202) 690-6045.

    Notification procedure:

    An individual may request information regarding this system of records, or information as to whether this system contains records pertaining to such individual from the System Manager listed above. Individuals seeking notification of and access to any record contained in this system of records, or seeking to contest its content, may submit a request in writing to the Headquarters or FSIS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Officer, whose contact information can be found at http://www.da.usda.gov/foia.htm under “Contacts.” If an individual believes more than one component maintains Privacy Act records concerning him or her, the individual may submit the request to the Chief FOIA Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250.

    When seeking records about yourself from this system of records or any other USDA system of records, your request must conform with the Privacy Act regulations set forth in 7 CFR part 1. You must first verify your identity, meaning that you must provide your full name, current address, and date and place of birth. You must sign your request, and your signature must either be notarized or submitted under 28 U.S.C. 1746, a law that permits statements to be made under penalty of perjury as a substitute for notarization. While no specific form is required, you may obtain forms for this purpose from the Chief FOIA Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. In addition, you should provide the following:

    • An explanation of why you believe USDA would have information on you,

    • Which components of USDA you believe may have the information about you,

    • When you believe the records would have been created,

    • Any other information that will help the FOIA staff determine which USDA component agency may have responsive records,

    • If your request is seeking records pertaining to another living individual, you must include a statement from that individual certifying his/her agreement for you to access his/her records.

    Without this bulleted information, the component(s) may not be able to conduct an effective search, and your request may be denied due to lack of specificity.

    Records access procedures:

    See “Notification Procedure” above.

    Contesting records procedures:

    See “Notification Procedure” above.

    Record source categories:

    Information generally is obtained directly from the individual who is the subject of the records, or from someone acting on their behalf, such as Federal, State and Local health agencies, relatives, or a friend of the consumer.

    Exemptions claimed for the system:

    None

    United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Consumer Complaint Monitoring System (CCMS) II FSIS-2011-0030 New System of Records—Narrative Statement

    The mission of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is to protect public health by ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, and accurately labeled. Natural events, accidents, or intentional acts can put the safety of food and the food supply chain at risk, and by doing so, put the health and welfare of consumers at risk. FSIS developed the Consumer Complaint Monitoring System (CCMS II) to help Agency personnel quickly and effectively identify potentially unsafe meat, poultry, or processed egg products. CCMS II is an electronic database accessed from FSIS' Intranet and is used to record, sort, evaluate, and track complaints about possible adverse effects from meat, poultry, or processed egg products regulated by FSIS. CCMS II is also used to track subsequent analysis and investigations of these complaints.

    Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), the Poultry Product Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451, et seq.), and the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031, et seq.), Congress has provided for the inspection and regulated processing and distribution of meat and meat products, poultry, and egg products to prevent the sale and movement in commerce of articles that are adulterated or misbranded. Specifically, 21 U.S.C. 451, 602, and 1031 note that the health and welfare of consumers are to be protected by assuring that meat and meat food products are wholesome and that regulation by the Secretary of Agriculture and cooperation by the States and other jurisdictions are appropriate to protect the health and welfare of consumers.

    Further, under 21 U.S.C. 679c(a)(1) and (3), the Secretary is authorized to give high priority to enhancing the ability of FSIS “. . . to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of meat and poultry products” and to “strengthen the ability of [FSIS] to collaborate with relevant agencies within the Department of Agriculture and with other entities in the Federal Government, the States, and Indian tribes . . . through the sharing of information and technology.” CCMS II helps to identify products in commerce that are potentially adulterated and enables FSIS to determine whether reported products are safe and wholesome. In addition, the system allows the Agency to collaborate with federal, State, local, and tribal public health partners in identifying potentially unsafe meat or poultry products—and helps the Agency to protect the consuming public from further harm.

    A complaint can be initiated by calls from consumers or their representatives, by representatives of State or local health departments and Federal agencies, including USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service and Food and Nutrition Service, or via electronic hand-off from USDA's Meat and Poultry Hotline system and through web forms submitted by consumers. The information from these complaints, collected in CCMS II, is analyzed, evaluated, and classified as needing further action by trained analysts in FSIS' Office of Public Health Science (OPHS). These and other analysts identify the organization that will perform any subsequent action, provide ongoing updates, coordinate communication with other USDA agencies as needed, and alert management in the event of a non-routine incident. OPHS will also determine and coordinate any needed laboratory analysis and provide technical and scientific support to other program areas. Until the complaint is resolved, any action taken is updated in CCMS II. CCMS II data can include certain information about individuals, such as first and last names, home or work address, telephone number or email, food product consumed, medical symptoms experienced, and medical care received. Some of this information can be and is used to retrieve records, such as first and last name, but by design and in general practice, a system-generated case code is used for retrieval. The case code is sequentially assigned at the time of the initial contact, and is provided to the submitter of the complaint. Other database fields, such as establishment number or type of complaint, can also be used for retrieval.

    The data within CCMS II is specifically used for the reasons the information was obtained: to help determine the safety of specific food products consumed by individuals who reported problems with the food items. Information from CCMS II may be shared in a controlled manner within FSIS and, as needed, with other public health partners, to determine whether there is a potential problem with the product, to help identify the origin of the product, to trace forward the product's distribution or disposition, to follow-up with the individual who reported the problem, to ascertain whether others experienced similar problems with the same product, or for other reasons that derive directly from the reason the information was originally collected. There are other routine uses of CCMS II data permitted under U.S.C. 552a(b)(3), as contained in the Federal Register Notice and summarized here:

    To the Department of Justice for litigation purposes; to National Archives and Records Administration for records management; to a Congressional Office in response to an inquiry from the relevant constituent; to an appropriate authority for audit purposes; to an appropriate authority in response to a threat to information security or confidentiality; to an appropriate law enforcement authority in response to investigations, prosecutions, or enforcement actions; to contractors and agents performing a function on behalf of the agency relating to the collection of information to support surveillance, investigations, and facilitation of rapid detection and response to food borne hazards; to appropriate authorities responsible for public health/monitoring illness outbreaks/ensuring safety of the food supply because the data supports public health officials in their ability to identify public health hazards and mitigate their impact through communication and information sharing among public health partners; and to producing establishments in connection with the Agency's investigation of complaint-related information.

    CCMS II data and investigations also support other activities, including complaint-related verification of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points in producing establishments, analysis of school lunch product manufacturing specifications, and recall coordination for product(s) identified as adulterated or unwholesome.

    Safeguards/Security Provided for This System

    FSIS has taken significant actions to safeguard the identifiable information about an individual in CCMS II and to control access to the system itself. Access to CCMS II is restricted to trained, authorized FSIS employees and to a limited number of users representing FSIS' public health partners in the Department of Health and Human Services. Authorized users are assigned level-of-access roles based on their job functions. The level of access for the user restricts the data that may be seen and the degree to which data may be modified by the user. Firewalls and other security controls further prevent unauthorized access. As a result, the potential effect of CCMS II on an individual's privacy is minimal.

    In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, records maintained in the system may be disclosed outside USDA for eight routine uses. These routine uses may be described as functional and housekeeping uses.

    The records are protected by the confidentiality requirements of USDA's Office of the Chief Information Officer Cyber Security Manuals and the provisions of the Privacy Act. Only authorized USDA employees and contractors will have access to the records in this system, and this access will be on a need-to-know basis. Role-based access controls are used to restrict access to CCMS II, which is accessible via the FSIS Intranet.

    The system has been categorized as a Moderate impact system as identified in Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 199. The security controls implemented within the system will correspond with those published in the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-53, Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Technology Systems (Revision1) for a Moderate impact system. Users are granted system access only upon successful completion of security training and must successfully complete security training each year to retain access. Each user is supplied with a unique and strong user-id and password. The user roles are restrictive and based on the principle of least privilege allowing for adequate performance of job functions and access to information based on a need to know.

    Where appropriate, the system also will adhere to the security controls identified in the Federal Information Security Control Audit Manual (FISCAM). The mandatory requirements of FIPS 199 and FIPS 200 support the Federal Information Security Management Act and FISCAM supports the mandated Office of Management and Budget Circular A-123, Management of Internal Controls.

    Moreover, system managers and users observe and adhere to specific USDA security requirements as set forth in the USDA Cyber Security Manuals, including but not limited to USDA Departmental Manual (DM) 3545-000, Personnel Security, and DM 3510-001, Physical Security Standards for Information Technology Restricted Space.

    [FR Doc. 2015-22085 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Office of the Chief Economist; Public Comment Period for Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System Assessment Report AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    ACTION:

    Request for Public Comment on Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System Assessment Report.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has led the development of an interagency assessment report entitled “Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System.” The report has been developed to support the National Climate Assessment of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and is called for under the President's Climate Action Plan. USDA is requesting input from the public. This request is being published in the Federal Register for a 30-day public comment period. Public comments will be considered during the preparation of the final report. The final report will be published on USDA's Web site when it becomes available. Comments from the public will be accepted electronically via http://www.globalchange.gov/notices. Comments may be submitted only online and via this address; instructions for doing this are on the Web site.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 8, 2015 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments from the public will be accepted electronically via http://www.globalchange.gov/notices. Comments may be submitted only online and via this address; instructions for doing this are on the Web site.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Hohenstein, Director, USDA Climate Change Program Office, telephone: 202-720-9978, Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The public comment draft can be found online at www.globalchange.gov/notices. Only comments received through the online comment system (www.globalchange.gov/notices) will be considered.

    All comments received will be considered by the report's authors and will become part of the public record once the final report is issued. However, until the report is finalized and released to the public, commenters' identities will not be shared with the authors. When the report is released in final form to the public, the comments, in association with the commenter's name, will be made available upon request. No additional information a commenter submits as part of the registration process (such as an email address) will be disclosed publicly.

    The Department of Agriculture will publish a notice informing the public of the final report when it is issued.

    Robert Johansson, Chief Economist.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22668 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-38-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Rogue and Umpqua Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Rogue and Umpqua Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Roseburg, Oregon. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with Title II of the Act. Additional RAC information, including the meeting agenda and the meeting summary/minutes can be found at the following Web site: http://tinyurl.com/qjkrxps.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held October 14-15, 2015, at 9:30 a.m.-4 p.m.

    All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under For Further Information Contact.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at Umpqua National Forest Supervisor's Office, 2900 NW Stewart Parkway, Roseburg, Oregon.

    Written comments may be submitted as described under Supplementary Information. All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are placed in the record and are available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received at Umpqua National Forest Supervisor's Office.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cheryl Caplan, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 541-957-3270 or via email at [email protected]

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting is to:

    1. Review projects proposals; and

    2. Make project recommendations for Title II funding.

    The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by October 13, 2015, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Cheryl Caplan, RAC Coordinator, Umpqua National Forest Supervisor's Office, 2900 NW Stewart Parkway, Roseburg, Oregon 97471; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 541-957-3495.

    Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. Steven T. Marchi, Acting Umpqua Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22527 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Business-Cooperative Service Inviting Applications for the Delta Health Care Services Grant Program AGENCY:

    Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice announces that the Rural Business-Cooperative Service (Agency) is accepting fiscal year (FY) 2015 applications for the Delta Health Care Services Grant (DHCS) Program as authorized by the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015 (Pub.L. 113-235). Approximately $5 million is available to be competitively awarded. The purpose of this program is to provide financial assistance to address the continued unmet health needs in the Delta Region through cooperation among health care professionals, institutions of higher education, research institutions and economic development entities in the Delta Region. The Agency is encouraging applications that grants to projects based in or serving census tracts with poverty rates greater than or equal to 20 percent. This emphasis will support Rural Development's (RD) mission of improving the quality of life for Rural Americans and its commitment to directing resources to those who most need them.

    DATES:

    You must submit completed applications for grants according to the following deadlines:

    • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than December 7, 2015.

    • Electronic copies must be received by December 2, 2015. Late applications are not eligible for funding under this Notice and will not be evaluated.

    ADDRESSES:

    You should contact your USDA Rural Development State Office (State Office) if you have questions about eligibility or submission requirements. You are encouraged to contact your State Office well in advance of the application deadline to discuss your project and to ask any questions regarding the application process. A list of State Office contacts can be found at http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices.

    A supplementary application guide has also been created for your assistance. You may obtain application guides and materials for this Notice in the following ways:

    • Through the Internet at the RBS Cooperative Programs Web site: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants

    • By requesting application guides and materials from your local State Office. A list of State Office contacts can be found at http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices.

    Alabama USDA Rural Development State Office, Sterling Centre, Suite 601, 4121 Carmichael Road, Suite 601, Montgomery, AL 36106-3683, (334) 279-3400/TDD (334) 279-3495. Arkansas USDA Rural Development State Office, 700 West Capitol Avenue, Room 3416, Little Rock, AR 72201-3225, (501) 301-3200/TDD (501) 301-3279. Illinois USDA Rural Development State Office, 2118 West Park Court, Suite A, Champaign, IL 61821, (217) 403-6200/TDD (217) 403-6240. Kentucky USDA Rural Development State Office, 771 Corporate Drive, Suite 200, Lexington, KY 40503, (859) 224-7435/TDD (859) 224-7422. Louisiana USDA Rural Development State Office, 3727 Government Street, Alexandria, LA 71302, (318) 473-7960/TDD (318) 473-7655. Mississippi USDA Rural Development State Office, Federal Building, Suite 831, 100 West Capitol Street, Jackson, MS 39269, (601) 965-5457/TDD (601) 965-5850. Missouri USDA Rural Development State Office, 601 Business Loop 70 West, Parkade Center, Suite 235, Columbia, MO 65203, (573) 876-9321/TDD (573) 876-9480. Tennessee USDA Rural Development State Office, 3322 West End Avenue, Suite 300, Nashville, TN 37203-1084, (615) 783-1321.

    You must submit either:

    • A complete paper application to the State Office located in the State where the project will primarily take place, http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices (see list above), or

    • A complete electronic grant application at http://www.grants.gov/ (Grants.gov). Please review the Grants.gov Web site at http://grants.gov/applicants/organization_registration.jsp, for instructions on the process of registering your organization as soon as possible to ensure you are able to meet the application deadline.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Grants Division, Cooperative Programs, Rural Business-Cooperative Programs, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., STOP 3253, Washington, DC 20250-3253; or call (202) 690-1376.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview

    Federal Agency: USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS).

    Funding Opportunity Title: Delta Health Care Services Grant Program.

    Announcement Type: Initial funding announcement.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 10.874.

    Dates: You must submit your complete application by December 7, 2015 or it will not be considered for funding. Electronic copies must be received by www.grants.gov no later than midnight Eastern time December 2, 2015 or it will not be considered for funding.

    Executive Order (EO) 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This Executive Order imposes requirements on RD in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications or preempt tribal laws. RD has determined that this Notice does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or on either the relationship or the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes. Thus, this Notice is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 13175. Tribal Consultation inquiries and comments should be directed to RD's Native American Coordinator at [email protected] or (720) 544-2911.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act requires Federal agencies to seek and obtain Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval before undertaking a collection of information directed to ten or more persons. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Agency conducted an analysis to determine the number of applications the Agency estimates that it will receive under the Delta Health Care Services Grant Program. It was determined that the estimated number of applications was fewer than nine and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320, thus no OMB approval is necessary at this time.

    A. Program Description

    This Notice announces the availability of funds for the DHCS grant program, which is authorized under Section 379G of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2008u). The primary objective of the program is to provide financial assistance to address the continued unmet health needs in the Delta Region through cooperation among health care professionals, institutions of higher education, research institutions, and other individuals and entities in the Delta Region. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis. The maximum award amount per grant is $500,000.

    Definitions

    The terms and conditions provided in this Notice are applicable to this Notice only. In addition, the term “you” referenced throughout this Notice should be understood to mean the applicant and the terms “we,” “us,” and “our” should be understood to mean Rural Business-Cooperative Services, Rural Development, USDA.

    Academic Health and Research Institute means one of the following:

    • A combination of a medical school, one or more other health profession schools or educational training programs (such as allied health, dentistry, graduate studies, nursing, pharmacy, public health, veterinary medicine), and one or more owned or affiliated teaching hospitals or health systems; or

    • A health care nonprofit organization or health system, including nonprofit medical and surgical hospitals, that conduct health related research exclusively for scientific or educational purposes.

    Conflict of Interest means a situation in which a person or entity has competing personal, professional, or financial interests that make it difficult for the person or business to act impartially. Regarding use of both grant and Federal procurement standards prohibit transactions that involve a real or apparent conflict of interest for owners, employees, officers, agents, or their immediate family members having a financial or other interest in the outcome of the project; or that restrict open and free competition for unrestrained trade. Specifically, project funds may not be used for services or goods going to, or coming from, a person or entity with a real or apparent conflict of interest, including, but not limited to, owner(s) and their immediate family members. An example of conflict of interest occurs when the consortium member's employees, board of directors, or the immediate family of either, have the appearance of a professional or personal financial interest in the recipients receiving the benefits or services of the grant.

    Consortium means a group of three or more entities that are regional Institutions of Higher Education, Academic Health and Research Institutes, and/or Economic Development Entities located in the Delta Region that have at least one year of prior experience in addressing the health care issues in the region. At least one of the consortium members must be legally organized as an incorporated organization or other legal entity and have legal authority to contract with the Federal government.

    Delta Region means the 252 counties and parishes within the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee that are served by the Delta Regional Authority. (The Delta Region may be adjusted by future Federal statute.) To view the areas identified within the Delta Region visit http://dra.gov/about-dra/dra-states.

    Economic Development Entity means any public or non-profit organization whose primary mission is to stimulate local and regional economies within the Delta Region by increasing employment opportunities and duration of employment, expanding or retaining existing employers, increasing labor rates or wage levels, reducing outmigration, and/or creating gains in other economic development-related variables such as land values. These activities shall primarily benefit low- and moderate-income individuals in the Delta Region.

    Health System means the complete network of agencies, facilities, and all providers of health care to meet the health needs of a specific geographical area or target populations.

    Institution of Higher Education means either a postsecondary (post-high school) educational institution that awards a bachelor's degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or a postsecondary vocational institution that provides a program of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.

    Nonprofit Organization means any organization or institution, including an accredited institution of higher education, no part of the net earnings of which may inure, to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.

    Project Funds means grant funds requested plus any other contributions to the proposed project.

    Rural and rural area means any area of a State:

    • Not in a city or town that has a population of more than 50,000 inhabitants, according to the latest decennial census of the United States; and

    • The contiguous and adjacent urbanized area,

    • Urbanized areas that are rural in character as defined by 7 U.S.C. 1991 (a) (13), as amended by Section 6018 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110-246 (June 18, 2008).

    • For the purposes of this definition, cities and towns are incorporated population centers with definite boundaries, local self-government, and legal powers set forth in a charter granted by the State.

    State means each of the 50 states, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the United States, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and, as may be determined by the Secretary to be feasible, appropriate and lawful, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the Republic of Palau.

    B. Federal Award Information Type of Award: Grant Total Funding for DHCS: $5,312,610.00 Maximum DHCS Award: $500,000 Minimum DHCS Award: $50,000 Project Period: Up to 24 months Anticipated Award Date: March 1, 2016 C. Eligibility Information

    Applicants must meet all of the following eligibility requirements. Your application will not be considered for funding if it does not provide sufficient information to determine eligibility or is missing required elements. Applicants that fail to submit the required elements by the application deadline will be deemed ineligible and will not be evaluated further. Information submitted after the application deadline will not be accepted.

    1. Eligible Applicants

    Grants funded through DHCS may be made to a Consortium as defined in Paragraph A of this Notice. Consortiums are eligible to receive funding through this Notice. One member of the Consortium must be designated as the lead entity by the other members of the Consortium and have legal authority to contract with the Federal government.

    The lead entity is the recipient (See 2 CFR 200.86) of the DHCS grant funds and accountable for monitoring and reporting on the project performance and financial management of the grant. In addition, the lead entity (recipient) is responsible for subrecipient monitoring and management in accordance with 2 CFR 200.330 and 200.331, respectively. The remaining consortium members are subrecipients (See 2 CFR 200.93). They may receive subawards (See 2 CFR 200.94) from the recipient and are responsible for monitoring and reporting the project performance and financial management of their subaward to the recipient.

    (a) An applicant is ineligible if they do not submit “Evidence of Eligibility” and “Consortium Agreements” as described in Section D.2. of this Notice.

    (b) An applicant is ineligible if they have been debarred or suspended or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs under Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension.” The Agency will check the System for Award Management (SAM) to determine if the applicant has been debarred or suspended. In addition, an applicant will be considered ineligible for a grant due to an outstanding judgment obtained by the U.S. in a Federal Court (other than U.S. Tax Court), is delinquent on the payment of Federal income taxes, or is delinquent on Federal debt. The applicant must certify as part of the application that they do not have an outstanding judgement against them. The Agency will check the Credit Alert Interactive Voice Response System (CAIVRS) to verify this.

    (c) Any corporation (i) that has been convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the past 24 months or (ii) that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability, is not eligible for financial assistance provided with funds appropriated by the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, unless a Federal agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and has made a determination that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.

    (d) Applications will be deemed ineligible if the application includes any funding restrictions identified under Section D.6.

    (e) Applications will be deemed ineligible if the application is not complete in accordance with the requirements stated in Section C.3.g.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching

    Matching funds are not required. However, if you are adding any other contributions to the proposed Project, you must provide documentation indicating who will be providing the matching funds, the amount of funds, when those funds will be provided, and how the funds will be used in the project budget. Examples of acceptable documentation include: A signed letter from the source of funds stating the amount of funds, when the funds will be provided, and what the funds can be used for or a signed resolution from your governing board authorizing the use of a specified amount of funds for specific components of the project. The matching funds you identify must be specifically dedicated to the project and cannot include your organization's general operating budget. No credit will be given for in-kind donations of time, goods, and/or services from any organization, including the applicant organization. Additionally, we will not consider program income or expected revenue as other contributions, unless a commitment letter from the organization that will be paying the fees provides a letter stating the amount of the funds that will be paid, when they will be paid, and what they can be used for, if applicable. If you choose, you may use a template to summarize the matching funds. The template is available either from your Rural Development State Office or the program Web site at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants.

    3. Other Eligibility Requirements

    The following additional eligibility requirements apply to this program:

    (a) Use of Funds. An application must propose to use Project funds, including grant and other contributions committed under the evaluation criteria for eligible purposes. Eligible Project purposes include the development of:

    • Health care services;

    • health education programs;

    • health care job training programs; and

    • the development and expansion of public health-related facilities in the Delta Region.

    (b) Project Area. The proposed Project must take place in a Rural Area within the Delta Region as defined in this Notice. However, the applicant need not propose to serve the entire Delta Region.

    (c) Project Input. Your proposed Project must be developed based on input from local governments, public health care providers, and other entities in the Delta Region.

    (d) Grant Period. All grant funds are limited to a 24-month performance period. Your proposed grant period should begin no earlier than the anticipated award announcement date, March 1, 2016, and should end no later than 24 months following that date. If you receive an award, your grant period will be revised to begin on the actual date of award—the date the grant agreement is executed by the Agency—and your grant period end date will be adjusted accordingly. Your Project activities must begin within 90 days of the date of award. If you request funds for a time period beginning before March 1, 2016, and/or ending later than 24 months from that date, your application will be ineligible. The length of your grant period should be based on your Project's complexity, as indicated in your application work plan.

    (e) Multiple Grant Requests. The Consortium, including its members, is limited to submitting one application for funding under this Notice. We will not accept applications from Consortiums that include members who are also members of other Consortiums that have submitted applications for funding under this Notice. If we discover that a Consortium member is a member of multiple Consortiums with applications submitted for funding under this Notice, all applications will be considered ineligible for funding.

    (f) Performance on Existing DHCS Awards. If the lead entity, or any of its Consortium members, has an existing DHCS award, they must be performing satisfactorily to be considered eligible for a funding under this Notice. Satisfactory performance includes, but is not limited to, being up-to-date on all financial and performance reports and being current on all tasks as approved in the work plan. The Agency will use its discretion to make this determination.

    (g) Completeness. Your application must provide all of the information requested in Section D.2. of this Notice. Applications lacking sufficient information to determine eligibility and scoring will be deemed ineligible and will not be considered for scoring.

    (h) Indirect Costs. Your negotiated indirect cost rate approval does not need to be included in your application, but you will be required to provide it if a grant is awarded. Approval for indirect costs that are requested in an application without an approved indirect cost rate agreement is at the discretion of the Agency.

    D. Application and Submission Information

    Please see instructions below on how to access and submit a complete application for this funding opportunity.

    1. Address To Request Application Package

    The application guide and copies of necessary forms for the DHCS Grant Program are available from these sources:

    • The Internet at http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants, http://www.grants.gov, or

    • For paper copies of these materials, please call (202) 690-1376.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission

    You may submit your application in paper form or electronically through Grants.gov. Your application must contain all required information.

    To submit an application electronically, you must follow the instructions for this funding announcement at http://www.grants.gov. Please note that we cannot accept emailed or faxed applications.

    You can locate the Grants.gov downloadable application package for this program by using a keyword, the program name, or the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number for this program.

    When you enter the Grants.gov Web site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    To use Grants.gov, you must already have a DUNS number and you must also be registered and maintain registration in SAM. We strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the application process through Grants.gov.

    You must submit all of your application documents electronically through Grants.gov. Applications must include electronic signatures. Original signatures may be required if funds are awarded.

    After electronically submitting an application through Grants.gov, you will receive an automatic acknowledgement from Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov tracking number.

    If you want to submit a paper application, send it to the State Office located in the State where you are headquartered. You can find State Office contact information at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices.

    You are strongly encouraged, but not required, to utilize the DHCS Application Guide found at http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants. The guide provides specific guidance on each of the items listed and also provides all necessary forms and sample worksheets.

    The organization submitting the application will be considered the lead entity. The Contact/Program Manager must be associated with the lead entity submitting the application.

    A completed application must include the following:

    (a) Form SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance.”—The application for federal assistance must be completed by the lead entity as described in Section C.1. of this Notice. Your application must include your DUNS number and SAM (CAGE) code and expiration date. Because there are no specific fields for a CAGE code and expiration date, you may identify them anywhere you want to on the form. If you do not include the CAGE code and expiration date and DUNS number in your application, it will not be considered for funding. The form must be signed by an authorized representative.

    (b) Form SF-424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs.” This form must be completed and submitted as part of the application package for non-construction projects.

    (c) Form SF-424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for non-construction projects.

    (d) Form SF-424C, “Budget Information—Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for construction projects.

    (e) Form SF-424D, “Assurances—Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for construction projects.

    (f) A project abstract. You must provide a brief summary of the proposed Project, not to exceed 250 words, suitable for dissemination to the public and to Congress.

    (g) Executive summary. You must provide a more detailed description of your project containing the following information; (1) Legal name of lead applicant, (2) consortium members, (3) applicant type (including consortium members) (4) application type (development of health care services, health education programs, health care job care training programs, or the development and/or expansion of health related facilities, (5) a summary of your project, (6) project goals and (7) how you intend to use the grant funds. Limit two pages.

    (h) Evidence of eligibility. You must provide evidence of the Consortium's eligibility to apply under this Notice. This section must include a detailed summary demonstrating how each Consortium member meets the definition of an eligible entity as defined under Definitions of this Notice.

    (i) Consortium agreements. The application must include a formal written agreement with each Consortium member that addresses the negotiated arrangements for administering the Project to meet Project goals, the Consortium member's responsibilities to comply with administrative, financial, and reporting requirements of the grant, including those necessary to ensure compliance with all applicable Federal regulations and policies, and facilitate a smooth functioning collaborative venture. Under the agreement, each Consortium member must perform a substantive role in the Project and not merely serve as a conduit of funds to another party or parties. This agreement must be signed by an authorized representative of the lead entity and an authorized representative of each partnering consortium entity.

    (j) Scoring documentation. You must address and provide documentation for each scoring criterion, specifically (1) the rurality of the project area and communities served, (2) the community needs and benefits derived from the project, (3) and project management and organization capability. See Section E.1.

    (k) Work Plan and Budget. You must provide a work plan and budget that includes the following: (1) The specific activities; such as programs, services, trainings, and/or construction-related activities for a facility to be performed under the Project, (2) the estimated line item costs associated with each activity, including grant funds and other necessary sources of funds; (3) the key personnel who will carry out each activity (including each Consortium member's role), and (4) the specific time frames for completion of each activity.

    An eligible start and end date for the project and for individual project tasks must be clearly shown and may not exceed Agency specified timeframes for the grant period. You must show the source and use of both grant and other contributions for all tasks. Other contributions must be spent at a rate equal to, or in advance of, grant funds.

    (l) Financial information and sustainability. You must provide current financial statements and a narrative description demonstrating sustainability of the project, all of which show sufficient resources and expertise to undertake and complete the project and how the project will be sustained following completion. Applicants must provide 3 years of pro-forma financial statements for the project.

    (m) Evidence of legal authority and existence. The lead entity must provide evidence of its legal existence and authority to enter into a grant agreement with the Agency and perform the activities proposed under the grant application.

    (n) Evidence of input solicited from local stakeholders. The application must include documentation detailing support solicited from local government, public health care providers and other entities in the Delta Region. Evidence of support can include; but is not limited to surveys conducted amongst rural residents and stakeholders, notes from focus groups, or letters of support from local entities.

    (o) Service area maps. You must provide maps with sufficient detail to show the area that will benefit from the proposed facilities and services and the location of the facilities improved or purchased with grant funds if applicable.

    (p) Form AD-3030. Form AD-3030, “Representations Regarding Felony Conviction and Tax Delinquent Status for Corporate Applicants,” if you are a corporation. A corporation is any entity that has filed articles of incorporation in one of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, or the various territories of the United States including American Samoa, Guam, Midway Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands. Corporations include both for profit and non-profit entities.

    (q) Certification of no current outstanding Federal judgment. You must certify that there are no current outstanding Federal judgments against your property and that you will not use grant funds to pay for any judgment obtained by the United States. To satisfy the Certification requirement, you should include this statement in your application: “[INSERT NAME OF APPLICANT] certifies that the United States has not obtained an unsatisfied judgment against its property and will not use grant funds to pay any judgments obtained by the United States.” A separate signature is not required.

    (r) Form RD-1940-20, “Request for Environmental Information.” You must submit a completed Form RD 1940-20, “Request for Environmental Information,” and a description of anticipated environmental issues or concerns for all construction related applications. The form can be found at: http://forms.sc.egov.usda.gov/efcommon/eFileServices/eForms/RD1940-20.PDF. Additional environmental documentation may be requested in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940 Exhibit H. The submission of the Form RD 1940-20 alone does not constitute compliance with 7 CFR part 1940.

    3. DUNS Number and SAM Registration

    In order to be eligible (unless you are exempted under 2 CFR 25.110(b), (c) or (d), you are required to:

    (a) Provide a valid DUNS number in your application, which can be obtained at no cost via a toll-free request line at (866) 705-5711;

    (b) Register in SAM before submitting your application. You may register in SAM at no cost at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/; and

    (c) Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which you have an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.

    The Agency may not make a Federal award to you until you have complied with all applicable DUNS and SAM requirements. If you have not fully complied with requirements by the time the Agency is ready to make a Federal award, the Agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and the Agency may use this determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.

    4. Submission Date and Time

    Application Deadline Date: December 7, 2015.

    Explanation of Deadlines: Complete paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight by December 7, 2015. The Agency will determine whether your application is late based on the date shown on the postmark or shipping invoice. You may also hand carry your application to one of our field offices, but it must be received by close of business on the deadline date. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. Late applications are not eligible for funding.

    Electronic applications must be RECEIVED by http://www.grants.gov by midnight Eastern time December 2, 2015, to be eligible for funding. Please review the Grants.gov Web site at http://grants.gov/applicants/organization_registration.jsp for instructions on the process of registering your organization as soon as possible to ensure you are able to meet the electronic application deadline. Grants.gov will not accept applications submitted after the deadline.

    5. Intergovernmental Review

    Executive Order (EO) 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, applies to this program. This EO requires that Federal agencies provide opportunities for consultation on proposed assistance with State and local governments. Many States have established a Single Point of Contact (SPOC) to facilitate this consultation. A list of States that maintain a SPOC may be obtained at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc. If your State has a SPOC, you may submit your application directly for review. Any comments obtained through the SPOC must be provided to Rural Development for consideration as part of your application. If your State has not established a SPOC or you do not want to submit your application to the SPOC, Rural Development will submit your application to the SPOC or other appropriate agency or agencies.

    You are also encouraged to contact Cooperative Programs at 202-690-1376 or [email protected] if you have questions about this process.

    6. Funding Restrictions

    The use of project funds, including grant funds and other contributions, cannot be used for ineligible purposes. In addition, you shall not use project funds for the following:

    (a) To duplicate current services or to replace or to substitute support previously provided. If the current service is inadequate, however, project funds may be used to expand the level of effort or a service beyond what is currently being provided;

    (b) To pay for costs to prepare the application for funding under this Notice;

    (c) To pay for costs of the project incurred prior to the effective date of the period of performance;

    (d) To pay expenses for applicant employee training;

    (e) Fund political activities;

    (f) To pay for assistance to any private business enterprise which does not have at least 51 percent ownership by those who are either citizens of the United States or reside in the United States after being legally admitted for permanent residence;

    (g) To pay any judgment or debt owed to the United States.

    (h) Engage in any activities that are considered a Conflict of Interest, as defined by this Notice; or

    (i) Fund any activities prohibited by 2 CFR 200.

    In addition, your application will not be considered for funding if it does any of the following:

    • Requests more than the maximum grant amount: or

    • Proposes ineligible costs that equal more than 10 percent of the project funds.

    If you include funds in your budget that are for ineligible purposes, we will consider the application for funding if the ineligible purposes total 10 percent or less of an applicant's project funds. However, if the application is successful, those ineligible costs must be removed from the work plan and budget and replaced with eligible costs before we will make the grant award, or the grant award will be reduced accordingly. If we cannot determine the percentage of ineligible costs, the application will not be considered for funding.

    7. Other Submission Requirements

    (a) You should not submit your application in more than one format. You must choose whether to submit your application in hard copy or electronically. Applications submitted in hard copy should be mailed or hand-delivered to the State Office where the project will primarily take place. You can find State Office contact information at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices. To submit an application electronically, you must follow the instructions for this funding announcement at http://www.grants.gov. A password is not required to access the Web site.

    (b) National Environmental Policy Act.

    This Notice has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940, subpart G, “Environmental Program.” We have determined that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required because the issuance of regulations and instructions, as well as amendments to them, describing administrative and financial procedures for processing, approving, and implementing the Agency's financial programs is categorically excluded in the Agency's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulation found at 7 CFR 1940.310(e)(3) of subpart G, “Environmental Program.” We have determined that this Notice does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Non-construction projects applying under this Notice are hereby classified as Categorical Exclusions according to 7 CFR 1940.310(e), the award of financial assistance for planning purposes, management and feasibility studies, or environmental impact analyses, which do not require any additional documentation.

    (c) Civil Rights Compliance Requirements.

    All grants made under this Notice are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as required by the USDA (7 CFR part 15, subpart A) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

    E. Application Review Information

    We will review your application to determine if it is complete and eligible. If at any time we determine that your application is ineligible, you will be notified in writing as to the reasons it was determined ineligible and you will be informed of your review and appeal rights.

    We will only score applications in which the lead entity, partnering Consortium member entities, and the project are eligible. The applications must also be complete and sufficiently responsive to program requirements.

    We will review each application to determine if it is eligible for funding and complete, based on the requirements of this Notice as well as other applicable Federal regulations.

    Applications that are determined to be eligible and complete will be evaluated based on the criteria described below.

    1. Criteria

    For each criterion, you must show how the Project has merit and why it is likely to be successful. If you do not address all parts of a criterion your application will be deemed ineligible. If you do not sufficiently communicate relevant Project information, you will receive lower scores. DHCS is a competitive program, so you will receive scores based on the quality of your responses. Simply addressing the criteria will not guarantee higher scores. The maximum number of points that can be awarded to your application is 100. For this announcement, the minimum score requirement for funding is 60 points. It is at the Agency's discretion to fund applications with a score of 59 or less if it is in the best interest of the Federal government.

    The evaluation criteria are detailed in the DHCS Grant Application Guide which can be found at http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants. You must address each evaluation criterion outlined in this Notice. Any criterion not substantively addressed will receive zero points. There are three criteria totaling 100 points. They are listed below:

    (a) Rurality of the Project and communities served (maximum of 30 points)—The rurality of the communities served by the Project is an objective criterion that measures the rurality of the Project's service area. It is determined by the population of the community. The rurality calculation provided in the application will be checked and, if necessary, corrected by us.

    Level Community Having a Population Over Not in excess of Points 1 0 5,000 30 2 5,001 20,000 20 3 20,001 50,000 10 4 50,001 or located in an Urbanized Area 0

    (b) The Community Needs and Benefits derived from the Project (maximum of 30 points)—We will assess how the Project's purpose and goals benefit the residents in the Delta Region. This criterion will be scored based on the documentation in support of the community needs for health services and public health-related facilities and the benefits to people living in Delta Regional derived from the implementation of the proposed Project. It should lead clearly to the identification of the Project participant pool and the target population for the Project, and provide convincing links between the Project and the benefits to the community to address its health needs. RBS will consider:

    (1) The extent of the applicant's documentation explaining the health care needs, issues, and challenges facing the service area. Include what problems the residents face and how the Project will benefit the residents in the region.

    (2) The extent to which the applicant is able to show the relationship between the Project's design, outcome, and benefits.

    (3) The extent to which the applicant explains the Project and its implementation and provides milestones which are well-defined and can be realistically completed.

    (4) The extent to which the applicant clearly outlines a plan to track, report, and evaluate performance outcomes.

    Applicants should attempt to quantify benefits in terms of outcomes from the Project; that is, ways in which peoples' lives, or the community, will be improved. Provide estimates of the number of people affected by the benefits arising from the project. The Agency has also established annual performance measures to evaluate the DHCS program. Use this section to provide estimates on the following performance measures as part of your narrative:

    • Number of businesses assisted;

    • Number of jobs created;

    • Number of jobs saved;

    • Number of individuals assisted/trained.

    It is permissible to have a zero in a performance element. When you calculate jobs created, estimates should be based upon actual jobs to be created by your organization as a result of the DHCS funding or actual jobs to be created by businesses as a result of assistance from your organization. When you calculate jobs saved, estimates should be based only on actual jobs that would have been lost if your organization did not receive DHCS funding or actual jobs that would have been lost without assistance from your organization.

    You can also suggest additional performance elements for example where job creation or jobs saved may not be a relevant indicator. These additional criteria should be specific, measurable performance elements that could be included in an award document.

    (c) The Project Management and Organization Capability (maximum of 40 points)—We will evaluate the Consortium's experience, past performance, and accomplishments addressing health care issues to ensure effective Project implementation. This criterion will be scored based on the documentation of the Project's management and organizational capability. RBS will consider:

    (1) The degree to which the organization has a sound management and fiscal structure including: well-defined roles for administrators, staff, and established financial management systems.

    (2) The extent to which the applicant identifies and demonstrates that qualifications, capabilities, and educational background of the identified key personnel (at a minimum the Project Manager) who will manage and implement programs are relevant and will contribute to the success of the Project.

    (3) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates current successful and effective experience (or recent past experience) addressing the health care issues in the Delta Region.

    (4) The extent to which the applicant has experience managing grant-funded programs.

    (5) The extent to which the applicant is able to correlate and support the budget to the project phases and implementation timeline.

    (6) The extent to which administrative/management costs are balanced with funds designated for the provision of programs and services.

    (7) The extent and depth of membership in the applicant's Consortium of regional institutions of higher education, academic health and research institutes and economic development entities located in the Delta Region.

    2. Review and Selection Process

    The State Offices will review applications to determine if they are eligible for assistance based on requirements in this Notice and other applicable Federal regulations. If determined eligible, your application will be scored by a panel of National and State Office employees in accordance with the point allocation specified in this Notice. A recommendation will be submitted to the Administrator to fund applications in highest ranking order, subject to availability of funds. It is at the Agency's discretion to fund applications with a score of 59 or less if it is in the best interest of the Federal government. If your application is evaluated, but not funded, it will not be carried forward into the next competition.

    F. Federal Award Administration Information 1. Federal Award Notices

    If you are selected for funding, you will receive a signed notice of Federal award by postal mail from the State Office where your application was submitted, containing instructions on requirements necessary to proceed with execution and performance of the award. You must comply with all applicable statutes, regulations, and notice requirements before the grant award will be approved. We recognize that each funded Project is unique and therefore the terms and conditions of each award may vary. We will notify applicants whose applications are selected for funding by sending a letter of conditions, which must be met before the award can be finalized.

    Once the conditions of the award are met, we will issue a grant agreement, which must be signed by the lead entity and us before the period of performance can begin. The lead entity may administer the award using the traditional subaward approach to the other Consortium members.

    If you are not selected for funding, you will be notified in writing via postal mail and informed of any review and appeal rights. See 7 CFR part 11 for USDA National Appeals Division procedures. Funding of successfully appealed applications will be limited to available FY 2015 funding. You must comply with all applicable statutes, regulations, and notice requirements before the grant will be approved.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    Additional requirements that apply to grantees selected for this in program can be found in 2 CFR parts 180, 200, 400, 415, 417, 418, 421, 25, and 170; and 48 CFR 31.2, and successor regulations to these parts. In addition, all recipients of Federal financial assistance are required to comply with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 and must report information about sub-awards and executive compensation (see 2 CFR part 170). These recipients must also maintain their registration in the SAM database as long as their grants are active. These regulations may be obtained at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html.

    The following additional requirements apply to grantees selected for this program:

    • Agency-approved Grant Agreement.

    • Letter of Conditions.

    • Form RD 1940-1, “Request for Obligation of Funds.”

    • Form RD 1942-46, “Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions.”

    • Form AD-1047, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions.”

    • Form AD-1048, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion—Lower Tier Covered Transactions.”

    • Form AD-1049, “Certification Regarding a Drug-Free Workplace Requirement (Grants).”

    • Form AD-3031, “Assurance Regarding Felony Conviction or Tax Delinquent Status for Corporate Applicants.”

    • Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement.”

    • RD Instruction 1940-Q, Exhibit A-1, “Certification for Contracts, Grants and Loans”

    • SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” if applicable.

    3. Reporting

    (a) Federal Financial Reports.

    (1) An SF-425, “Federal Financial Report,” must be submitted listing expenditures according to agreed upon budget categories, on a semiannual basis. Reporting periods end each August 31 and February 28. Reports are due 30 days after the reporting period ends.

    (2) A final project and financial status report within 90 days after the expiration or termination of the grant.

    (3) Provide outcome project performance reports and final deliverables.

    (b) Performance Reports.

    Semiannual performance reports should compare accomplishments to the objectives stated in the proposal. Identify all tasks completed to date and provide documentation supporting the reported results. If the original schedule provided in the work plan is not being met, the report should discuss the problems or delays that may affect completion of the project. Objectives for the next reporting period should be listed. Compliance with any special condition on the use of award funds should be discussed. Reports are due as provided in paragraph 3.a. of this section.

    (c) Subrecipient Reporting.

    The lead entity must have the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the reporting requirements for first-tier sub-awards and executive compensation under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 in the event the applicant receives funding unless such applicant is exempt from such reporting requirements pursuant to 2 CFR 170.110(b). The reporting requirements under the Transparency Act pursuant to 2 CFR part 170 are as follows:

    (1) First Tier Sub-Awards of $25,000 or more in non-Recovery Act funds (unless they are exempt under 2 CFR part 170) must be reported by the Recipient to http://www.fsrs.gov no later than the end of the month following the month the obligation was made.

    (2) The Total Compensation of the Recipient's Executives (five most highly compensated executives) must be reported by the Recipient (if the Recipient meets the criteria under 2 CFR part 170) to http://www.sam.gov by the end of the month following the month in which the award was made.

    (3) The Total Compensation of the Subrecipient's Executives (five most highly compensated executives) must be reported by the Subrecipient (if the Subrecipient meets the criteria under 2 CFR part 170) to the Recipient by the end of the month following the month in which the sub-award was made. Further details regarding these requirements can be obtained at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title02/2cfr170_main_02.tpl.

    (d) Closeout.

    Grant closeout activities include a letter to the grantee with final instructions and reminders for amounts to be de-obligated for any unexpended grant funds, final project performance reports due, submission of outstanding deliverables, audit requirements, or other outstanding items of closure.

    (e) Report for Public Distribution.

    You must provide a report suitable for public distribution that describes the accomplishments made during this project. We may use this report as a success story to promote this program.

    G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts

    If you have questions about this Notice, please contact the State Office as identified in the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. You are also encouraged to visit the application Web site for application tools, including an application guide and templates. The Web site address is: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants.

    H. Other Information Nondiscrimination Statement

    USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

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

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

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

    Dated: August 28, 2015. Samuel H. Rikkers, Acting Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22546 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XY-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Commission Business Meeting.

    DATES:

    Date and Time: Friday, September 11, 2015; 10:00 a.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Place: 1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Suite 1150, Washington, DC.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591.

    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the briefing and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at [email protected] at least seven business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Meeting Agenda

    This meeting is open to the public.

    I. Approval of Agenda II. Program Planning • Status on Commission Reports and hiring of contractors by OCRE • Discussion on hearing dates for 2016 Statutory Enforcement Report • Discussion On Changing October 16 and November 6 Commission Business Meeting Dates • Discussion and vote on part A of Peaceful Coexistence report III. Management and Operations • Staff Director Report IV. State Advisory Committee (SAC) Appointments • Ohio V. Adjourn Meeting Dated: September 3, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22652 Filed 9-3-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission at Singapore Airshow; February 15-19, 2016 AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Mission Description

    The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration is organizing an Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission (AESTM) to Singapore in conjunction with the Singapore Airshow 2016 (http://www.singaporeairshow.com).

    The AESTM will include representatives from a variety of U.S. aerospace-industry manufacturers and service providers. The mission participants will be introduced to international agents, distributors and end-users whose capabilities are targeted to each participant's needs. This year a key mission goal is to recruit U.S. firms that have not previously participated in this AESTM to the Singapore Airshow.

    Mission participants will also be briefed by key local industry leaders who can advise on local market conditions and opportunities.

    In addition, the Commercial Service will offer its AsiaNow Showtime program during the Singapore Airshow, where mission participants can meet one-on-one with Commercial Service aerospace and defense industry specialists from various markets in Asia. The industry specialists will be on-hand to discuss market trends and opportunities in their respective markets.

    Mission Goals

    The mission's goal for the Aerospace Executive Service (AES) at the Singapore Airshow is to facilitate an effective presence for small to medium-sized U.S. companies without the major expenses associated with purchasing and staffing exhibition space. The AES will enable U.S. aerospace companies to familiarize themselves with this important air show, conduct market research, and explore export opportunities through pre-screened meetings with potential partners. It will give the U.S. companies a small presence at the show, with an office infrastructure environment and the support of knowledgeable U.S. Commercial Service staff focused on furthering company-specific objectives. This mission also seeks to recruit a minimum of six participants new to the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow.

    Mission Scenario

    Within the U.S. Pavilion at the 2016 Singapore Airshow, the Commercial Service will maintain a 66-square-meter booth that will include 48 square meters of kiosk space for the mission participants, where each participant may display company literature and conduct meetings with visitors to the air show, including buyer delegations from the Asia-Pacific region recruited by Commercial Service staff as part of the AsiaNow program. The Commercial Service booth will also house an area for meetings with Commercial Service staff and a Business Information Office (BIO) reception area (18 square meters). Commercial Service staff will be available to provide market information and offer logistical assistance to AESTM participants throughout the trade mission duration at the Singapore Airshow.

    • In summary, participation in the AESTM includes:

    • Pre-show breakfast briefing on February 15;

    • Daily transportation to and from the designated hotel and Singapore Airshow;

    • Pre-scheduled meetings with potential partners, distributors, and end users recruited by the Commercial Service;

    • One show entry pass per company representative;

    • Participation in U.S. Exhibitors Welcome Reception;

    • One invitation to the U.S. Ambassador's reception per participant;

    • Access to Official U.S. Pavilion/BIO amenities, including meeting area and shared business center when not in use for AsiaNow one-on-one appointments;

    • Individual kiosk space (4.0 m2) within the U.S. Pavilion for displaying company marketing materials and conducting meetings;

    • Copy of the official 2016 Singapore Airshow Exhibitor's Directory;

    • Meetings with Commercial Service aerospace and defense industry specialists from U.S. Embassies and Consulates across the Asia-Pacific region;

    • On-site logistical support by U.S. Commercial Service staff.

    Proposed Timetable Sunday, February 14, 2016 Arrival of AESTM participants Monday, February 15, 2016 Briefing at the designated hotel on country/regional market and AESTM event logistics One-on-one business matchmaking appointments Evening welcome reception for U.S. exhibitors Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Attend U.S. Pavilion opening with VIP delegates at Singapore Airshow Participate in Singapore Airshow Wednesday, February 17, 2016 Participate in Singapore Airshow Evening U.S. Ambassador's Reception Thursday, February 18-Friday, February 19, 2016 AsiaNow Showtime meetings, participants walk show floor, and conduct any follow-up meetings Friday afternoon AES Trade Mission participants' debrief with USCS staff Friday evening no host dinner (optional) Participation Requirements

    All parties interested in participating in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow must complete and submit an application package for consideration by the Department of Commerce. All applicants will be evaluated on their ability to meet certain conditions and best satisfy the selection criteria as outlined below. A maximum of 12 companies will be selected to participate in the mission from the applicant pool. As a condition of the Singapore Airshow organizer on Commercial Service use of booth space at this event, half of the mission participation (at least six participants) is reserved for companies that have not previously participated in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow. These will be selected on a first-come, first-served basis. The remaining participants, up to the maximum of 12, may include companies that have previously participated in the AESTM, also to be selected on a first-come, first-served basis. U.S. companies already doing business in Singapore or elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific region as well as U.S. companies seeking to enter those markets for the first time may apply.

    Fees and Expenses

    After a company has been selected to participate on the mission, a payment to the Department of Commerce in the form of a participation fee is required. The participation fee will be $9,400 for large firms and $8,700 for a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME).* The fee for each additional firm representative (large firm or SME) is $300. The participation fee is inclusive of registration for exhibiting at the Singapore Airshow. Expenses for travel to and from Singapore, lodging, meals, and incidentals will be the responsibility of each mission participant.

    * An SME is defined as a firm with 500 or fewer employees or that otherwise qualifies as a small business under SBA regulations (see http://www.sba.gov/services/contractingopportunities/sizestandardstopics/index.html). Parent companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries will be considered when determining business size. The dual pricing reflects the Commercial Service's user fee schedule that became effective May 1, 2008 (see http://www.export.gov/newsletter/march2008/initiatives.html for additional information).

    Conditions for Participation

    • An applicant must submit a completed and signed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on the company's products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation. The applicant must also state whether the company has previously participated in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow. If the Department of Commerce receives an incomplete application, the Department may reject the application, request additional information, or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the applications.

    • Each applicant must also certify that the products and services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least 51 percent U.S. content of the value of the finished product or service.

    • Each applicant's products must meet the Singapore Airshow trade fair rules, which can be found at http://www.singaporeairshow.com/exhibit-profile.html.

    Selection Criteria for Participation

    Selection will be based on the following criteria:

    • Suitability of the company's products or services to the Asia Pacific markets.

    • Applicant's potential for business in Asia Pacific, including likelihood of exports resulting from the mission.

    • Consistency of the applicant's goals and objectives with the stated scope of the mission.

    As explained above, as a condition of the Singapore Airshow organizer on Commercial Service use of booth space at this event, half of the mission participation (at least six participants) is reserved for companies that have not previously participated in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow. Previous participation in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow will be considered in making selection decisions for these six opportunities to participate. Previous experience will not be considered when selecting applicants for the remaining six opportunities.

    Referrals from political organizations and any documents containing references to partisan political activities (including political contributions) will be removed from an applicant's submission and not considered during the selection process.

    Timeframe for Recruitment and Applications

    Mission recruitment will be conducted in an open and public manner, including publication in the Federal Register and posting on the Commerce Department trade missions calendar—http://export.gov/trademissions/—and other Internet Web sites, publication in domestic trade publications and association newsletters, mailings from internal mailing lists, faxes to internal aerospace clients, emails to aerospace distribution lists, and promotion at industry meetings, symposia, conferences, trade shows, and other events. The ITA Aerospace and Defense Technology Team members in U.S. Export Assistance Centers will have the lead in recruiting the AESTM.

    Recruitment for the mission will begin immediately and conclude no later than November 30, 2015. The mission will open on a first-come, first-served basis, as outlined above in the Participation Requirements section. Applications received after November 30, 2015, will be considered only if space and scheduling constraints permit.

    Contacts

    Aerospace and Defense Technology Team: Jason Sproule, U.S. Export Assistance Center, 444 Flower Street, 37th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90071, Tel: (213) 894-8785, Email: [email protected]

    US and Foreign Commercial Service in Singapore: Hawcheng Ng, American Embassy, 27 Napier Road, Singapore 258508, Tel. 011-(65) 6476-9037, Fax 011-(65) 6476-9080, Email: [email protected]

    Frank Spector, Director (A), Trade Mission Office.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22072 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership Advisory Board AGENCY:

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announces that the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Advisory Board will hold an open meeting on Thursday September 24, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Central Time.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held Thursday, September 24, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Central Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hyatt Regency Dallas, 300 Reunion Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75207. Please note admittance instructions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kari Reidy, Manufacturing Extension Partnership, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-4800, telephone number (301) 975-4919, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The MEP Advisory Board (Board) is authorized under Section 3003(d) of the America COMPETES Act (Pub. L. 110-69); codified at 15 U.S.C. 278k(e), as amended, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. The Board is composed of 10 members, appointed by the Director of NIST. Hollings MEP is a unique program, consisting of centers across the United States and Puerto Rico with partnerships at the state, federal, and local levels. The Board provides a forum for input and guidance from Hollings MEP program stakeholders in the formulation and implementation of tools and services focused on supporting and growing the U.S. manufacturing industry, provides advice on MEP programs, plans, and policies, assesses the soundness of MEP plans and strategies, and assesses current performance against MEP program plans.

    Background information on the Board is available at http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm.

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the MEP Advisory Board will hold an open meeting on Thursday, September 24, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Central Time. This meeting will focus on updates from the Advisory Board Sub-committees on (1) Update on MEP Competition (2) Evaluation System (3) Updates from Board Subcommittees (4) Strategic Planning.

    The final agenda will be posted on the MEP Advisory Board Web site at http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm. This meeting is being held in conjunction with the MEP Update meeting that will be held September 23, 2015 also at the Hyatt Regency Dallas.

    Admittance Instructions: Anyone wishing to attend the MEP Advisory Board meeting should submit their name, email address and phone number to Kari Reidy ([email protected] or 301-975-4919) no later than Monday, September 14, 2015, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the MEP Advisory Board's business are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately 15 minutes will be reserved for public comments at the end of the meeting. Speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received but is likely to be no more than three to five minutes each. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the MEP Advisory Board Web site as http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the MEP Advisory Board, National Institute of Standards and Technology, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-4800, or via fax at (301) 963-6556, or electronically by email to [email protected]

    Richard Cavanagh, Acting Associate Director for Laboratory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22544 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE165 Pacific Islands Fisheries; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the Center for Independent Experts (CIE) will meet to review methods for assessing stocks in coral reef fisheries using information on fish length and life history.

    DATES:

    See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for meeting dates and times.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting location is in Room 208, Hemenway Hall, University of Hawaii, 2445 Campus Road, Honolulu, HI 96822.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christofer H. Boggs, (808) 725-5364, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meeting schedule and agenda are as follows:

    1. Tuesday, September 8, 2015 (9 a.m.-4 p.m.) • Introduction • Background information—Objectives and Terms of Reference • Fishery Operation and Management • Data—State of Hawaii System; Coral Reef Ecosystem Division surveys; biological data; other data • Panel Questions and Answers 2. Wednesday, September 9, 2015 (9 a.m.-4 p.m.) • Presentation and Review of Stock Assessment • Panel Questions and Answers 3. Thursday, September 10, 2015 (9 a.m.-4 p.m.) • Continue Assessment Review (1/2 day) • Panel Questions and Answers • Panel Discussions (Closed) 4. Friday, September 11, 2015 (9 a.m.-4 p.m.) • Panel Discussions (1/2 day) • Present Results (afternoon) • Adjourn

    The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come up at the meeting for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during the meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Direct requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids to Christofer Boggs, (808) 725-5364 or [email protected]

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Jennifer M. Wallace, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22536 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE135 Western Pacific Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene a half-day meeting on Friday, September 25, 2015 regarding social, economic, ecological, and management uncertainty (SEEM) factors pertinent to setting annual catch limits (ACLs) for bottomfish fisheries in American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Friday, September 25, 2015, starting at 1 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Council office, 1164 Bishop St., 14th Floor, Honolulu, HI 96813 and via teleconference; conference telephone: (808) 522-3560.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; telephone: (808) 522-8220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda Friday, September 25, 2015

    Following introductions, participants will review the overfishing limit for territorial bottomfish fisheries and the results of risk analyses that considered quality of the stock assessment, uncertainty characteristics, stock status, and productivity and susceptibility. Participants will then discuss social, economic, ecological, and management uncertainty factors relevant to these fisheries that may warrant the Council to consider additional catch limit reductions. Finally, individuals will score these factors and these scores will be averaged in order to reach consensus on a recommendation to the Council.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22540 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE133 Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of SEDAR 45 pre-workshop webinar for Gulf of Mexico Vermilion Snapper.

    SUMMARY:

    The SEDAR assessment of the Gulf of Mexico Vermilion Snapper will consist of one in-person workshop and a series of webinars. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    DATES:

    The SEDAR pre-Workshop webinar will be held September 25, 2015, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested in participating should contact Julie A. Neer at SEDAR (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) to request an invitation providing webinar access information. Please request webinar invitations at least 24 hours in advance of each webinar.

    SEDAR address: 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julie A. Neer, SEDAR Coordinator; (843) 571-4366; email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data/Assessment Workshop, and (2) a series of webinars. The product of the Data/Assessment Workshop is a report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses, and describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

    The items of discussion in the Assessment Process webinars are as follows: Panelists will present summary data, and discuss data needs and treatments.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10 business days prior to each workshop.

    Note: The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22539 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD978 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Rehabilitation of Jetty A at the Mouth of the Columbia River AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (the Corps) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, six species of marine mammals during activities related to the rehabilitation of Jetty A at the mouth of the Columbia River (MCR).

    DATES:

    This authorization is effective from May 1, 2016 through April 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability

    An electronic copy of the Corps' application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process by which citizens of the U.S. can apply for an authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS' review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the authorization. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as “any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].”

    Summary of Request

    On February 13, 2015 NMFS received an application from the Corps for the taking of marine mammals incidental to the rehabilitation of Jetty A at the MCR. On June 9, 2015 NMFS received a revised application. NMFS determined that the application was adequate and complete on June 12, 2015. The Corps proposes to conduct in-water work that may incidentally harass marine mammals (i.e., pile driving and removal). The use of vibratory pile driving is expected to produce underwater sound at levels that have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals. Species with the expected potential to be present during the project timeframe include killer whale (Orcinus orca), Steller sea lion (Eumatopius jubatus), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), and harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii).

    Description of the Specified Activity Overview

    The Corps is seeking an IHA for the first year of pile installation and, possibly, removal work at Jetty A related to construction and maintenance of a barge offloading facility. The barge facility will be used for activities associated with the rehabilitation of Jetty A. The Corps is seeking this authorization by the end of August 2015 for contract bid scheduling reasons.

    Dates and Duration

    Work on the first year of pile installation may begin as early as May 2016 and would extend through September 2017. Because the work may extend to two seasons the Corps has requested a Letter of Authorization (LOA) that would come into effect immediately after the IHA expires for the second year of pile maintenance and removal at Jetty A. The LOA would also cover rehabilitation work planned for the North and South Jetties.

    Specific Geographic Region

    This activity will take place at Jetty A at the MCR jetty system in Pacific County, Washington.

    Detailed Description of Activities

    We provided a description of the proposed action in our Federal Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (80 FR 43739; July 23, 2015). Please refer to that document; we provide only summary information here.

    The scheduled rehabilitation of Jetty A would occur as part of the Corps' Major Rehabilitation program for the MCR jetty system. During the first year of the project, operators would install and potentially remove up to 24 24-in steel piles and 93 sections of Z or H piles using a vibratory hammer. USACE expects those activities to take 17 days and would limit them to daylight hours only.

    Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the Federal Register on July 23, 2015 (80 FR 43739). During the 30-day public comment period, the Marine Mammal Commission submitted a letter. The letter is available on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. All comments specific to the Corps' application that address the statutory and regulatory requirements or findings NMFS must make to issue an IHA are addressed in this section of the Federal Register notice.

    Comment 1: The Commission recommends that a hydroacoustic monitoring plan be incorporated in subsequent years of activity under requested regulations, if and when issued. The Commission believes such a plan is prudent due to the types and sizes of piles to be installed and removed, the substrate of the environment, and the ambient sound and sound propagation loss associated with a river mouth opening into the open ocean.

    Response 1: NMFS agrees that a hydroacoustic monitoring plan would be valuable for defining potential injury and harassment zones during future years of the jetty rehabilitation project. There is very limited hydroacoustic data pertaining to the MCR. NMFS will work with the applicant to devise a monitoring plan during the next application cycle.

    Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    There are six marine mammal species known to occur in the vicinity of the MCR which may be subjected to Level B harassment. These are the killer whale, Steller sea lion, gray whale, harbor porpoise, California sea lion, and harbor seal.

    We have reviewed the Corps' detailed species descriptions, including life history information, for accuracy and completeness and refer the reader to Section 3 of the Corps' application as well as the proposed incidental harassment authorization published in the Federal Register (80 FR 43739) instead of reprinting the information here. Please also refer to NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals) for generalized species accounts which provide information regarding the biology and behavior of the marine resources that occur in the vicinity of the MCR. We provided additional information for the potentially affected stocks, including details of stock-wide status, trends, and threats, in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 43739).

    Table 1 lists marine mammal stocks that could occur in the vicinity of the Jetty A project that may be subject to Level B harassment and summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance. Taxonomically, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please see NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of these stocks' status and abundance.

    Table 1—List of Marine Mammal Species Under NMFS Jurisdiction That Occur in the Vicinity of the MCR Project Area * Species Stock(s)
  • abundance
  • estimate 1
  • ESA status MMPA * status Frequency of
  • occurrence 3
  • Killer Whale (Orcinus orca), Eastern N. Pacific, Southern Resident Stock 85 Endangered Depleted and Strategic Infrequent/Rare. Killer Whale (Orcinus orca), Eastern N. Pacific, West Coast Transient Stock 243 Non-depleted Rare. Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robustus), Eastern North Pacific Stock, (Pacific Coast Feed Group) 18,017 (173) Delisted/Recovered (1994) Non-depleted Rare. Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Northern Oregon/Washington Coast Stock 21,487 Non-depleted Likely. Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus), Eastern U.S. Stock/DPS** 63,160-78,198 Delisted/Recovered (2013) Depleted and Strategic 2 Likely. California Sea Lion (Zalophus californianus), U.S. Stock 296,750 Non-depleted Likely. Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), Oregon and Washington Stock 24,732 4 Non-depleted Seasonal. 1NOAA/NMFS 2014 marine mammal stock assessment reports at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. 2May be updated based on the recent delisting status. 3Frequency defined here in the range of: Rare—Few confirmed sightings, or the distribution of the species is near enough to the area that the species could occur there. Infrequent—Confirmed, but irregular sightings. Likely—Confirmed and regular sightings of the species in the area year-round. Seasonal—Confirmed and regular sightings of the species in the area on a seasonal basis. 4Data is 8 years old. No current abundance estimates exist. * MMPA = Marine Mammal Protection Act. ** DPS = Distinct population segment.
    Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    The Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 43739), incorporated here by reference, provides a general background on sound relevant to the specified activity as well as a detailed description of marine mammal hearing and of the potential effects of these construction activities on marine mammals.

    Anticipated Effects on Habitat

    We described potential impacts to marine mammal habitat in detail in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization. In summary, the project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may cause some fish to leave the area of disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range. Because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations

    Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, “and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking” for certain subsistence uses.

    Measurements from similar pile driving events were coupled with practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOI; see “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment”). ZOIs are often used to establish a mitigation zone around each pile (when deemed practicable) to prevent Level A harassment to marine mammals, and also provide estimates of the areas within which Level B harassment might occur. ZOIs may vary between different diameter piles and types of installation methods. The Corps will employ the following mitigation measures:

    (a) Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and the Corps' staff prior to the start of all pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.

    (b) For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving (using, e.g., standard barges, tug boats, barge-mounted excavators, or clamshell equipment used to place or remove material), if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. This type of work could include the following activities: (1) Movement of the barge to the pile location or (2) positioning of the pile on the substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile).

    Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving

    The following measures apply to the Corps' mitigation through shutdown and disturbance zones:

    Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving activities, the Corps will establish a shutdown zone. Shutdown zones are intended to contain the area in which SPLs equal or exceed the 180/190 dB rms acoustic injury criteria, with the purpose being to define an area within which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area), thus preventing injury of marine mammals. The estimated shutdown zone for Level A injury to cetaceans would be 1 meter. The Corps, however, would implement a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m radius for all marine mammals around all vibratory pile driving and removal activities. These precautionary measures are intended to further reduce the unlikely possibility of injury from direct physical interaction with construction operations.

    Disturbance Zone—Disturbance zones are the areas in which sound pressure levels (SPLs) equal or exceed 120 dB rms (for continuous sound) for pile driving installation and removal. Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area but outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring is for documenting incidents of Level B harassment. Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are shown in Table 2. The shutdown zone for Level B injury wound extend 7,356 meters from the sound source. Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile driving, it is impossible to guarantee that all animals would be observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale behavioral reactions to sound. We discuss monitoring objectives and protocols in greater depth in “Monitoring and Reporting.”

    Table 2—Calculated Area Encompassed Within Zone of Influence at MCR Jetties for Underwater Marine Mammal Sound Thresholds at Jetty A Jetty Underwater threshold Distance—m (mi) Area excluding land & jetty masses—km2 (mi2) Jetty A: ~ Station 78+50, River Side Vibratory driving, pinniped injury (190 dB) 0 0 Vibratory driving, cetacean injury (180 dB) 1 (3.3) <0.000003 (0.000001) Vibratory driving, disturbance (120 dB) 7,356 (4.6 miles) 23.63 (9.12)

    Time Restrictions—Work would occur only during daylight hours, when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In order minimize impact to Southern resident killer whales, in-water work will not be conducted during their primary feeding season extending from October 1 until on or after May 1. Installation could occur from May 1 through September 30 each year.

    In order to document observed incidents of harassment, observers record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven, is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from the pile and the estimated ZOIs for relevant activities (i.e., pile installation and removal). This information may then be used to extrapolate observed takes to reach an approximate understanding of actual total takes.

    Soft Start—The use of a soft start procedure is believed to provide additional protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically involves a requirement to initiate sound from the hammer at reduced energy followed by a waiting period. This procedure is repeated two additional times. It is difficult to specify the reduction in energy for any given hammer because of variation across drivers. The project will utilize soft start techniques for all vibratory pile driving. We require the Corps to initiate sound from vibratory hammers for fifteen seconds at reduced energy followed by a thirty-second waiting period, with the procedure repeated two additional times. Soft start will be required at the beginning of each day's pile driving work and at any time following a cessation of pile driving of 20 minutes or longer.

    Monitoring

    Monitoring Protocols—Monitoring would be conducted before, during, and after pile driving. In addition, observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the shutdown zone will not result in shutdown and that pile segment would be completed without cessation, unless the animal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, at which point all pile driving activities would be halted. Monitoring will take place from thirty minutes prior to initiation through thirty minutes post-completion of pile driving activities. Pile driving activities include the time to remove a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes.

    The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:

    (1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. One observer will be placed on or near the drilling rig near Jetty A while a second observer will be stationed on the opposite side of the observable zone of influence on Clatsop Spit. Qualified observers are trained biologists, with the following minimum qualifications:

    (a) Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target;

    (b) Advanced education in biological science or related field (undergraduate degree or higher required);

    (c) Experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience);

    (d) Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;

    (e) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations;

    (f) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from construction sound of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown zone; and marine mammal behavior; and

    (g) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary.

    (2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone will be monitored for 30 minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition) and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog, etc.).

    If waters exceed a sea-state which restricts the observers' ability to make observations within the marine mammal shutdown zone (e.g. excessive wind or fog), pile installation will cease. Pile driving will not be initiated until the entire shutdown zone is visible.

    The waters will be scanned 30 minutes prior to commencing pile driving at the beginning of each day, and prior to commencing pile driving after any stoppage of 30 minutes or greater. If marine mammals enter or are observed within the designated marine mammal shutdown zone during or 30 minutes prior to pile driving, the monitors will notify the on-site construction manager to not begin until the animal has moved outside the designated radius.

    If any marine mammal species are encountered during activities that are not listed in Table 1 for authorized taking and are likely to be exposed to sound pressure levels (SPLs) greater than or equal to 120 dB re 1mPa (rms), then the Holder of this Authorization must stop pile driving activities and report observations to NMFS' Office of Protected Resources at (301) 847-8401.

    If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during the course of vibratory pile driving operations, activity will be halted and delayed until the animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the contractor would wait 15 minutes for pinnipeds and 30 minutes for cetaceans. If no marine mammals are seen by the observer in that time it will be assumed that the animal has moved beyond the exclusion zone.

    Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time required to drive a pile.

    (3) Marine mammal presence within the Level B harassment zone will be monitored, but vibratory driving will not be stopped if marine mammals are found to be present. Any marine mammal documented within the Level B harassment zone during vibratory driving would constitute a Level B take (harassment), and will be recorded and reported as such.

    Mitigation Conclusions

    We have carefully evaluated the Corps' proposed mitigation measures and considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure for applicant implementation.

    Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of the general goals listed below:

    (1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).

    (2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only).

    (3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only).

    (4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only).

    (5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas, permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat during a biologically important time.

    (6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation, an increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation.

    Based on our evaluation of the Corps' proposed measures, including information from monitoring of implementation of mitigation measures very similar to those described here under previous IHAs from other marine construction projects, we have determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

    Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking”. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for incidental take authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.

    Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should improve our understanding of one or more of the following:

    (1) An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both within the mitigation zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;

    (2) An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are likely to be exposed to levels of pile driving that we associate with specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or PTS;

    (3) An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the following methods:

    Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

    Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

    Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;

    (4) An increased knowledge of the affected species; and

    (5) An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain mitigation and monitoring measures.

    The Corps consulted with NMFS to create a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the IHA application for this project.

    Visual Marine Mammal Observations

    • Two individuals meeting the minimum qualifications previously identified will monitor the marine mammal buffer area and Level B harassment zones during vibratory pile. Monitors will be stationed on the drilling rig or Jetty A as well as on Clatsop Spit.

    • During vibratory pile driving, the area within 10 meters of pile driving activity will be monitored and maintained as a marine mammal buffer area in which pile installation will not commence or will be suspended temporarily if any marine mammals are observed within or approaching the area of potential disturbance. The Level B harassment area will be monitored by 2 observers at locations listed above. The monitoring staff will record any presence of marine mammals by species, will document any behavioral responses noted, and record Level B takes when sightings overlap with pile installation activities.

    • The individuals will scan the waters within each monitoring zone activity using binoculars (Vector 10X42 or equivalent), spotting scopes (Swarovski 20-60 zoom or equivalent), and visual observation.

    • The area within which the Level B harassment thresholds could be exceeded during vibratory pile driving will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals. Marine mammal presence within these zones, if any, will be monitored but pile driving activity will not be stopped if marine mammals were found to be present. Any marine mammal documented within the Level B harassment zone will constitute a Level B take, and will be recorded and used to document the number of take incidents.

    • If waters exceed a sea-state which restricts the observers' ability to make observations within the marine mammal buffer zone (e.g. excessive wind or fog), pile installation will cease until conditions allow the resumption of monitoring.

    • The waters will be scanned for 30 minutes before, during, and 30 minutes after any and all pile driving and removal activities.

    • If marine mammals enter or are observed within the designated marine mammal buffer zone (10 m) during or 30 minutes prior to pile driving, the monitors will notify the on-site construction manager to not begin until the animal has moved outside the designated radius.

    • If a marine mammal approaches the shutdown zone prior to initiation of pile driving, the Corps cannot commence activities until the marine mammal (a) is observed to have left the Level A harassment zone or (b) has not been seen or otherwise detected within the Level A harassment zone for 30 minutes.

    • The waters will continue to be scanned for at least 30 minutes after pile driving has completed each day, and after each stoppage of 30 minutes or greater.

    Data Collection

    We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other pieces of information, the Corps will record detailed information about any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the Corps will attempt to distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the number of incidents of take. We require that, at a minimum, the following information be collected on the sighting forms:

    • Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;

    • Construction activities occurring during each observation period;

    • Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);

    • Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);

    • Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals;

    • Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile driving activity;

    • Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;

    • Locations of all marine mammal observations; and

    • Other human activity in the area.

    Reporting

    The Corps will notify NMFS prior to the initiation of the pile driving activities. The Corps will provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 90 days of the conclusion of the proposed construction work. This report will detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft final report will constitute the final report. If comments are received, a final report must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments.

    Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as: “. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].”

    All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment resulting from vibratory pile driving/removal and involving temporary changes in behavior. Injurious or lethal takes are not expected due to the expected source levels and sound source characteristics associated with the activity, and the planned mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to further minimize the possibility of such take.

    Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types of impacts of sound in every given situation on marine mammals, it is common practice to estimate how many animals are likely to be present within a particular distance of a given activity, or exposed to a particular level of sound, based on the available science.

    This practice potentially overestimates the numbers of marine mammals taken for stationary activities, as it is likely that some smaller number of individuals may accrue a number of incidences of harassment per individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new individual, especially if those individuals display some degree of residency or site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g., because of foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence presented by the harassing activity.

    The Corps requested authorization for the incidental taking of small numbers of killer whale, Gray whale, harbor porpoise, Steller sea lion, California sea lion, and harbor seal near the MCR project area that may result from vibratory pile driving and removal during construction activities associated with the rehabilitation of Jetty A at the MCR.

    In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur incidental to the specified activity, we must first estimate the extent of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then consider in combination with information about marine mammal density or abundance in the project area. We provided detailed information on applicable sound thresholds for determining effects to marine mammals as well as describing the information used in estimating the sound fields, the available marine mammal density or abundance information, and the method of estimating potential incidences of take, in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 43739; July 23, 2015).

    Table 2 above illustrated that during vibratory driving the120 dB Level B harassment threshold could be exceeded at 7,356 meters. Note that the actual area ensonified by pile driving activities is significantly constrained by local topography relative to the identified threshold radii.

    The method used for calculating potential exposures to vibratory pile driving noise for each threshold was estimated using local marine mammal data sets, the Biological Opinion, best professional judgment from state and federal agencies, and data from IHA estimates on similar projects with similar actions. All estimates are conservative and include the following assumptions:

    • During construction, each species could be present in the project area each day. The potential for a take is based on a 24-hour period. The model assumes that there can be one potential take (Level B harassment exposure) per individual per 24-hours.

    • All pilings installed at each site would have an underwater noise disturbance equal to the piling that causes the greatest noise disturbance (i.e., the piling furthest from shore) installed with the method that has the largest ZOI. The largest underwater disturbance ZOI would be produced by vibratory driving steel piles. The ZOIs for each threshold are not spherical and are truncated by land masses which would dissipate sound pressure waves.

    • Exposures were based on an estimated 17 days of in-water work.

    In absence of site specific underwater acoustic propagation modeling, the practical spreading loss model was used to determine the ZOI.

    Southern resident killer whales have been observed offshore near the study area and ZOI, but the Corps does not have fine-scale details on frequency of use. While killer whales do occur in the Columbia River plume, where fresh water from the river intermixes with salt water from the ocean, they are rarely seen in the interior of the Columbia River Jetty system. The ensonified area associated with the proposed action at Jetty A does not extend out into the open ocean where killer whales are likely to be found. Furthermore, the Corps has limited its pile installation window in order to avoid peak salmon runs and any overlap with the presence of Southern residents. To ensure no Level B acoustical harassment occurs, the Corps will restrict pile installation from October 1 until April 30 of each season. However, this restriction was enacted primarily for construction work at the North and South jetties, where the ensonified zone will radiate out towards the open ocean. As such NMFS is not anticipating any acoustic exposure to Southern residents. Also note that in the 2011 Biological Opinion, NMFS issued a not likely to adversely affect determination. Therefore, NMFS has determined that authorization of take for Southern residents is not warranted.

    Western Transient killer whales may be traversing offshore over a greater duration of time than the feeding resident. They are rarely observed inside of the jetty system. The Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) stratum model under the Marine Animal Monitor Model provides an estimated density of 0.00070853 animals per km2for summer killer whales for areas near MCR, which may provide a surrogate proxy value for assuming possible densities near the jetties (Barlow et al. 2009, Halpin et al. 2009 at OBIS-SEAMAP). Given anecdotal evidence (Griffith 2015) and sightings recorded on the OBIS network from surveys done in 2005 (Halpin et al. 2009, OBIS-SEAMAP 2015), this density may be appropriate for the MCR vicinity.

    The following formula was used to calculate exposure using

    Exposure Estimate = (0.000708DensityEstimate * 23.63ZOI Jetty A * 17days) = 0.28 killer whale exposures

    Where:

    NDensityEstimate = Represents estimated density of species within the 4.6-mile radius (23.63 km2) encompassing the ZOI at Jetty A; using the density model suggested by NOAA (2015), this equates to 0.000708 animals per km2(Barlow et al. 2009). Days = Total days of pile installation or removal activity (~17 days)

    Given the low density and rare occurrence of transient killer whales in the ZOI, exposure of feeding or transient killer whales to Level B acoustical harassment from pile driving is unlikely to occur. However, NMFS proposes to authorize take of small number due to the remote chance that transient orcas remain in the vicinity to feed on pinnipeds that frequent the haulouts at the South Jetty.

    NMFS believes that an authorized take of 8 transients is warranted because solitary killer whales are rarely observed, and transient whales travel in pods of 2-15 members. NMFS has assumed a pod size of 8.

    Based on anecdotal information and sightings between 2006 and 2011 (Halpin et al. 2009 at OBIS SEAMAP 2015), gray whales may be in the proximity of the proposed action area and exposed to underwater acoustic disturbances. However, no data exists that is specific to presence and numbers in the MCR vicinity and gray whale density estimates were not available on the SERDP or OBIS-SEAMAP web model sites. Anecdotal evidence also indicates gray whales have been seen at MCR, but are not a common visitor, as they mostly remain in the vicinity of the further offshore shelf-break (Griffith 2015). According to NOAA's Cetacean Mapping classification of the MCR vicinity pertaining to gray whale use, its Biologically Important Area categorization is indicated as a migration corridor (http://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map). As primarily bottom feeders, gray whales are the most coastal of all great whales; they primarily feed in shallow continental shelf waters and live much of their lives within a few tens of kilometers of shore (Barlow et. al. 2009 on OBIS—SEAMAP 2015).

    The Pacific Coast Feeding Group or northbound summer migrants would be the most likely gray whales to be in the vicinity of MCR. Since no information pertaining to gray whale densities could be identified, NMFS elected to apply proxy data for estimating densities. As a proxy, data pertinent to humpback whales (0.0039 animals per km2) was selected because both are baleen species found near the MCR vicinity for the same purposes (as a migration route or temporary feeding zone). However, the number of estimated exposures at Jetty A was increased to account for the fact that gray whales are more likely to be in the nearshore environment than humpback whales. This increase was proposed strictly as a conservative assumption to acknowledge the distinct preference gray whales may have over humpbacks for nearshore feeding.

    The following formula was used to calculate exposure:

    Exposure Estimate = (0.0039DensityEstimate * 23.63ZOI Jetty A * 17days) + 1 = 1.56 gray whale exposures

    Migrating gray whales often travel in groups of 2, although larger pods do occur. For gray whales, NMFS believes 4 Level B authorized takes is reasonable.

    Harbor porpoises are known to occupy shallow, coastal waters and, therefore, are likely to be found in the vicinity of the MCR. They are known to occur within the proposed project area, however, density data for this region is unavailable (Griffith 2015).

    The SWFSC stratum model under the Marine Animal Monitor Model provides an estimated density per km2 of year-round porpoises for areas near northern California, which may provide a surrogate proxy value for assuming possible densities near the jetties. Though not in the project vicinity, the range of 3.642 animals/km2(Barlow et al. 2009, Halpin et al. 2009) is a relatively high density compared to values moving even further south along the model boundaries, for which the northern-most extent ends in California. Given anecdotal evidence (Griffith 2015) and sightings recorded on the OBIS network from surveys done between 1989 and 2005, (Halpin et al. 2009, OBIS-SEAMAP 2015), this higher density may be appropriate for the MCR vicinity, or may be conservative.

    The formula previously described was used to arrive at a take estimate for harbor porpoise.

    Exposure Estimate = (3.642DensityEstimate * 23.63ZOI Jetty A * 17days) = 1,464.

    Based on the density model suggested by NOAA (2015), the Corps has provided a very conservative maximum estimate of 1,464 harbor porpoise disturbance exposures over the 17 days of operation. However, this number of potential exposures does not accurately reflect the actual number of animals that would potentially be taken for the MCR jetty project. Rather, it is more likely that the same pod may be exposed more than once during the 17-day operating window. The highest estimated number of animals exposed on any single day based on the modeled proxy density (Barlow et al. 2009 at SERDP) and the jetty with the greatest ZOI is 193 animals (from South Jetty Channel). While the number of pods in the vicinity of the MCR is unknown, the size of the pods is usually assumed to be significantly smaller than 193 animals. According to OBIS-SEAMAP (2015 and Halpin et al. 2009), the normal range of group size generally consists of less than five or six individuals, though aggregations into large, loose groups of 50 to several hundred animals could occur for feeding or migration. Because the ZOI only extends for a maximum of 7,256 meters (4.6 miles), it may also be assumed that due to competition and territorial circumstances only a limited number of pods would be feeding in the ZOI at any particular time. If the modeled density calculations are assumed, then this means anywhere from 32 small pods to 2 large, 100-animal pods might be feeding during every day of pile installation. Given these values seem an unrealistic representation of use and pod densities within any one of the ZOIs, NMFS is proposing an alternative calculation.

    NMFS conservatively assumed that a single, large feeding pod of 50 animals forms within the ZOI for Jetty A on each day of pile installation. Though this is likely much higher than actual use by multiple pods in the vicinity, it more realistically represents a worst-case scenario for the number of animals that could potentially be affected by the proposed work. This calculation also assumes that it is a new pod of individuals would be affected on each installation day, which is also unlikely given pod residency. Therefore, NMFS is permitting a Level B take for 850 animals.

    There are haulout sites on the South Jetty used by pinnipeds, especially Steller sea lions. It is likely that pinnipeds that use the haulout area in would be exposed to 120 dB threshold acoustic threshold during pile driving activities. The number of exposures would vary based on weather conditions, season, and daily fluctuations in abundance. Based on a survey by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) the number of affected Steller sea lions could be between 200-800 animals per month; California sea lion numbers could range from 1 to 500 per month and the number of harbor seals could be as low as 1 to as high as 57 per month. Exposure and take estimates below are based on past pinniped data from WDFW (2000-2014 data), which had a more robust monthly sampling frequency relative to Oregon Department of Fish &Wildlife (ODFW) counts. The exception to this was for harbor seal counts, for which ODFW (also 2000-2014 data) had more sampling data in certain months. Therefore, ODFW harbor seal data was used for the months of May and July. Exposure estimates are much higher than take estimates. This is because unlike the exposure estimate which assumes all new individuals, the take estimate request assumes that some of the same individuals will remain in the area and be exposed multiple times during the short 17-day installation period to complete and remove each offloading facility (for a total of about 68 days). NMFS examined the estimated monthly average number of animals from 2000-2014 hauled on South Jetty during May and June, which are the most likely months for pile installation as is shown in Table 3. There are no anticipated airborne exposures since the main haul out sites are not in close proximity to Jetty A. Note that the formula used by NMFS is different than that employed by the Corps in their application as NMFS is only analyzing potential impacts associated with Jetty A. To reiterate, these exposure estimates assume a new individual is exposed every day throughout each acoustic disturbance, for the entire duration of the project.

    Exposure EstimateStellar = (Nest(May+June/2) * 17underwater/piles days) = 12,750 Steller sea lions Exposure EstimateCalifornia = (Nest(May+June/2) * 17underwater/piles days) = 2,788 CA sea lions Exposure EstimateHarbor = (Nest(May+June/2) * 17underwater/piles days)= 493 Harbor porpoises Where: Nest = Estimated daily average number of animals for May and June hauled out at South Jetty based on WDFW data. Duration = total days of pile installation or removal activity for underwater thresholds (17); Table 3—Authorized Takes of Pinnipeds During Pile Installation at Jetty A Month Steller
  • sea lion
  • Avg 1
  • #
  • California
  • sea lion
  • Avg 1
  • #
  • Harbor
  • seal
  • Avg 12
  • #
  • April 587 99 May 824 125 0 June 676 202 57 July 358 1 10 August 324 115 1 September 209 249 October 384 508 Avg Daily Count (May+June/2) 3 750 164 29 Total Exposures over Duration 4 (17 days) 12,750 2,788 493 1 WDFW average daily count per month from 2000-2014. 2 ODFW average daily count per month for May and July 2000-2014 due to additional available sampling data. 3 Conservatively assumes each exposure is to new individual, all individuals are new arrivals each month, and no individual is exposed more than one time. 4 Assumed 17 pile installation/removal days.
    Analyses and Determinations Negligible Impact Analysis

    Negligible impact is “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival” (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes, alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through behavioral harassment, NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the status of the species.

    To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analyses applies to all the species listed in Table 4 given that the anticipated effects of this pile driving project on marine mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no information about the size, status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a different analysis for this activity, else species-specific factors would be identified and analyzed.

    Pile driving activities associated with the rehabilitation of Jetty A at the mouth of the Columbia River, as outlined previously, have the potential to disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the planned activities may result in take, in the form of Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from pile driving. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these species are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving is happening.

    No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the nature of the activity and measures designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for these outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically, vibratory hammers will be the only method of installation utilized. No impact driving is planned. Vibratory driving does not have significant potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the relatively low source levels produced (site-specific acoustic monitoring data show no source level measurements above 180 dB rms) and the lack of potentially injurious source characteristics. The likelihood that marine mammal detection ability by trained observers is high under the environmental conditions described for the rehabilitation of Jetty A at MCR further enables the implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury, serious injury, or mortality.

    The Corps' proposed activities are localized and of short duration. The entire project area is limited to the Jetty A area and its immediate surroundings. Actions covered under the Authorization would include installing a maximum of 24 piles for use as dolphins and a maximum of 93 sections of Z or H piles for retention of rock fill over 17 days. The piles would be a maximum diameter of 24 inches and would only be installed by vibratory driving method. The possibility exists that smaller diameter piles may be used but for this analysis it is assumed that 24 inch piles will be driven.

    These localized and short-term noise exposures may cause brief startle reactions or short-term behavioral modification by the animals. These reactions and behavioral changes are expected to subside quickly when the exposures cease. Moreover, the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to reduce potential exposures and behavioral modifications even further. Additionally, no important feeding and/or reproductive areas for marine mammals are known to be near the proposed action area. Therefore, the take resulting from the proposed project is not reasonably expected to and is not reasonably likely to adversely affect the marine mammal species or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

    The project also is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in the “Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat” section. The project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may cause some fish to leave the area of disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences.

    Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; Lerma, 2014). Most likely, individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile driving. In response to vibratory driving, pinnipeds (which may become somewhat habituated to human activity in industrial or urban waterways) have been observed to orient towards and sometimes move towards the sound. The pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than, numerous construction activities conducted in other similar locations, which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are unlikely to result in hearing impairment or to significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in fitness for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment will be reduced to the level of least practicable impact through use of mitigation measures described herein and, if sound produced by project activities is sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply avoid the project area while the activity is occurring.

    In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior and; (3) the presumed efficacy of the proposed mitigation measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level of least practicable impact. In combination, we believe that these factors, as well as the available body of evidence from other similar activities, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified activity will have only short-term effects on individuals. The specified activity is not expected to impact rates of recruitment or survival and will therefore not result in population-level impacts.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the Corps' rehabilitation of Jetty A at MCR will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

    Table 4—Estimated Percentage of Species/Stocks That May Be Exposed to Level B Harassment Species Total proposed authorized takes Abundance Percentage of total stock Killer whale (Western transient stock) 8 243 3.2 Gray whale (Eastern North Pacific Stock) 4 18,017 <0.01 Harbor porpoise 850 21,487 3.9 Steller sea lion 12,750 63,160-78,198 20.2-16.3-1.0 California sea lion 2,788 296,750 0.01 Harbor seal 493 24,732 2.0 Small Numbers Analysis

    Table 4 illustrates the number of animals that could be exposed to received noise levels that could cause Level B behavioral harassment for the proposed work associated with the rehabilitation of Jetty A at MCR. The analyses provided above represents between <0.01%—20.9% of the populations of these stocks that could be affected by Level B behavioral harassment. The numbers of animals authorized to be taken for all species would be considered small relative to the relevant stocks or populations even if each estimated taking occurred to a new individual—an extremely unlikely scenario. For pinnipeds occurring in the vicinity of Jetty A, there will almost certainly be overlap in individuals present day-to-day, and these takes are likely to occur only within some small portion of the overall regional stock.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, which are expected to reduce the number of marine mammals potentially affected by the proposed action, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks.

    Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses

    There are no subsistence uses of marine mammals in the proposed project area; and, thus, no subsistence uses impacted by this action.

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    There are two marine mammal species that are listed as endangered under the ESA with confirmed or possible occurrence in the study area: humpback whale and Southern resident killer whale. For the purposes of this IHA, NMFS determined that take of Southern resident killer whales was highly unlikely given the rare occurrence of these animals in the project area. A similar conclusion was reached for humpback whales. On March 18, 2011, NMFS signed a Biological Opinion concluding that the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of humpback whales and may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Southern resident killer whales.

    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    The Corps issued the Final Environmental Assessment Columbia River at the Mouth, Oregon and Washington Rehabilitation of the Jetty System at the Mouth of the Columbia River and Finding of No Significant Impact in 2011. The environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant interest (FONSI) were revised in 2012 with a FONSI being signed on July 26, 2012. NMFS has adopted the findings of the 2012 FONSI.

    Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to the Corps for conducting the described activities related to the rehabilitation of Jetty A at the MCR from May 1, 2016 through April 30, 2017 provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. Perry Gayaldo, Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22069 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0090] Defense Personal Property Program (DP3) AGENCY:

    United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD has developed a Concept of Operations (CONOPS) to test expansion of the personal property volume move criteria to include select high-volume channel/traffic lanes. Under the pilot test, personal property shipments will be awarded both directions (to/from) by the responsible origin/destination Joint Personal Property Shipping Office (JPPSO) on the participating pilot lanes. The CONOPS was developed utilizing general traffic management principles in concert with the Defense Transportation Regulation (DTR) Part IV (DTR 4500.9R), and Government household goods tariff (400NG) (as amended).

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Do not submit comments directly to the point of contact under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or mail your comments to any address other than what is shown in this section. Doing so will delay the posting of the submission. 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 and docket number 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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Jim Teague, United States Transportation Command, TCJ5/4-PI, 508 Scott Drive, Scott Air Force Base, IL 62225-5357; (618) 220-4803.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The pilot test CONOPS is available for review and comment on the USTRANSCOM Web site at http://www.transcom.mil/dtr/coord/coordpartivfrn.cfm. Request comments be submitted using the downloadable comment-matrix-format posted with the CONOPS. In furtherance of DoD's goal to develop and implement an efficient personal property program to facilitate quality movements for our military members and civilian employees, all business rules are developed in concert with the Military Services and Surface Deployment and Distribution Command.

    Any subsequent modification(s) to the business rules will be published in the Federal Register and incorporated into the Defense Transportation Regulation (DTR) Part IV (DTR 4500.9R). The Government shall comply with the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 644(a). These program requirements do not impose a legal requirement, obligation, sanction or penalty on the public sector, and will not have an economic impact of $100 million or more.

    Additional Information

    A complete version of the DTR is available via the Internet on the USTRANSCOM homepage at http://www.transcom.mil/dtr/part-iv/.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD <E T="03">Federal Register</E> Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22524 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce a Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel (hereafter referred to as the Panel).

    DATES:

    Wednesday, September 30, 2015, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Naval Heritage Center Theater, 701 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    CAPT Edward Norton, DFO, Uniform Formulary Beneficiary Advisory Panel, 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 5101, Falls Church, VA 22042-5101. Telephone: (703) 681-2890. Fax: (703) 681-1940. Email Address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (Title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.), Appendix, as amended) and the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended).

    Purpose of Meeting: The Panel will review and comment on recommendations made to the Director of Defense Health Agency, by the Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee, regarding the Uniform Formulary.

    Meeting Agenda 1. Sign-In 2. Welcome and Opening Remarks 3. Public Citizen Comments 4. Scheduled Therapeutic Class Reviews (Comments will follow each agenda item) a. Diabetes Non-Insulin (GLP-1 Receptor Agonists) b. Diabetes Non-Insulin (SGLT-2 Inhibitors) c. Narcotics Analgesics—Long Acting d. Oral Oncological Agents—CML Drugs 5. Designated Newly Approved Drugs in Already-Reviewed Classes 6. Pertinent Utilization Management Issues 7. Panel Discussions and Vote

    Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Seating is limited and will be provided only to the first 220 people signing-in. All persons must sign-in legibly.

    Administrative Work Meeting: Prior to the public meeting, the Panel will conduct an Administrative Work Meeting from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. to discuss administrative matters of the Panel. The Administrative Work Meeting will be held at the Naval Heritage Center, 701 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.160, the Administrative Work Meeting will be closed to the public.

    Written Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the membership of the Panel at any time or in response to the stated agenda of a planned meeting. Written statements should be submitted to the Panel's Designated Federal Officer (DFO). The DFO's contact information can be obtained from the General Services Administration's Federal Advisory Committee Act Database at http://facadatabase.gov/.Written statements that do not pertain to the scheduled meeting of the Panel may be submitted at any time. However, if individual comments pertain to a specific topic being discussed at a planned meeting, then these statements must be submitted no later than 5 business days prior to the meeting in question. The DFO will review all submitted written statements and provide copies to all the committee members.

    Public Comments: In addition to written statements, the Panel will set aside 1 hour for individuals or interested groups to address the Panel. To ensure consideration of their comments, individuals and interested groups should submit written statements as outlined in this notice; but if they still want to address the Panel, then they will be afforded the opportunity to register to address the Panel. The Panel's DFO will have a “Sign-Up Roster” available at the Panel meeting for registration on a first-come, first-serve basis. Those wishing to address the Panel will be given no more than 5 minutes to present their comments, and at the end of the 1 hour time period, no further public comments will be accepted. Anyone who signs-up to address the Panel, but is unable to do so due to the time limitation, may submit their comments in writing; however, they must understand that their written comments may not be reviewed prior to the Panel's deliberation.

    To ensure timeliness of comments for the official record, the Panel encourages that individuals and interested groups consider submitting written statements instead of addressing the Panel.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22068 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities AGENCY:

    President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Office of Undersecretary, U.S. Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of an open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the agenda for the September 23, 2015, meeting of the President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (PBA) and provides information to members of the public on submitting written comments and on the process as to how to request time to make oral comments at the meeting. The notice also describes the functions of the Board. Notice of the meeting is required by § 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and intended to notify the public of its opportunity to attend.

    DATES:

    The PBA meeting will be held on September 23, 2015, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. E.D.T. at the Washington Marriott Wardman Park, 2660 Woodley Road NW., Washington, DC 20008, in the Wilson Rooms (Mezzanine Level).

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Department of Education, White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sedika Franklin, Program Specialist, U.S. Department of Education, White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20204; telephone: (202) 453-5634 or (202) 453-5630, fax: (202) 453-5632, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    PBA's Statutory Authority and Function: The President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (the Board) is established by Executive Order 13532 (February 26, 2010) and subsequently continued by Executive Order 13652, which was signed by the President on September 30, 2013. The Board is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), (Pub.L 92-463; as amended, 5 U.S.C.A., Appendix 2) which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees. The purpose of the Board is to advise the President and the Secretary of Education (Secretary) on all matters pertaining to strengthening the educational capacity of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).

    The Board shall advise the President and the Secretary in the following areas: (i) Improving the identity, visibility, and distinctive capabilities and overall competitiveness of HBCUs; (ii) engaging the philanthropic, business, government, military, homeland-security, and education communities in a national dialogue regarding new HBCU programs and initiatives; (iii) improving the ability of HBCUs to remain fiscally secure institutions that can assist the nation in reaching its goal of having the highest proportion of college graduates by 2020; (iv) elevating the public awareness of HBCUs; and (v) encouraging public-private investments in HBCUs.

    Meeting Agenda: In addition to its review of activities prior to September 23, 2015, the meeting agenda will include Chairman William R. Harvey's report on HBCU issues and concerns; Acting Executive Director, Ivory A. Toldson will provide an update on current priorities of the White House Initiative on HBCUs to include planning strategies and initiatives beyond the 2015 HBCU Week Conference and an update on the 2014 Report to the President on the Results of the Participation of Historically Black Colleges and Universities in Federal Programs; David Johns, Executive Director of the White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans will discuss the joint meeting requirement for the President's Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for African Americans and the Board; and Chairman Harvey will lead a conversation regarding the re-focus of Board subcommittees.

    Below is a list of agencies, invited to provide updates on fiscal year 2015 activities and outreach during the September 23, 2015 meeting:

    • National Science Foundation

    • U.S. Department of Transportation

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture

    • U.S. Social Security Administration

    Submission of requests to make an oral comment: There are two methods the public may use to make an oral comment at the September 23, 2015 meeting.

    Method One: Submit a request by email to the [email protected] mailbox. Please do not send material directly to PBA members. Requests must be received by September 17, 2015. Include in the subject line of the email request “Oral Comment Request: (organization name).” The email must include the name(s), title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, telephone number, of the person(s) requesting to speak, and a brief summary (not to exceed one page) of the principal points to be made during the oral presentation. All individuals submitting an advance request in accordance with this notice will be afforded an opportunity to speak for three minutes.

    Method Two: Register at the meeting location on September 23, 2015, to make an oral comment during the PBA's deliberations concerning Historically Black Colleges and Universities. The requestor must provide his or her name, title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, and telephone number. Individuals will be selected on a first-come, first-served basis. If selected, each commenter will have an opportunity to speak for three minutes.

    All oral comments made will become part of the official record of the Board. Similarly, written materials distributed during oral presentations will become part of the official record of the meeting.

    Submission of written public comments: The Board invites written comments, which will be read during the Public Comment segment of the agenda. Comments must be received by September 17, 2015, in the [email protected] mailbox, include in the subject line “Written Comments: Public Comment”. The email must include the name(s), title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, and telephone number, of the person(s) making the comment. Comments should be submitted as a Microsoft Word document or in a medium compatible with Microsoft Word (not a PDF file) that is attached to an electronic mail message (email) or provided in the body of an email message. Please do not send material directly to the PBA members.

    Access to Records of the Meeting: The Department will post the official report of the meeting on the PBA Web site 90 days after the meeting. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the public may also inspect the materials at 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC, by emailing [email protected] or by calling (202) 453-5634 to schedule an appointment.

    Reasonable Accommodations: The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. If you will need an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in an alternate format), notify the contact person listed in this notice at least one week before the meeting date. Although we will attempt to meet a request received after that date, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

    Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Authority:

    Presidential Executive Order 13532, continued by Executive Order 13652.

    Ted Mitchell, Under Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22541 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Advisory Board Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, September 30, 2015, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Key Bridge Marriott, 1404 Lee Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22209.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kristen G. Ellis, Designated Federal Officer, EMAB (EM-3.2), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. Phone (202) 586-5810; fax (202) 586-0293 or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of EMAB is to provide the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM) with advice and recommendations on corporate issues confronting the EM program. EMAB contributes to the effective operation of the program by providing individual citizens and representatives of interested groups an opportunity to present their views on issues facing EM and by helping to secure consensus recommendations on those issues.

    Tentative Agenda Topics:

    • EM Program Update and Discussion of Board Work Plans

    Public Participation: EMAB welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Kristen G. Ellis at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number or email address listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda should contact Kristen G. Ellis at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Kristen G. Ellis at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following Web site: http://energy.gov/em/services/communication-engagement/environmental-management-advisory-board-emab.

    Issued at Washington, DC. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22534 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Proposed Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, intends to extend for three years an information collection request with the Office of Management and Budget. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the extended collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of DOE, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of DOE's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (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.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before November 9, 2015. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Desk Officer for the Department of Energy, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 735 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. And to Mr. Dennis Smith, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE-3V), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, or by fax at 202-586-1600, or by email at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Dennis Smith at the address listed above in ADDRESSES.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DOE is proposing to extend an information collection pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The approved collection is being used for two Clean Cities programmatic efforts. The first is related to a scorecard that assists DOE's Clean Cities coalitions and stakeholders in assessing the level of readiness of their communities for plug-in electric vehicles (PEV). The second effort is intended to develop information that enables DOE to measure the impact and progress of DOE's National Clean Fleets Partnership (Partnership). DOE is not proposing to expand the scope of these information collection efforts.

    This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No. 1910-5171; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Clean Cities Vehicle Programs; (3) Type of Review: Renewal; (4) Purpose: DOE's Clean Cities initiative has developed two voluntary mechanisms by which communities and certain fleets can get a better understanding of their readiness to deploy alternative fuel vehicles and their progress in doing so. The voluntary PEV Scorecard is intended to assist its coalitions and stakeholders in assessing the level of readiness of their communities for plug-in electric vehicles. The principal objective of the scorecard is to provide respondents with an objective assessment and estimate of their respective community's readiness for PEV deployment as well as understand the respective community's commitment to deploying these vehicles successfully. DOE intends the scorecard to be completed by a city/county/regional sustainability or energy coordinator. As the intended respondent may not be aware of every aspect of local or regional PEV readiness, coordination among local stakeholders to gather appropriate information may be necessary.

    DOE expects a total respondent population of approximately 1,250 respondents. Selecting the multiple choice answers in completing a scorecard questionnaire is expected to take under 30 minutes, although additional time of no more than 20 hours may be needed to assemble information necessary to be able to answer the questions, leading to a total burden of approximately 25,625 hours. Assembling information to update questionnaire answers in the future on a voluntary basis would be expected to take less time, on the order of 10 hours, as much of any necessary time and effort needed to research information would have been completed previously.

    For the Clean Fleets Partnership information collection, the Partnership is targeted at large, private-sector fleets that own or have contractual control over at least 50 percent of their vehicles and have vehicles operating in multiple States. DOE expects approximately 50 fleets to participate in the Partnership and, as a result, DOE expects a total respondent population of approximately 50 respondents. Providing initial baseline information for each participating fleet, which occurs only once, is expected to take 60 minutes. Follow-up questions and clarifications for the purpose of ensuring accurate analyses are expected to take up to 90 minutes. The total burden is expected to be 125 hours.

    The combined burden for the two information collections is 25,750 hours.

    (5) Type of Respondents: Public; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents for both information collections: 1,300; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 1,300; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 25,750 (25,625 for PEV Scorecard, and 125 for Clean Fleets Partnership); and (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: There is no cost associated with reporting and recordkeeping.

    Statutory Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 13233; 42 U.S.C. 13252 (a)-(b); 42 U.S.C. 13255.

    Issued in Washington, DC on: September 1, 2015. David Howell, Acting Director, Vehicle Technologies Office, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22538 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-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: ER15-1196-004.

    Applicants: Nevada Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: OATT Revisions Attachment P Schedule 9 and Definitions to be effective 11/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5204.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2304-001.

    Applicants: Oildale Energy LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Initial Market-Based Rate Tariff Application to be effective 7/31/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/28/15.

    Accession Number: 20150828-5143.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2588-000.

    Applicants: Eastside Power Authority.

    Description: Petition of Eastside Power Authority for Limited Waiver of the California Independent System Operator Corporation's Tariff Provisions.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5168.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2589-000.

    Applicants: CPV Shore, LLC.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Reactive Power Service Rate Schedule to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5187.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2590-000.

    Applicants: Triolith Energy Fund L.P.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Triolith Energy Fund LP Tariff to be effective 9/4/2015.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5202.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2591-000.

    Applicants: PacifiCorp.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: OATT Revised Sections (EIM Available Balancing Capacity) to be effective 11/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5203.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    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: September 1, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22509 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-2535-000] Midwest Electric Power, Inc.; Supplemental Notice that Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Midwest Electric Power, Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is September 21, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22510 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 1121-119] Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Application Type: Recreation Plan Amendment.

    b. Project No: 1121-119.

    c. Date Filed: August 27, 2015.

    d. Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    e. Name of Project: Battle Creek Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The project is located on the mainstem Battle Creek, North Fork Battle Creek, and South Fork Battle Creek, in Shasta and Tehama counties, California.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a—825r.

    h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Elisabeth Rossi, License Coordinator, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Mail Code N13E, P.O. Box 770000, San Francisco, CA 94177, (415) 973-2032.

    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Kevin Anderson, (202) 502-6465, [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests: October 2, 2015.

    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-1121-119) on any comments, motions, or recommendations filed.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    k. Description of Request: The licensee filed a revised recreation plan in response to a Commission staff request following an inspection which found that several sites on the approved recreation plan were either closed to the public or received little to no public recreational use. The proposed revised plan would close the fishing access areas at the Inskip Powerhouse and Coleman Forebay. To offset these closures, the licensee proposes to improve a fishing access area at the North Battle Creek Reservoir and create a new fishing access area on the Cross Country Canal off of Rock Creek Road. Aside from these revisions and deletion of extraneous or outdated information, other aspects of the current recreation plan would remain the same.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: September 1, 2015 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22516 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings related to the transmission planning activities of Public Service Company of Colorado, Tucson Electric Power Company, UNS Electric, Inc., Public Service Company of New Mexico, Arizona Public Service Company, El Paso Electric Company, Black Hills Power, Inc., Black Hills Colorado Electric Utility Company, LP, Cheyenne Light, Fuel, & Power Company, Arizona Public Service Company, and NV Energy, Inc.:

    Planning Subcommittee Meeting, September 15, 2015, 9 a.m.-12 p.m. (MST) Cost Allocation Subcommittee Meeting, September 15, 2015, 1 p.m.-4 p.m. (MST) Planning Management Committee Meeting, September 16, 2015, 9 a.m.-3 p.m. (MST)

    The above-referenced meetings will be held at:

    Arizona Public Service Company, 2124 W Cheryl Dr., Phoenix, AZ 85021.

    The above-referenced meetings will be available via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meetings are open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at http://www.westconnect.com/index.php.

    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters at issue in the following proceedings:

    ER13-75, Public Service Company of Colorado ER13-77, Tucson Electric Power Company ER13-78, UNS Electric, Inc. ER13-79, Public Service Company of New Mexico ER13-82, Arizona Public Service Company ER13-91, El Paso Electric Company ER13-96, Black Hills Power, Inc. ER13-97, Black Hills Colorado Electric Utility Company, LP ER13-120, Cheyenne Light, Fuel, & Power Company ER15-428, NV Energy, Inc. ER15-411, Arizona Public Service Company

    For more information contact Gabriel Aguilera, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-8489 or [email protected]

    Dated: September 1, 2015 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22515 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-546-000] Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C.; Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on August 24, 2015, Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C. (CIG) and Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C. (WIC), jointly filed an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations, for approval to abandon, by sale and in place, CIG's Powder River Lateral Pipeline and associated metering facilities located in Converse County and Albany County, Wyoming. Also, the applicants request the Commission's approval the termination of an associated Powder River Lateral capacity lease agreement between CIG and WIC. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Francisco Tarin, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C., P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80944, telephone (719) 667-7517, fax (719) 520-4697; or Mark A. Minich, Assistant General Counsel, Colorado Interstate Gas Company, L.L.C., P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80944, telephone (719) 520-4416, fax (719) 520-4415.

    CIG requests the approval of an abandonment buy sale to Copano Pipelines/Rocky Mountain LLC (CP/RM) of its approximate 100-mile Powder River Lateral Pipeline (Line No. 72A) located in Converse County and Albany County, Wyoming. CIG also proposes to abandon in place of its Powder River Meter Station, North Platte Meter Station, Glenrock Meter Station, and a farm tap located on Line No. 72A. In addition, CIG and WIC request an approval the termination of the CIG/WIC capacity lease agreement currently in effect for capacity on Line No. 72A and through WIC's Laramie Jumper Compressor Station.

    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 5 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 22, 2015.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22514 Filed 9-4-15; 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 rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2670-009; ER10-2669-009; ER14-1219-002; ER10-2253-013; ER10-3319-017; ER10-2674-009; ER10-2627-010; ER10-2629-011; ER10-1546-011; ER10-1547-009; ER14-1699-002; ER10-2636-010; ER10-1974-016; ER10-1550-010; ER10-1975-017; ER11-2424-013; ER10-2677-009; ER10-2678-008; ER10-2638-008.

    Applicants: ANP Blackstone Energy Company, LLC, ANP Bellingham Energy Company, LLC, Armstrong Power, LLC, Astoria Energy LLC, Astoria Energy II LLC, Calumet Energy Team, LLC, FirstLight Hydro Generating Company, FirstLight Power Resources Management, LLC, GDF SUEZ Energy Marketing NA, Inc., Hopewell Cogeneration Ltd Partnership, Milford Power, LLC, Mt. Tom Generating Company, LLC, Northeast Energy Associates, A Limited Partnership, Northeastern Power Company, North Jersey Energy Associates, a Limited Partnership., Pinetree Power-Tamworth, Inc., Pleasants Energy, LLC, Troy Energy, LLC, Waterbury Generation, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Change in Status of the GDF SUEZ MBR Sellers.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5428.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2583-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-08-31 MEEA between CAISO and WAPA-Sierra Nevada Region to be effective 11/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5388.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2584-000.

    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Aug 31 2015 Membership Filing to be effective 9/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5391.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2585-000.

    Applicants: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of Cost Based Formula Tariff to be effective 9/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5402.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2586-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amended GIA & DSA Eco Services Operations LLC—Rhodia Project to be effective 9/2/2015.

    Filed Date: 9/1/15.

    Accession Number: 20150901-5011.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2587-000.

    Applicants: DR Power, LLC.

    Description: Notice of cancellation of market based tariff of DR Power, LLC under ER15-2587.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5435.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF15-997-000.

    Applicants: Golden Renewable Energy, LLC.

    Description: Form 556 of Golden Renewable Energy, LLC.

    Filed Date: 8/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20150831-5432.

    Comments Due: None Applicable.

    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: September 1, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22508 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9926-05-OEI] Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision Approval, State of Alabama AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces EPA's approval of the State of Alabama's request to revise/modify its State Operating Permit Programs EPA-authorized program to allow electronic reporting.

    DATES:

    EPA's approval is effective September 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karen Seeh, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop 2823T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 566-1175, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    On July 29, 2015, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) submitted an application titled “Air Emissions Electronic Reporting System” for revision/modification to its EPA-approved operating permit program under title 40 CFR to allow new electronic reporting. EPA reviewed ADEM's request to revise/modify its EPA-authorized Part 70—State Operating Permit Program and, based on this review, EPA determined that the application met the standards for approval of authorized program revision/modification set out in 40 CFR part 3, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice of EPA's decision to approve Alabama's request to revise/modify its Part 70—State Operating Permit Program to allow electronic reporting under 40 CFR part 70 is being published in the Federal Register.

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

    Matthew Leopard, Director, Office of Information Collection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22063 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9932-72-OEI] Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision Approval, State of Mississippi AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces EPA's approval of the State of Mississippi's request to revise/modify certain of its EPA-authorized programs to allow electronic reporting.

    DATES:

    EPA's approval is effective September 8, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karen Seeh, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop 2823T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 566-1175, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    On June 22, 2015, the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted an application titled “Network Discharge Monitoring Report System” for revisions/modifications to its EPA-approved stormwater and industrial pretreatment programs under title 40 CFR to allow new electronic reporting. EPA reviewed MDEQ's request to revise/modify its EPA-authorized programs and, based on this review, EPA determined that the application met the standards for approval of authorized program revisions/modifications set out in 40 CFR part 3, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice of EPA's decision to approve Mississippi's request to revise/modify its following EPA-authorized programs to allow electronic reporting under 40 CFR parts 122 and 403, is being published in the Federal Register: Part 123—EPA Administered Permit Programs: The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; and Part 403—General Pretreatment Regulations For Existing And New Sources Of Pollution.

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

    Matthew Leopard, Director, Office of Information Collection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22528 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination; 10067 Southern Community Bank, Fayetteville, GA

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10667 Southern Community Bank, Fayetteville, GA (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Southern Community Bank (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 01, 2015 the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22562 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination, 10473 Chipola Community Bank, Marianna, Florida

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10473 Chipola Community Bank, Marianna, Florida (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Chipola Community Bank (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 1, 2015 the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22568 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination; 10318 Paramount Bank, Farmington Hills, Michigan

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10318 Paramount Bank, Farmington Hills, Michigan (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Paramount Bank (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 1, 2015 the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22566 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10468 Westside Community Bank University Place, Washington

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Westside Community Bank, University Place, Washington (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Westside Community Bank on January 11, 2013. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22567 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination; 10066 First National Bank of Anthony, Anthony, KS

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10066 First National Bank of Anthony, Anthony, KS (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of First National Bank of Anthony (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 1, 2015 the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22561 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination, 10274, NorhWest Bank and Trust Acworth, Georgia

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10274, NorthWest Bank and Trust, Acworth, GA (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of NorthWest Bank and Trust (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 1, 2015, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22565 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10243 Bank of Florida—Tampa Bay, Tampa, Florida

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Bank of Florida—Tampa Bay, Tampa, Florida (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Bank of Florida—Tampa Bay on May 28, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Date: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22564 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination; 10201, American National Bank, Parma, Ohio

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10201, American National Bank, Parma, Ohio (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of American National Bank (Receivership Estate); The Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective September 1, 2015 the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: September 2, 2015. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22563 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than September 22, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 33 Liberty Street New York, New York 10045-0001:

    1. Frederick Hing Kwok Chau; Christopher Yeou-Hwa Chau; Karen Yeou-Hung Pellett; and FD Chau Family LLC, all of Brea, California; to collectively acquire additional voting shares of First American International Corp., and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of First American International Bank, both in Brooklyn, New York.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309:

    1. Michael William Mathis, Rome, Georgia; to acquire voting shares of RCB Financial Corporation and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of River City Bank, both in Rome, Georgia.

    C. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. Catherine Ann Bosch, Manhattan, Kansas; to acquire voting shares of Alta Vista Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Alta Vista Bank, both in Alta Vista, Kansas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 2, 2015.

    Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22519 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 2, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. West Town Bancorp, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of West Town Bank, Cicero, Illinois.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. CSBO Holdings, Inc., Ridgway, Colorado; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Citizens State Bank of Ouray, Ouray, Colorado.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 2, 2015.

    Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22518 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30 Day-15-0666] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) 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; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) 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; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) (OMB No. 0920-0666, exp. 12/31/2017)—Revision—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) is a system designed to accumulate, exchange, and integrate relevant information and resources among private and public stakeholders to support local and national efforts to protect patients and promote healthcare safety. Specifically, the data is used to determine the magnitude of various healthcare-associated adverse events and trends in the rates of these events among patients and healthcare workers with similar risks. The data will be used to detect changes in the epidemiology of adverse events resulting from new and current medical therapies and changing risks. The NHSN currently consists of five components: Patient Safety, Healthcare Personnel Safety, Biovigilance, Long-Term Care Facility (LTCF), and Dialysis. The Outpatient Procedure Component is on track to be released in NHSN in 2016/2017. The development of this component has been previously delayed to obtain additional user feedback and support from outside partners.

    Changes were made to seven facility surveys. Based on user feedback and internal reviews of the annual facility surveys it was determined that questions and response options be amended, removed, or added to fit the evolving uses of the annual facility surveys. The surveys are being increasingly used to help intelligently interpret the other data elements reported into NHSN. Currently the surveys are used to appropriately risk adjust the numerator and denominator data entered into NHSN while also guiding decisions on future division priorities for prevention.

    Additionally, minor revisions have been made to 27 forms within the package to clarify and/or update surveillance definitions. Two forms are being removed as those forms will no longer be added to the NHSN system.

    The previously approved NHSN package included 54 individual collection forms; the current revision request removes two forms for a total of 52 forms. The reporting burden will increase by 583,825 hours, for a total of 4,861,542 hours.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) NHSN Registration Form 2,000 1 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Facility Contact Information 2,000 1 10/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Patient Safety Component—Annual Hospital Survey 5,000 1 50/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Group Contact Information 1,000 1 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Patient Safety Monthly Reporting Plan 6,000 12 15/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Primary Bloodstream Infection (BSI) 6,000 44 30/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Pneumonia (PNEU) 6,000 72 30/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Ventilator-Associated Event 6,000 144 25/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) 6,000 40 20/60 Staff RN Denominators for Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) 6,000 9 3 Staff RN Denominators for Specialty Care Area (SCA)/Oncology (ONC) 6,000 9 5 Staff RN Denominators for Intensive Care Unit (ICU)/Other locations (not NICU or SCA) 6,000 60 5 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Surgical Site Infection (SSI) 6,000 36 35/60 Staff RN Denominator for Procedure 6,000 540 5/60 Laboratory Technician Antimicrobial Use and Resistance (AUR)-Microbiology Data Electronic Upload Specification Tables 6,000 12 5/60 Pharmacy Technician Antimicrobial Use and Resistance (AUR)-Pharmacy Data Electronic Upload Specification Tables 6,000 12 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Central Line Insertion Practices Adherence Monitoring 1,000 100 25/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) MDRO or CDI Infection Form 6,000 72 30/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) MDRO and CDI Prevention Process and Outcome Measures Monthly Monitoring 6,000 24 15/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Laboratory-identified MDRO or CDI Event 6,000 240 30/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Long-Term Care Facility Component—Annual Facility Survey 250 1 1 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Laboratory-identified MDRO or CDI Event for LTCF 250 8 15/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) MDRO and CDI Prevention Process Measures Monthly Monitoring for LTCF 250 12 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) for LTCF 250 9 30/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Monthly Reporting Plan for LTCF 250 12 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Denominators for LTCF Locations 250 12 3.25 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Prevention Process Measures Monthly Monitoring for LTCF 250 12 5/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) LTAC Annual Survey 400 1 50/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Rehab Annual Survey 1,000 1 50/60 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Healthcare Personnel Safety Component Annual Facility Survey 50 1 8 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Healthcare Personnel Safety Monthly Reporting Plan 17,000 1 5/60 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Healthcare Worker Demographic Data 50 200 20/60 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Exposure to Blood/Body Fluids 50 50 1 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Healthcare Worker Prophylaxis/Treatment 50 30 15/60 Laboratory Technician Follow-Up Laboratory Testing 50 50 15/60 Occupational Health RN/Specialist Healthcare Worker Prophylaxis/Treatment-Influenza 50 50 10/60 Medical/Clinical Laboratory Technologist Hemovigilance Module Annual Survey 500 1 2 Medical/Clinical Laboratory Technologist Hemovigilance Module Monthly Reporting Plan 500 12 1/60 Medical/Clinical Laboratory Technologist Hemovigilance Module Monthly Reporting Denominators 500 12 1 Medical/Clinical Laboratory Technologist Hemovigilance Adverse Reaction 500 48 15/60 Medical/Clinical Laboratory Technologist Hemovigilance Incident 500 10 10/60 Staff RN Patient Safety Component—Annual Facility Survey for Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) 5,000 1 5/60 Staff RN Outpatient Procedure Component—Monthly Reporting Plan 5,000 12 15/60 Staff RN Outpatient Procedure Component Event 5,000 25 40/60 Staff RN Outpatient Procedure Component—Monthly Denominators and Summary 5,000 12 40/60 Registered Nurse (Infection Preventionist) Outpatient Dialysis Center Practices Survey 6,500 1 2.0 Staff RN Dialysis Monthly Reporting Plan 6,500 12 5/60 Staff RN Dialysis Event 6,500 60 25/60 Staff RN Denominators for Dialysis Event Surveillance 6,500 12 10/60 Staff RN Prevention Process Measures Monthly Monitoring for Dialysis 1,500 12 1.25 Staff RN Dialysis Patient Influenza Vaccination 325 75 10/60 Staff RN Dialysis Patient Influenza Vaccination Denominator 325 5 10/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22529 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority; Correction

    This document corrects a notice that was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, June 16, 2015 (78 FR 34437-34438) announcing the reorganization of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Replace the title of Research Branch (CCLE), with Research Branch (CCLG), and replace Conformity Verification & Standards Development Branch (CCLG), with Conformity Verification & Standards Development Branch (CCLE).

    James Seligman, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22535 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-15-0950; Docket No. CDC-2015-0078] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on the proposed revision of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). NHANES programs produce descriptive statistics which measure the health and nutrition status of the general population.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2015-0078 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), (OMB No. 0920-0950, expires 11/30/2016)—Revision—National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Section 306 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 242k), as amended, authorizes that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting through NCHS, shall collect statistics on the extent and nature of illness and disability; environmental, social and other health hazards; and determinants of health of the population of the United States. The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) have been conducted periodically between 1970 and 1994, and continuously since 1999 by the National Center for Health Statistics, CDC. Annually, approximately 14,410 respondents participate in some aspect of the full survey. Up to 3,500 additional persons might participate in tests of procedures, special studies, or methodological studies.

    NHANES programs produce descriptive statistics which measure the health and nutrition status of the general population. Through the use of physical examinations, laboratory tests, and interviews NHANES studies the relationship between diet, nutrition and health in a representative sample of the United States. NHANES monitors the prevalence of chronic conditions and risk factors. NHANES data are used to produce national reference data on height, weight, and nutrient levels in the blood. Results from more recent NHANES can be compared to findings reported from previous surveys to monitor changes in the health of the U.S. population over time. NCHS collects personal identification information. Participant level data items will include basic demographic information, name, address, social security number, Medicare number and participant health information to allow for linkages to other data sources such as the National Death Index and data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

    A variety of agencies sponsor data collection components on NHANES. To keep burden down, NCHS cycles in and out various components. The 2015-2016 NHANES physical examination includes the following components: oral glucose tolerance test (ages 12 and older), anthropometry (all ages), 24-hour dietary recall (all ages), physician's examination (all ages, blood pressure is collected here), oral health examination (ages 1 and older), hearing (ages 20-59), dual X-ray absorptiometry (total body composition ages 6-59 and osteoporosis, vertebral fractures and aortic calcification ages 40 and older).

    While at the examination center additional interview questions are asked (6 and older), a second 24-hour dietary recall (all ages) is scheduled to be conducted by phone 3-10 days later, and an appointment is made to return to the MEC to begin a 24-hour urine collection (one-half sample of ages 20- 69). In 2014, a 24-hour urine collection was added to the NHANES protocol to better understand sodium intake and provide a population baseline for use in monitoring trends in sodium intake in the future. In 2015, FDA is scheduled to implement a plan to promote broad, gradual reduction of added sodium in the food supply. One half of those successfully completing the initial collection will be asked to complete a second 24-hour urine. After completing the 24-hour urine participants are asked to provide 2 home urine collections (first morning and an evening) and mail them back. The urines collected in the morning and evening will be compared to the 24-hour urine collection.

    NHANES also plans to conduct a waist circumference methodology study. The study population will be NHANES participants aged 20 and over who participate in the body measurements component in the Mobile Examination Center (MEC).

    The bio-specimens collected for laboratory tests include urine, blood, vaginal and penile swabs, oral rinses and household water collection. Serum, plasma and urine specimens are stored for future testing if the participant consents.

    The following major examination or laboratory items, that had been included in the 2013-2014 NHANES, were cycled out for NHANES 2015-2016: physical activity monitor, taste and smell component and upper body muscle strength (grip test).

    Most sections of the NHANES interviews provide self-reported information to be used either in concert with specific examination or laboratory content, as independent prevalence estimates, or as covariates in statistical analysis (e.g., socio-demographic characteristics). Some examples include alcohol, drug, and tobacco use, sexual behavior, prescription and aspirin use, and indicators of oral, bone, reproductive, and mental health. Several interview components support the nutrition monitoring objective of NHANES, including questions about food security and nutrition program participation, dietary supplement use, and weight history/self-image/related behavior.

    NHANES data users include the U.S. Congress; numerous Federal agencies such as other branches of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the United States Department of Agriculture; private groups such as the American Heart Association; schools of public health; and private businesses.

    Participation in NHANES is completely voluntary and confidential. A three-year approval is requested. There is no cost to respondents other than their time.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total
  • burden
  • hours
  • Individuals in households NHANES Questionnaire 14,410 1 2.5 36,025 Individuals in households Waist Circumference Methodology Studies 3,000 1 8/60 400 Individuals in households Special Studies 3,500 1 3 10,500 Total 46,925
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review, Office Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22550 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-15-0488; Docket No. CDC-2015-0079] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on the proposed revision of the information collection request entitled Restrictions on Interstate Travel of Persons (42 CFR part 70). This information collection request outlines regulatory reporting requirements for communicable disease reporting from conveyances engaged in interstate travel within the United States.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2015-0079 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    Please note: All public comment should be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking portal (Regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    Restrictions on Interstate Travel of Persons (42 CFR part 70) (OMB Control No. 0920-0488 exp. 3/31/2016)—Revision—Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging Zoonotic and Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    This revision to an existing information collection request is intended to ensure that CDC can continue to collect pertinent information related to communicable disease or deaths that occur aboard conveyances during interstate travel within the United States, as authorized under 42 Code of Federal Regulations part 70.

    The intended use of the information is to ensure that CDC can assess and respond to reports of communicable disease or death that occur on conveyances engaged in interstate travel, and assist state and local health authorities if an illness or death occurs that poses a risk to public health. Generally, the primary source of this information is aircraft traveling within the United States.

    This revision makes several modification to this information collection. They are as follows:

    • In current practice, CDC does not process applications for travel permits. The issuance of travel restrictions is a collaborative process between public health partners, e.g., state health departments, the Department of Homeland Security, and CDC. There is no standardized collection of information involved. This change results in the removal of the Ill Person Travel Permit from the list of information collections as well as the removal of the associated burden.

    • Reports of communicable disease or death from domestic conveyances are almost always submitted electronically via radio, so the current Master of Vessel or Conveyance Illness Report has been rendered obsolete. In addition, CDC has issued guidance stating that reports to CDC, instead of local health authorities, regarding domestic reports of communicable disease or death on board conveyances meet the requirements of the regulation; therefore, information collections related to copies sent to state health departments are no longer necessary. This primary concerns interstate flights.

    • CDC is also requesting an adjustment to the burden associated with reports of communicable disease or death from domestic conveyances. CDC is reducing the burden from 15 minutes per report to 7 minutes. This is due to the facilitation of reporting using electronic means, i.e., Air Traffic Control and the Domestic Events Network for domestic flights.

    The resulting change in burden is a reduction of 3,678 hours.

    For reports of death or communicable disease made by master of a vessel or person in charge of a conveyance engaged in interstate traffic, the requested burden is approximately 23 hours. This total is estimated from 200 respondents submitting domestic reports of death or communicable disease a year, with an average burden of 7 minutes per report. This totals 23 hours. There is no burden to respondents other than the time required to make the report of illness or death.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • (in hours)
  • Master of a vessel or person in charge of a conveyance 42 CFR 70.4 Report by the master of a vessel or person in charge of conveyance of the incidence of a communicable disease occurring while in interstate travel 200 1 7/60 23 Total 23
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22549 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC-2015-0075, Docket Number NIOSH-288] A Vapor Containment Performance Protocol for Closed System Transfer Devices Used During Pharmacy Compounding and Administration of Hazardous Drugs; Request for Comment AGENCY:

    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of draft document available for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the availability of the following draft document for public comment entitled A Vapor Containment Performance Protocol for Closed System Transfer Devices Used During Pharmacy Compounding and Administration of Hazardous Drugs. The document and instructions for submitting comments can be found at www.regulations.gov.

    This guidance document does not have the force and effect of law.

    Table of Contents • DATES: • ADDRESSES: • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: • SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    DATES:

    Electronic or written comments must be received by November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by CDC-2015-0075 and Docket Number NIOSH-288, by either of the two following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft Laboratories, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS-C34, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.

    Instructions: All information received in response to this notice must include the agency name and the docket number (CDC-2015-0075; NIOSH-288). All relevant comments received will be posted without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. All electronic comments should be formatted as Microsoft Word. Please make reference to CDC-2015-0075 and Docket Number NIOSH-288. All information received in response to this notice will also be available for public examination and copying at the NIOSH Docket Office, 1150 Tusculum Avenue, Room 155, Cincinnati, OH 45226-1998.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Deborah V. Hirst, NIOSH, Division of Applied Research and Technology, Alice Hamilton Laboratories, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS R-5, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, (513) 841-4141 (not a toll free number), Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the protocol is to test a closed system transfer device's (CSTD) capability to perform as a closed system. During an evaluation of the protocol, registered pharmacists, familiar with the use of CSTDs, tested the protocol's prescribed compounding and administration tasks using five commercially available CSTDs. They also performed the assigned tasks using a negative control condition without a CSTD. Prescribed tasks were performed in a NIOSH-developed environmental test chamber with 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) as the challenge agent. A highly specific gas analyzer, with measurement capabilities specific to IPA and with a low limit of detection (LOD), was used to detect vapor concentrations of escaped IPA during the tasks. The protocol is not intended for CSTDs designed to operate using air-cleaning technologies. This protocol has multiple applications and can be used by manufacturers to evaluate prototype CSTDs, by consumers to compare CSTD products, or by jurisdictions wishing to adopt the protocol for a CSTD performance certification procedure.

    A panel consisting of peer reviewers and stakeholders was asked to review and comment on the draft guidance document and protocol. NIOSH reviewed the recommendations of the peer reviewers and stakeholders then made the final determination regarding document content as well as the decision not to propose a specific pass/fail performance threshold. The protocol is being published for comment in CDC-2015-0075 and Docket Number NIOSH-288 and can be found at www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 1, 2015. John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22525 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10221] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by October 8, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 OR Email: OIRA_ [email protected]

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement without change of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Site Investigation for Independent Diagnostic Testing Facilities (IDTFs); Use: We enroll Independent Diagnostic Testing Facilities (IDTFs) into the Medicare program via a uniform application, the CMS 855B. Implementation of enhanced procedures for verifying the enrollment information has improved the enrollment process as well as identified and prevented fraudulent IDTFs from entering the Medicare program. As part of this process, verification of compliance with IDTF performance standards is necessary. The primary function of the site investigation form for IDTFs is to provide a standardized, uniform tool to gather information from an IDTF that tells us whether it meets certain standards to be a IDTF (as found in 42 CFR 410.33(g)) and where it practices or renders its services. The site investigation form has been used in the past to aid in verifying compliance with the required performance standards found in 42 CFR 410.33(g). No revisions have been made to this form since the last submission for OMB approval. Form Number: CMS-10221 (OMB Control Number: 0938-1029); Frequency: Occasionally; Affected Public: Private Sector (Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 900; Total Annual Responses: 900; Total Annual Hours: 1,800. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Kim McPhillips at 410-786-5374).

    Dated: September 2, 2015. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22530 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Tribal TANF Data Report, TANF Annual Report, and Reasonable Cause/Corrective Action Documentation Process- Final.

    OMB No.: 0970-0215.

    Description: 42 U.S.C. 612 (section 412 of the Social Security Act as amended by Public Law 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA)), mandates that federally recognized Indian Tribes with an approved Tribal TANF program collect and submit to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services data on the recipients served by the Tribes' programs. This information includes both aggregated and disaggregated data on case characteristics and individual characteristics. In addition, Tribes that are subject to a penalty are allowed to provide reasonable cause justifications as to why a penalty should not be imposed or may develop and implement corrective compliance procedures to eliminate the source of the penalty. Finally, there is an annual report, which requires the Tribes to describe program characteristics. All of the above requirements are currently approved by OMB and the Administration for Children and Families is simply proposing to extend them without any changes.

    Respondents: Indian Tribes.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours per response
  • Total burden hours
    Final Tribal TANF Data Report 70 4 451 126,280 Tribal TANF Annual Report 70 1 40 2,800 Tribal TANF Reasonable Cause/Corrective 70 1 60 4,200

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 133,280.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Fax: 202-395-7285, Email: [email protected] Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22041 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Child Care and Development Fund Annual Aggregate Report—ACF-800.

    OMB No.: 0970-0150.

    Description: Description: Section 658K of the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act (42 U.S.C. 9858, as amended by Pub. L. 113-186) requires that States and Territories submit annual aggregate data on the children and families receiving direct services under the Child Care and Development Fund. The implementing regulations for the statutorily required reporting are at 45 CFR 98.70 and 98.71. Annual aggregate reports include data elements represented in the ACF-800 reflecting the scope, type, and methods of child care delivery. This provides ACF with the information necessary to make reports to Congress, address national child care needs, offer technical assistance to grantees, meet performance measures, and conduct research.

    Consistent with the recent reauthorization of the CCDBG statute, ACF requests reinstatement and revision of the ACF-800 including a number of changes and clarifications to the reporting requirements and instructions. Most notably, section 658K(a)(2)(F) of the CCDBG Act now requires States to report the number of fatalities occurring among children while in the care and facility of child care providers serving CCDF children. The new data element will be required with the reporting period beginning on October 1 of 2015 (FFY 2016).

    Respondents: States, the District of Columbia, and Territories including Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Marianna Islands.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    ACF-800 56 1 42 2,352

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,352.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22571 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

    Proposed Projects: ORR, Unaccompanied Children's Program, Division of Children's Services (DCS)

    Title: Information Collection and Record Keeping for the Timely Placement and Release of Unaccompanied Children (UC) in ORR Care

    OMB No.:

    Description:

    On March 1, 2003, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Section 462, transferred responsibilities for the care and placement of unaccompanied children from the Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service to the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). ORR is also governed by the provisions established by the Flores Agreement in 1997 and the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2008.

    The ORR Unaccompanied Children's Program provides placement, care, custody and services for UC until they can be successfully released to a sponsor, are repatriated to their home country, or able to obtain legal status.

    Through cooperative agreements and contracts, ORR funds residential care providers that provide temporary housing and other services to unaccompanied children in ORR custody. These care provider facilities are State licensed and must meet ORR requirements to ensure a high level quality of care. They provide a continuum of care for children, including placements in ORR foster care, group homes, shelter, staff secure, secure, and residential treatment centers. The care providers provide children with classroom education, health care, socialization/recreation, vocational training, mental health services, access to legal services, and case management.

    Under the law, ORR and its care providers are required to:

    (1) Collect information about each UC who is entrusted to the care of ORR in order to determine the most appropriate and least restrictive placement, provide adequate services, and identify qualified sponsors for the timely release of the child or youth. ORR has developed instruments to assess the child or youth and his or her needs and conditions throughout his or her stay with ORR as well as the identification and assessment of potential sponsors. These instruments allow for consistency and compliance of standards across care providers and help ORR monitor programs and identify problems and issues that need corrective action.

    (2) Keep up-to-date records to ensure the child or youth's safety and security and care and to provide accountability with all Federal and State, licensing, and other standards by care providers.

    (3) Notify UC of their rights and responsibilities under the law, including notice about ORR services, the fact that that they have the right to apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) status, and their legal responsibility to attend an immigration hearing.

    These tasks are mainly conducted through the ORR online database (The UC Portal), which provides a central location for case records and the documentation of other activities (for example, when a child or youth is transferred to another facility). Many of these records are “auto-populated” on the UC Portal once the original data points are completed (such as DOB, A number, date of initial placement).

    The data collection described here pertains to activities involving UC and care providers from initial intakes of UC into ORR care to his or her release from ORR care. It does not cover information collection for potential sponsors (Submitted via separate OMB request in January 2015.)

    ORR has applied the following assumptions to this request:

    (1) Items related to tasks that are routine and customary for care providers and others are excluded. This includes quarterly or annual financial or other reports, grant related requests from ORR Project Officers or others for monitoring performance and progress, and third party notifications to other government agencies, such as U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (For financial and other reports, Care Providers use templates posted on http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html#reporting)

    (2) Data collection and reporting requirements do not reflect those required by State or local licensing or accreditation requirements.

    (3) Acknowledgement of receipt of information or other acknowledgements via signature by either the UC or the care provider or others are not included in this information request as these are administrative in nature in order to help care providers and UC track personal belongings, DHS related documents, medical records, and other important items required by the UC following release from ORR care.

    The components of this information request include:

    (1) UC Portal Capacity Report: Care providers complete the sections on “In Care” and “Beds in Reserve” as well as the section recording the UC who have been discharged on a daily basis so that ORR Intakes has a complete picture of available beds for UC placements.

    (2) The Further Assessment Swift Track (FAST) Placement Tool (Versions for Secure and Staff Secure placements): Initially used by ORR Intakes to determine when a UC warrants a placement in Secure or Staff Secure Care. Care providers must use the tool to update a status for UC who are placed in Secure Care at least every 30 days. (Care providers are not required to re-use tool for UC who have been placed in Staff Secure Care).

    (3) Placement Authorization: Auto-generated. Requires a signature from the care provider acknowledging a particular UC placement into their facility.

    (4) Notice of Placement in Secure or Staff Secure Facility: Acknowledges UC's placement in a secure or staff secure care provider facility with signature of UC and facility witness.

    (5) Initial Intakes Assessment: Biographical information is auto-populated for care providers based on ORR information obtained at Intakes. Screens for trafficking or other safety concerns, special needs, danger to self and others, medical conditions, mental health concerns.

    (6) UC Assessment: Care provider must complete within 7 days of UC's admission, covers biographic, family, legal, migration, medical, substance abuse, and mental health history.

    (7) Individual Service Plan: Documents the services that have been provided (for example, number of counseling sessions, educational assessment and classes) and is updated every 30 days. When a child is transferred to a new facility, a new ISP is developed.

    (8) UC Case Review Form: Documents any new information not indicated in the UC Assessment.

    (9) New Sponsor Form: Identifies any potential sponsor(s) for a particular UC. In addition to serving as a record for a particular case, helps ORR track individuals who are attempting to sponsor numerous UC, which may suggest a possible trafficking or abuse situation.

    (10) Transfer Request and Tracking Form: Auto-populated and used to obtain ORR permission for transfer to another care facility. (Filled out by both ORR and care providers) and used to document when a UC is transferred from one facility to another (requires signatures of both facilities).

    (11) Long Term Foster Care Placement Memo: When ORR identifies a placement of a UC with a long term foster care facility, the long term foster care provider or national VOLAG receiving the transfer request completes the memo and sends to ORR to ensure continuity of services and tracking of records for a UC.

    (12) Travel Request form for UC Long Term Foster Care: Must be filled out by program at least 10 days prior to travel start date.

    (13) Notice of Transfer to ICE Chief Counsel and Change of Address: Required so that the Chief Counsel of ICE may file a Motion for Change of Venue and/or Change of Address with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), if applicable, to ensure immigration hearing may proceed.

    (14) Care Provider Release Checklist: Care providers must complete and affirm that all documents, forms, and steps are completed in the release process.

    (15) Release Request: Provides care provider recommendation for release of a UC to a sponsor. All releases must be approved by ORR prior to UC release.

    (16) Discharge Notification: Includes date and type of discharge (transfer, home country, sponsor release) and is sent to ICE.

    (17) Verification of Release: Signed by sponsor as notification that named UC has been released according to the law. Sponsor must also acknowledge agreement with the provisions of the Sponsor Care Agreement pertaining to the minor's care, safety, and well-being, and the sponsor's responsibility for ensuring the minor's presence at all future proceedings before the Department of Homeland Security and EOIR.

    (18) Child Advocate Referral and Appointment Form: Used by the Child Advocate Program to recommend that ORR appoint an independent child advocate for a victim of child trafficking or in other cases involving vulnerable children.

    (19) Notice of Rights Handout and Notice of Rights and Provision of Services: Care providers are required to provide to all UC under the Flores v. Reno Settlement Agreement.

    (20) Legal Service Provider List for UC: List of organizations who offer free legal representation and help for UC with State and Federal courts, immigration hearings, and appeals. Required under the Flores Settlement Agreement.

    (21) URM Application: Certain populations of children and youth in ORR custody may become eligible for the Unaccompanied Refugee Minors Program, which is a State administered foster care program. In such instances the care provider facility or other interested party may complete this application form on behalf of the child.

    (22) Withdrawal of Application or Declination of Placement Form: If a youth who has submitted an application for the URM Program wishes to withdraw this application, or if he or she has been offered placement and wishes to decline this placement, the youth must complete this form.

    (23) Standard Shelter Tour Request: Used by members of the public and the media to submit to care providers in order to tour a shelter facility.

    Respondents: UC in ORR care and custody (they are generally referred to ORR from the DHS) and who are then referred to ORR's Network of Care Providers.

    Staff in ORR's Care Provider Network, including those in shelter care, secure and staff secure care, foster care, and residential treatment centers.

    Approved sponsors of UC released from ORR care.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    UC Portal Capacity Report 50 1 .16/hour 8 Further Assessment Swift Track (FAST) Placement Tool 2,320 1 .25/hour 580 Placement Authorization Form 58,000 1 .1/hour 5,800 Notice of Placement in Secure or Staff Secure Facility 2,320 1 .1/hour 232 Initial Intakes Form 58,000 1 .25/hour 14,500 UC Assessment 58,000 1 .50/hour 29,000 Individual Service Plan 58,000 1 .25 14,500 UC Case Review Form 58,000 1 .50/hour 29,000 New Sponsor Form 55,200 1 .25/hour 13,800 Transfer Request and Tracking Form 1,000 1 .25/hour 250 Long Term Foster Care Placement Memo 279 1 .1/hour 28 Travel Request Form for UC Long Term Foster Care 20 1 .25/hour 5 Notice of Transfer to ICE Chief Counsel and Change of Address 2,320 1 .1/hour 232 Care Provider Release Checklist 55,200 1 .1 5,520 Release Request 55,200 3 .25 hour 41,400 Discharge Notification 716 1 .25/hour 179 Verification of Release 55,200 1 .1/hour 5,520 Child Advocate Referral and Appointment Form 250 1 .50 125 Notice of Rights Handout and Notice of Rights and Provision of Services 58,000 1 .1/hour 5,800 Legal Service Provider List for UC 58,000 1 .1 5,800 URM Application 350 1 1 350 Withdrawal of Application or Declination of Placement Form 10 1 .1/hour 1 Standard Shelter Tour Request 60 1 .1/hour 6

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 172,636.

    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. 2015-22495 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0961] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Environmental Impact Considerations AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection entitled “Environmental Impact Considerations.”

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit electronic comments on the collection of information to: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA 305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the 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:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information listed below.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Environmental Impact Considerations—21 CFR Part 25 OMB Control Number 0910-0322

    FDA is requesting OMB approval for the reporting requirements contained in the FDA collection of information “Environmental Impact Considerations.” The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) states national environmental objectives and imposes upon each Federal Agency the duty to consider the environmental effects of its actions. Section 102(2)(C) of NEPA requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for every major Federal action that will significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

    FDA's NEPA regulations are in part 25 (21 CFR part 25). All applications or petitions requesting Agency action require the submission of a claim for categorical exclusion or an environmental assessment (EA). A categorical exclusion applies to certain classes of FDA-regulated actions that usually have little or no potential to cause significant environmental effects and are excluded from the requirements to prepare an EA or EIS. Sections 25.15(a) and (d) specifies the procedures for submitting to FDA a claim for a categorical exclusion. Extraordinary circumstances (§ 25.21), which may result in significant environmental impacts, may exist for some actions that are usually categorically excluded. An EA provides information that is used to determine whether an FDA action could result in a significant environmental impact. Sections 25.40(a) and (c) specifies the content requirements for EAs for non-excluded actions.

    This collection of information is used by FDA to assess the environmental impact of Agency actions and to ensure that the public is informed of environmental analyses. Firms wishing to manufacture and market substances regulated under statues for which FDA is responsible must, in most instances, submit applications requesting approval. Environmental information must be included in such applications for the purpose of determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment. Where significant adverse events cannot be avoided, the Agency uses the submitted information as the basis for preparing and circulating to the public an EIS, made available through a Federal Register document also filed for comment at the Environmental Protection Agency. The final EIS, including the comments received, is reviewed by the Agency to weigh environmental costs and benefits in determining whether to pursue the proposed action or some alternative that would reduce expected environmental impact.

    Any final EIS would contain additional information gathered by the Agency after the publication of the draft EIS, a copy or a summary of the comments received on the draft EIS, and the Agency's responses to the comments, including any revisions resulting from the comments or other information. When the Agency finds that no significant environmental effects are expected, the Agency prepares a finding of no significant impact.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Human Drugs (Including Biologics in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research)

    Under 21 CFR 312.23(a)(7)(iv)(c), 314.50(d)(1)(iii), and 314.94(a)(9)(i), each investigational new drug application (IND), new drug application (NDA), and abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) must contain a claim for categorical exclusion under § 25.30 or § 25.31, or an EA under § 25.40. Annually, FDA receives approximately 3,677 INDs from 2501 sponsors; 120 NDAs from 87 applicants; 2,718 supplements to NDAs from 399 applicants; 9 biologic license applications (BLAs) from 8 applicants; 317 supplements to BLAs from 43 applicants; 1475 ANDAs from 300 applicants; and 5448 supplements to ANDAs from 318 applicants. FDA estimates that it receives approximately 13,663 claims for categorical exclusions as required under §§ 25.15(a) and (d), and 11 EAs as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c). Based on information provided by the pharmaceutical industry, FDA estimates that it takes sponsors or applicants approximately 8 hours to prepare a claim for a categorical exclusion and approximately 3,400 hours to prepare an EA.

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Human Drugs 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.15(a) and (d) 3,416 4 13,664 8 109,312 25.40(a) and (c) 11 1 11 3,400 37,400 Total 146,712 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Human Foods

    Under 21 CFR 71.1, 171.1, 170.39, and 170.100, food additive petitions, color additive petitions, requests from exemption from regulation as a food additive, and submission of a food contact notification for a food contact substance must contain either a claim of categorical exclusion under § 25.30 or § 25.32 or an EA under § 25.40. Annually, FDA receives approximately 97 industry submissions. FDA received an annual average of 42 claims of categorical exclusions as required under § 25.15(a) and (d) and 33 EAs as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c). FDA estimates that approximately 42 respondents will submit an average of 1 application for categorical exclusion and 33 respondents will submit an average of 1 EA. FDA estimates that, on average, it takes petitioners, notifiers, or requestors approximately 8 hours to prepare a claim of categorical exclusion and approximately 210 hours to prepare an EA.

    Table 2—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Human Foods 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.15(a) and (d) 42 1 42 8 336 25.40(a) and (c) 33 1 33 210 6,930 Total 7,266 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Medical Devices

    Under 21 CFR 814.20(b)(11), premarket approvals (PMAs) (original PMAs and supplements) must contain a claim for categorical exclusion under § 25.30 or § 25.34 or an EA under § 25.40. In 2012 to 2014, FDA received an average of 39 claims (original PMAs and supplements) for categorical exclusions as required under §§ 25.15(a) and (d), and 0 EAs as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c). FDA estimates that approximately 39 respondents will submit an average of 1 application for categorical exclusion annually. Based on information provided by sponsors, FDA estimates that it takes approximately 6 hours to prepare a claim for a categorical exclusion.

    Table 3—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Medical Devices 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.15(a) and (d) 39 1 39 6 234 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Biological Products, Drugs, and Medical Devices in the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research

    Under 21 CFR 601.2(a), BLAs as well as INDs (§ 312.23), NDAs (§ 314.50), ANDAs (§ 314.94), and PMAs (§ 814.20) must contain either a claim of categorical exclusion under § 25.30 or 25.32 or an EA under § 25.40. Annually, FDA receives approximately 34 BLAs from 18 applicants, 801 BLA supplements to license applications from 156 applicants, 345 INDs from 256 sponsors, 1 NDA from 1 applicant, 26 supplements to NDAs from 8 applicants, 1 ANDA from 1 applicant, 1 supplement to ANDAs from 1 applicant, 8 PMAs from 3 applicants, and 33 PMA supplements from 16 applicants. FDA estimates that approximately 10 percent of these supplements would be submitted with a claim for categorical exclusion or an EA.

    FDA has received approximately 481 claims for categorical exclusion as required under §§ 25.15(a) and (d) annually and 2 EAs as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c) annually. Therefore, FDA estimates that approximately 247 respondents will submit an average of 2 applications for categorical exclusion and 2 respondents will submit an average of 1 EA. Based on information provided by industry, FDA estimates that it takes sponsors and applicants approximately 8 hours to prepare a claim of categorical exclusion and approximately 3,400 hours to prepare an EA for a biological product.

    Table 4—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Biological Products1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.15(a) and (d) 247 2 494 8 3,952 25.40(a) and (c) 2 1 2 3,400 6,800 Total 10,752 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Animal Drugs

    Under 21 CFR 514.1(b)(14), new animal drug applications (NADAs) and abbreviated new animal drug applications (ANADAs); 21 CFR 514.8(a)(1) supplemental NADAs and ANADAs; 21 CFR 511.1(b)(10) investigational new animal drug applications (INADs), and 21 CFR 571.1(c) food additive petitions must contain a claim for categorical exclusion under § 25.30 or 25.33 or an EA under § 25.40. Annually, FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine has received approximately 698 claims for categorical exclusion as required under §§ 25.15(a) and (d), and 10 EAs as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c). FDA estimates that approximately 70 respondents will submit an average of 10 applications for categorical exclusion and 10 respondents will submit an average of 1 EA. FDA estimates that it takes sponsors/applicants approximately 3 hours to prepare a claim of categorical exclusion and an average of 2,160 hours to prepare an EA.

    Table 5—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Animal Drugs 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.15(a) and (d) 70 10 700 3 2,100 25.40(a) and (c) 10 1 10 2,160 21,600 Total 23,700 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Tobacco Products

    Under sections 905, 910, and 911 of the Federal Food, Drugs, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 387, 387j, and 387k), product applications and supplements (PMTAs), SEs, Exemption from SEs, and modified risk tobacco products must contain a claim for categorical exclusion or an EA. In 2015, FDA estimated it will receive approximately 5 premarket review of new tobacco PMTAs from 5 respondents, 509 reports intended to demonstrate the substantial equivalence of a new tobacco product (SEs) from 509 respondents, 15 exemption from substantial equivalence requirements applications (SE Exemptions) from 15 respondents, and 3 modified risk tobacco product applications (MRTPAs) from 3 respondents. FDA is not accepting claims for categorical exclusions at this time, and estimates that there will be 532 EAs from 532 respondents as required under §§ 25.40(a) and (c). Therefore, over the next 3 years, FDA estimates that approximately 532 respondents will submit an average of 1 application for environmental assessment. Part of the information in the EA will be developed while writing other parts of a PMTA, SE, Exemption from SE, or MRTPA. Based on FDA's experience, previous information provided by potential sponsors and knowledge that part of the EA information has already been produced in one of the tobacco product applications, FDA estimates that it takes approximately 80 hours to prepare an EA.

    Table 6—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden for Tobacco Products 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    25.40(a) and (c) 532 1 532 80 42,560 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Dated: August 31, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22507 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0147] Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions; Second Edition; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a second edition of the guidance for industry entitled “Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions”. FDA is issuing the second edition to provide further information on demonstrating substantial equivalence (SE) of a new tobacco product, including demonstrating SE when the new tobacco product has: A modified label that renders it distinct from, but has identical characteristics to, a valid predicate product; or a change in product quantity from, but where the per weight composition is identical to, a valid predicate product.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time.

    ADDRESSES:

    All communications in response to this notice should be identified with Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0147. Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Annette Marthaler, Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document Control Center, Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; 1-877-287-1373, [email protected], or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of the second edition of the guidance for industry entitled “Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions” (second edition SE FAQ guidance). We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115).

    In September 2011, FDA issued draft guidance responding to frequently asked questions covering a range of topics on demonstrating the SE of a new tobacco product (September 9, 2011, 76 FR 55927). In March 2015, FDA issued a final guidance on many of the topics included in the September 2011 draft ((March 5, 2015, 80 FR 12011) (March 2015 FAQ guidance)). In May 2015, FDA announced that an interim enforcement policy would be in effect while it considered comments submitted on the March 2015 FAQ guidance. This interim enforcement policy will continue to be in effect for 30 days from the date of issuance of the second edition SE FAQ guidance. Based on the comments received on the September 2011 draft guidance and the March 2015 final guidance, we are now issuing the second edition FAQ final guidance.

    The second edition FAQ guidance describes FDA's current thinking on whether and when a change to a tobacco product's label, product quantity in the package, additives, or specifications renders that product a “new tobacco product” subject to premarket review. It explains that a manufacturer may submit streamlined SE reports for certain modifications to labels and changes to product quantity. The guidance also explains FDA's plans and processes for review of the streamlined SE reports. Finally, this guidance responds to several questions that have been raised about the SE process more generally.

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

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved information collections. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in sections 905(j) and 910 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387e(j) and 387j, respectively), as amended by the Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-31), have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0673; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 25 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0322.

    III. Comments A. General Information About Submitting 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). 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.

    B. Public Availability of Comments

    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. As a matter of Agency practice, FDA generally does not post comments submitted by individuals in their individual capacity on http://www.regulations.gov. This is determined by information indicating that the submission is written by an individual, for example, the comment is identified with the category “Individual Consumer” under the field titled “Category (Required),” on the “Your Information” page on http://www.regulations.gov. For this document, however, FDA will not be following this general practice. Instead, FDA will post on http://www.regulations.gov comments to this docket that have been submitted by individuals in their individual capacity. If you wish to submit any information under a claim of confidentiality, please refer to 21 CFR 10.20.

    C. Information Identifying the Person Submitting the Comment

    Please note that your name, contact information, and other information identifying you will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov if you include that information in the body of your comments. For electronic comments submitted to http://www.regulations.gov, FDA will post the body of your comment on http://www.regulations.gov along with your state/province and country (if provided), the name of your representative (if any), and the category identifying you (e.g., individual, consumer, academic, industry). For written submissions submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post the body of your comments on http://www.regulations.gov, but you can put your name and/or contact information on a separate cover sheet and not in the body of your comments.

    IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain an electronic version of the guidance at either http://www.regulations.gov or http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/default.htm.

    Dated: August 27, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22494 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects (Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) announces plans to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR), described below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to OMB, HRSA seeks comments from the public regarding the burden estimate, below, or any other aspect of the ICR.

    DATES:

    Comments on this Information Collection Request must be received no later than November 9, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or mail the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Room 10C-03, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and draft instruments, email [email protected] or call the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer at (301) 443-1984.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the information request collection title for reference.

    Information Collection Request Title: The Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program Performance Measurement Information System.

    OMB No. 0906-xxxx—New

    Abstract: The Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), administered by HRSA in partnership with the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), supports voluntary, evidence-based home visiting services during pregnancy and to parents with young children up to kindergarten entry. States and Tribal entities are eligible to receive funding from the MIECHV Program and have the flexibility to tailor the program to serve the specific needs of their communities.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: HRSA will use the proposed information to demonstrate program accountability and continuously monitor and provide oversight to Home Visiting Program grantees. The information will also be used to provide quality improvement guidance and technical assistance to grantees and help inform the development of early childhood systems at the national, state, and local level. HRSA is seeking to collect demographic, service utilization, and select clinical indicators for participants enrolled in home visiting services. In addition, HRSA will collect a set of standardized performance and outcome indicators that correspond with the statutorily identified benchmark areas.

    Demographic, Service Utilization, and Clinical Indicators Data

    These data will describe the population served by the MIECHV Program, including the unduplicated count of the number of participants and participant groups by primary insurance coverage. These data will provide other socio-demographic characteristics of program participants and their utilization of services, such as program retention. Additionally, these data will describe several select clinical indicators of program participants, such as the percent of eligible participants who deliver their child preterm. This information will be collected from participants once, at enrollment in home visiting services and aggregated and reported to HRSA by state/territory grantees once annually.

    Performance and Outcome Benchmark Data

    These data constitute a discrete set of standardized performance and outcome indicators that correspond with the statutorily identified benchmark areas. These data will provide aggregate totals, percentages, and rates for performance and outcome indicators that are salient to the MIECHV Program, home visiting services more generally, and the at-risk populations served. These data will be collected from participants based on the appropriate measurement period defined for each measure and aggregated and reported to HRSA by state/territory grantees once annually.

    This information will be used to demonstrate accountability with legislative and programmatic requirements. It will also be used to monitor and provide continued oversight for grantee performance and to target technical assistance resources to grantees. In the future, it is anticipated the MIECHV funding decisions may be allocated based on grantee performance, including on benchmark performance areas.

    Likely Respondents: Home Visiting Program grantees.

    Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this Information Collection Request are summarized in the table below.

    Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Form 1: Demographic, Service Utilization, and Clinical Indicators Data 56 1 56 650 36,400 Performance and Outcome Benchmark Data 56 1 56 200 11,200 Total 56 56 47,600

    HHS specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    Jackie Painter, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22545 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Indian Health Service [OMB NO. 0917-0028] Request for Public Comment: 30-Day Proposed Information Collection: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions AGENCY:

    Indian Health Service, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments. Request for extension of approval.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law (Pub. L.) 104-13 [44 United States Code (U.S.C.) section 3507(a)(1)(D)], the Indian Health Service (IHS) is submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for an extension of a previously approved collection of information titled, “Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions,” Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number 0917-0028, which expires November 30, 2015.

    This previously approved information collection project was last published in the Federal Register (80 FR 43100) on July 21, 2015, and allowed 60 days for public comment, as required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). The IHS received no comments regarding this collection. The purpose of this notice is to solicit public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection, which are to be submitted directly to OMB for a 30 day period.

    A copy of the supporting statement is available at www.regulations.gov (see Docket ID IHS-2015-0004).

    Proposed Collection: Title: Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions (OMB No. 0917-0028). Type of Information Collection Request: Extension, without revision, of currently approved information collection, 0917-0028, Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions. There are no program changes or adjustments in burden hours. Form(s): Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment, Child Care and Indian Child Care Worker Positions. Need and Use of Information Collection: This is a request for approval of the collection of information as required by section 408 of the Indian Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act, Public Law 101-630, 104 Stat. 4544, and 25 U.S.C. 3201-3211.

    The IHS is required to compile a list of all authorized positions within the IHS where the duties and responsibilities involve regular contact with, or control over, Indian children; and to conduct an investigation of the character of each individual who is employed, or is being considered for employment in a position having regular contact with, or control over, Indian children [25 U.S.C. 3207(a)(1) and (2)]. Title 25 U.S.C. 3207(b) requires regulations prescribing the minimum standards of character to ensure that none of the individuals appointed to positions involving regular contact with, or control over, Indian children have been found guilty of, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to any felonious offense, or any of two or more misdemeanor offenses under Federal, State, or Tribal law involving crimes of violence; sexual assault, molestation, exploitation, contact or prostitution; crimes against persons; or offenses committed against children.

    In addition, 42 U.S.C. 13041 requires each agency of the Federal Government, and every facility operated by the Federal Government (or operated under contract with the Federal Government), that hires (or contracts for hire) individuals involved with the provision of child care services to children under the age of 18 to assure that all existing and newly hired employees undergo a criminal history background check. The background investigation is to be initiated through the personnel program of the applicable Federal agency. This section requires employment applications for individuals who are seeking work for an agency of the Federal Government, or for a facility or program operated by (or through contract with) the Federal Government, in positions involved with the provision of child care services to children under the age of 18, to contain a question asking whether the individual has ever been arrested for or charged with a crime involving a child. Affected Public: Individuals and households. Type of Respondents: Individuals.

    The table below provides: Types of data collection instruments, Estimated number of respondents, Number of responses per respondent, Average burden hour per response, and Total annual burden hour(s).

    Estimated Annual Burden Hours Data collection instrument(s) Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden
  • responses
  • (in hours)
  • Addendum to Declaration for Federal Employment (OMB 0917-0028) 3000 1 12/60 600 Total 3000 600

    There are no Capital Costs, Operating Costs, and/or Maintenance Costs to report.

    Requests for Comments: Your written comments and/or suggestions are invited on one or more of the following points:

    (a) Whether the information collection activity is necessary to carry out an agency function;

    (b) whether the agency processes the information collected in a useful and timely fashion;

    (c) the accuracy of the public burden estimate (the estimated amount of time needed for individual respondents to provide the requested information);

    (d) whether the methodology and assumptions used to determine the estimates are logical;

    (e) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and

    (f) ways to minimize the public burden through the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Direct Your Comments to OMB: Send your comments and suggestions regarding the proposed information collection contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time to: Office of Management and Budget, Office of Regulatory Affairs, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for IHS.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information, please contact Tamara Clay by one of the following methods:

    Mail: Tamara Clay, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Indian Health Service, 801 Thompson Avenue, TMP, STE 450-30, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Phone: 301-443-4750.

    Email: [email protected]

    Fax: 301-443-4750.

    Comment Due Date: October 8, 2015. Your comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having full effect if received within 30 days of the date of this publication.

    Dated: August 29, 2015. Robert G. McSwain, Deputy Director, Indian Health Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22532 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-16-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 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 section 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 of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; MFMU Network Review.

    Date: November 19-20, 2015.

    Time: 8 p.m. to 5 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda Downtown, 7335 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Sheri A. Hild, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 435-8382, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015 Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22500 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council for Complementary and Integrative Health.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, 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 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 Advisory Council for Complementary and Integrative Health

    Date: October 2, 2015

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 10:00 a.m. to 3:35 p.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Martin H. Goldrosen, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, NIH, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Ste. 401, Bethesda, MD 20892-5475, (301) 594-2014, [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: https://nccih.nih.gov/about/naccih, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22503 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 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 section 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 of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; “NRN” RFA.

    Date: November 17-18, 2015.

    Time: 8 p.m. to 5 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Doubletree Hotel Bethesda, (Formerly Holiday Inn Select), 8120 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Rita Anand, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 496-1487, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22499 Filed 9-4-15; 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; AREA: Oncological Sciences Grant Applications.

    Date: September 24, 2015.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 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: Sally A. Mulhern, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6214, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-5877, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group; Social Sciences and Population Studies A Study Section.

    Date: October 1-2, 2015.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Suzanne Ryan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3139, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1712, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Cell Biology Integrated Review Group; Molecular and Integrative Signal Transduction Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Marines' Memorial Club and Hotel, 609 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA 94102.

    Contact Person: Raya Mandler, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5134, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-8228, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Cell Biology Integrated Review Group; Development—2 Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites DC, 900 10th Street, Washington, DC 20001.

    Contact Person: Rass M. Shayiq, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institute of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2182, MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2359, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group; Motor Function, Speech and Rehabilitation Study Section.

    Date: October 5, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Melrose Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Biao Tian, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3166, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-4411, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Group; Clinical and Integrative Diabetes and Obesity Study Section.

    Date: October 8-9, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The Allerton Hotel, 701 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60611.

    Contact Person: Hui Chen, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1044, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Musculoskeletal, Oral and Skin Sciences Integrated Review Group; Skeletal Biology Structure and Regeneration Study Section.

    Date: October 13-14, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Warwick Seattle Hotel, 401 Lenora Street, Seattle, WA 98121.

    Contact Person: Daniel F. McDonald, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4110, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1215, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Integrative, Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Somatosensory and Chemosensory Systems Study Section.

    Date: October 15-16, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Doubletree Hotel Washington, 1515 Rhode Island Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: M. Catherine Bennett, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5182, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1766, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group; Cognition and Perception Study Section.

    Date: October 15-16, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Wyndham Grand Chicago Riverfront Hotel, 71 E Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60601.

    Contact Person: Dana Jeffrey Plude, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3176, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2309, [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: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22504 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 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 section 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 of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: November 5, 2015.

    Time: 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Peter Zelazowski, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 435-6902, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22498 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 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 section 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 of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Katanis P01 Teleconference Review.

    Date: October 30, 2015.

    Time: 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Sherry L. Dupere, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 451-3415, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22502 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 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 section 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 of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: November 16, 2015.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Sherry L. Dupere, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 451-3415, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22501 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 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 of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Clinical Study Planning.

    Date: September 25, 2015.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Elena Sanovich, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 750, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-594-8886, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-12-265: NIDDK Ancillary Studies—HBV (R01).

    Date: September 30, 2015.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jian Yang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 755, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7799, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-12-265: NIDDK Ancillary Studies—Adult Liver Failure (R01).

    Date: September 30, 2015.

    Time: 2:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jian Yang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 755, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7799, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 1, 2015. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-22496 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering; 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 of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Special Emphasis Panel; Health Disparity SBIR Review (2016/01).

    Date: October 23, 2015.

    Time: 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, Suite 920, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Dennis Hlasta, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 952, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-4794, [email protected]

    Dated: September 1, 2015. David Clary, Program Analyst, <E T="03">Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2015-22497 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5885-N-01] Proposed Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program, Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy Program and Other Programs; Fiscal Year 2016 AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Fair Market Rents (FMRs).

    SUMMARY:

    Section 8(c)(1) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (USHA) requires the Secretary to publish FMRs periodically, but not less than annually, adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year. The primary uses of FMRs are to determine payment standards for the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, to determine initial renewal rents for some expiring project-based Section 8 contracts, to determine initial rents for housing assistance payment contracts in the Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program, and to serve as rent ceilings for rental assistance units in the HOME Investment Partnerships program. FMRs are used in the calculation of maximum award amounts for Continuum of Care grantees and are also used in the calculation of flat rents in Public Housing units. Today's notice provides proposed FY 2016 FMRs for all areas that reflect the estimated 40th and 50th percentile rent levels trended to April 1, 2016. The FY 2016 FMRs are based on “5-year” data collected by the American Community Survey (ACS) from 2009 through 2013. These data are updated by one-year 2013 ACS data for areas where statistically valid one-year ACS data is available. HUD continues to use ACS data in different ways according to the statistical reliability of rent estimates. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) rent and utility indexes are used to further update the data to 2014. These values are then trended forward to FY 2016 using the annualized change in median gross rents as measured across the most recent 5 years of available 1 year ACS data. While HUD will continue to use this trend factor for the calculation of FY 2016 FMRs, the Department is considering replacing it with a forward-looking forecast for the FY 2017 FMRs. For example, HUD is evaluating the use of a model that would forecast national rent and utility CPI indices based on economic assumptions used in the formulation of the President's Budget. HUD seeks public comments on this or alternative methodologies, as well as other data sources, for trending rent levels forward.

    The proposed FY 2016 FMRs in this notice incorporate a change in the level of statistical reliability that is allowed for an ACS estimate to be used in the calculation of FMRs. Previously, if the error of the estimate was less than the estimate itself, HUD used the estimate. The Proposed FMRs in this notice use ACS estimates where the size of the error is limited to half of the estimate.

    An additional change to the proposed FY 2016 FMRs is the incorporation of the February 28, 2013, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) metropolitan area definition update based on the 2010 Decennial Census data. The 2013 ACS data are the first to use the new area definitions in the compilation of the ACS data.

    In a June 2, 2015 advanced notice of proposed rulemaking, HUD solicited comments on several topics related to the calculation of FMRs, including possible measures the Department is considering that would reduce the concentration of Section 8 voucher tenants. For example, HUD is evaluating alternatives to the current 50th percentile FMR program, which was implemented to mitigate excessive geographic concentration of voucher tenants. Comments were requested to determine interest in a program that is based on different measures for determining how many and which areas would receive special FMRs to encourage deconcentration, as well as on alternative FMR-based tools for promoting deconcentration, such as Small Area FMRs estimated at the ZIP code level. The Department appreciates the comments provided and is currently analyzing this input to inform the next steps in the rulemaking process. For the FY 2016 FMRs, however, the current 50th percentile FMR program is still in place with no change to existing regulations.

    DATES:

    Comment Due Date: October 8, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding the proposed FMRs to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0001. Communications must refer to the above docket number and title and should contain the information specified in the “Request for Comments” section. There are two methods for submitting public comments.

    1. Submission of Comments by Mail. Comments may be submitted by mail to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at all federal agencies, however, submission of comments by mail often results in delayed delivery. To ensure timely receipt of comments, HUD recommends that comments submitted by mail be submitted at least two weeks in advance of the public comment deadline.

    2. Electronic Submission of Comments. Interested persons may submit comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit comments electronically. Electronic submission of comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make them immediately available to the public. Comments submitted electronically through the http://www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by other commenters and interested members of the public. Commenters should follow instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically.

    Note: To receive consideration as public comments, comments must be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. Again, all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the notice.

    No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile (FAX) comments are not acceptable.

    Public Inspection of Public Comments. All properly submitted comments and communications regarding this notice submitted to HUD will be available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at 202-708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. Copies of all comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information on the methodology used to develop FMRs or a listing of all FMRs, please call the HUD USER information line at 800-245-2691 or access the information on the HUD USER Web site http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr.html. FMRs are listed at the 40th or 50th percentile in Schedule B. For informational purposes, 40th percentile recent-mover rents for the areas with 50th percentile FMRs will be provided in the HUD FY 2016 FMR documentation system at http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/docsys.html&data=fmr16 and 50th percentile rents for all FMR areas will be published at http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/50per.html after publication of final FY 2016 FMRs.

    Questions related to use of FMRs or voucher payment standards should be directed to the respective local HUD program staff. Questions on how to conduct FMR surveys may be addressed to Marie L. Lihn or Peter B. Kahn of the Economic and Market Analysis Division, Office of Economic Affairs, Office of Policy Development and Research at HUD headquarters [451 7th Street SW., Room 8208, Washington, DC 20410]; telephone number 202-402-2409 (this is not a toll-free number), or they may be reached at [email protected] Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access HUD numbers through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

    Electronic Data Availability. This Federal Register notice will be available electronically from the HUD User page at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. Federal Register notices also are available electronically from https://www.federalregister.gov/, the U.S. Government Printing Office Web site. Complete documentation of the methodology and data used to compute each area's proposed FY 2016 FMRs is available at http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/docsys.html&data=fmr16. Proposed FY 2016 FMRs are available in a variety of electronic formats at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. FMRs may be accessed in PDF format as well as in Microsoft Excel. Small Area FMRs based on proposed FY 2016 Metropolitan Area Rents are available in Microsoft Excel format at the same web address. Please note that these Small Area FMRs are only applicable to the public housing agencies (PHAs) participating in the Small Area FMR demonstration. Small Area FMRs for non-demonstration areas are available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/smallarea/index.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Section 8 of the USHA (42 U.S.C. 1437f) authorizes housing assistance to aid lower-income families in renting safe and decent housing. Housing assistance payments are limited by FMRs established by HUD for different geographic areas. In the HCV program, the FMR is the basis for determining the “payment standard amount” used to calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for an assisted family (see 24 CFR 982.503). In general, the FMR for an area is the amount that would be needed to pay the gross rent (shelter rent plus utilities) of privately owned, decent, and safe rental housing of a modest (non-luxury) nature with suitable amenities is typically set at the 40th percentile of the distribution of gross rents. In addition, all rents subsidized under the HCV program must meet reasonable rent standards. HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 888.113 permit the Department to establish 50th percentile FMRs for certain areas.

    II. Procedures for the Development of FMRs

    Section 8(c)(1) of the USHA requires the Secretary of HUD to publish FMRs periodically, but not less frequently than annually. Section 8(c)(1) states, in part:

    Proposed fair market rentals for an area shall be published in the Federal Register with reasonable time for public comment and shall become effective upon the date of publication in final form in the Federal Register. Each fair market rental in effect under this subsection shall be adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year to reflect changes, based on the most recent available data trended so the rentals will be current for the year to which they apply, of rents for existing or newly constructed rental dwelling units, as the case may be, of various sizes and types in the market area suitable for occupancy by persons assisted under this section.

    HUD's regulations at 24 CFR part 888 provide that HUD will develop proposed FMRs, publish them for public comment, provide a public comment period of at least 30 days, analyze the comments, and publish final FMRs. (See 24 CFR 888.115.)

    In addition, HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 888.113 set out procedures for HUD to assess whether areas are eligible for FMRs at the 50th percentile. Minimally qualified areas 1 are reviewed each year unless not qualified to be reviewed. Areas are not qualified to be reviewed if they have been made a 50th-percentile area within the last three years or have lost 50th-percentile status for failure to deconcentrate within the last three years.

    1 As defined in 24 CFR 888.113(c), a minimally qualified area is an area with at least 100 census tracts where 70 percent or fewer of the census tracts with at least 10 two bedroom rental units are census tracts in which at least 30 percent of the two bedroom rental units have gross rents at or below the two bedroom FMR set at the 40th percentile rent. This continues to be evaluated with 2000 Decennial Census information. In light of HUD's June 6, 2015 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, HUD has chosen not to update the area selection criteria with 2010 tract delineations in order to ease the anticipated future implementation of a Small Area FMR based deconcentration rule.

    In FY 2015 there were 16 areas using 50th-percentile FMRs. Of these 16 areas, 6 areas completed three years of program participation and were evaluated. Only two of the 6 areas will continue as 50th-percentile FMR areas; three of the remaining four areas do not show measurable deconcentration over the three-year period, will not continue as 50th-percentile FMR areas, and will not be evaluated for three years. One area that was evaluated, the New Haven-Meriden, CT HUD Metro FMR Area, graduated from the program and will be evaluated each year. Housing authorities operating in these areas are encouraged to review the rules at 24 CFR 982.503(f) to determine if they qualify for continued use of the 50th percentile rents when setting their payment standards. The table below lists the three areas that are not eligible for 50th percentile FMRs until 2019.

    FMR Areas That Failed To Deconcentrate and Year of Next Reevaluation Baltimore, MD MSA 2019 Fort Lauderdale, FL HUD Metro FMR Area 2019 Richmond, VA HUD Metro FMR Area 2019

    The Washington, DC-VA-MD HUD Metro FMR Area returns as a 50th percentile area after failing to deconcentrate in FY 2013. In summary, there will be 13 50th-percentile FMR areas in FY 2016. These areas are indicated by an asterisk in Schedule B, where all FMRs are listed by state. The following table lists the FMR areas along with the year of their next evaluation.

    FY 2016 50th-Percentile FMR Areas and Year of Next Reevaluation Albuquerque, NM MSA 2018 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL HUD Metro FMR Area 2018 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO MSA 2018 Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT HUD Metro FMR Area 2018 Honolulu, HI MSA 2018 Kansas City, MO-KS HUD Metro FMR Area 2018 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA 2018 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA 2019 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA MSA 2018 Tacoma, WA HUD Metro FMR Area 2018 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA 2018 Washington, DC-VA-MD HUD Metro FMR Area 2019 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL HUD Metro FMR Area 2019 III. FMR Methodology

    This section provides a brief overview of how the FY 2016 FMRs are computed. For complete information on how FMR areas are determined, and on how each area's FMRs are derived, see the online documentation at http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/docsys.html&data=fmr16.

    The proposed FY 2016 FMRs are based on the updated metropolitan area definitions published by OMB on February 28, 2013. Counties that have been removed from metropolitan areas will be nonmetropolitan counties. Counties that have been added to metropolitan areas will be treated as metropolitan county subareas. They will receive rents based on their own data if the local data is statistically reliable (with an error that is less than one-half of the estimate) or receive the metropolitan rent if their subarea estimate does not exist or is statistically unreliable.2 New multi-county metropolitan areas will be treated as individual county metropolitan subareas using county based gross rent estimates (if statistically reliable); otherwise, a metropolitan, area-wide gross rent estimate is used.

    2 The metropolitan subarea of Columbia, MD no longer exists. This subarea, developed in the 1970s was based on data collected in the field before the exception payment standard regulations were developed. This level of geography cannot be continued as it does not comport with any current subarea rules.

    A. Base Year Rents

    The U.S. Census Bureau released standard tabulations of 5-year ACS data collected between 2009 through 2013 in December of 2014. For Proposed FY 2016 FMRs, HUD uses the 2009-2013 5-year ACS data to update the base rents. HUD has updated base rents each year based on new 5-year data since FY 2012, for which HUD used 2005-2009 ACS data. HUD is also updating base rents for Puerto Rico FMRs using the 2009-2013 Puerto Rico Community Survey (PRCS); HUD first updated the Puerto Rico base rents in FY 2014 based on 2007-2011 PRCS data collected through the ACS program.

    HUD historically based FMRs on gross rents for recent movers (those who have moved into their current residence in the last 24 months). However, due to the way Census constructs the 5-year ACS data, HUD developed a new methodology for calculating recent-mover FMRs in FY 2012. As in FY 2012, HUD assigns all areas a base rent, which is the two-bedroom standard quality 5-year gross rent estimate from the ACS.3 Because HUD's regulations mandate that FMRs must be published as recent mover gross rents, HUD continues to apply a recent mover factor to the standard quality base rents assigned from the 5-year ACS data. The calculation of the recent mover factor is described below.

    3 For areas with a two-bedroom standard quality gross rent from the ACS that have a margin of error greater than 50 percent of the estimate or no estimate due to inadequate sample in the 2009-2013 5-year ACS, HUD uses the two-bedroom state non-metro area rent.

    B. Recent Mover Factor

    Following the assignment of the standard quality two-bedroom rent described above, HUD applies a recent mover factor to these rents. The calculation of the recent mover factor for FY 2016 is similar to the methodology HUD used in FY 2015, with the only difference being the use of updated ACS data and the change to the statistical reliability assessment of the ACS data. The following describes the process for determining the appropriate recent mover factor.

    In general, HUD uses the 1-year ACS-based two-bedroom recent mover gross rent estimate from the smallest geographic area encompassing the FMR area for which the estimate is statistically reliable to calculate the recent mover factor.4 HUD calculates some areas' recent mover factors using data collected just for the FMR area. However, HUD bases other areas' recent mover factors on larger geographic areas if this is necessary to obtain statistically reliable estimates. For metropolitan areas that are subareas of larger metropolitan areas, the order is FMR area, metropolitan area, aggregated metropolitan parts of the state, and state. Metropolitan areas that are not divided follow a similar path from FMR area, to aggregated metropolitan parts of the state, to state. In nonmetropolitan areas HUD bases the recent mover factor on the FMR area, the aggregated non-metropolitan parts of the state, or if that is not available, on the basis of the whole state. HUD calculates the recent mover factor as the percentage change between the 5-year 2009-2013 standard quality two-bedroom gross rent and the 1 year 2013 recent mover two-bedroom gross rent for the recent mover factor area. HUD does not allow recent mover factors to lower the standard quality base rent; therefore, if the 5-year standard quality rent is larger than the comparable 1-year recent mover rent, the recent mover factor is set to 1. The process for calculating each area's recent mover factor is detailed in the FY 2016 Proposed FMR documentation system available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/docsys.html&data=fmr16. Applying the recent mover factor to the standard quality base rent produces an “as of” 2013 recent mover two-bedroom base gross rent for the FMR area.

    4 For the purpose of the recent mover factor calculat