Federal Register Vol. 80, No.176,

The 2009 Forest Plan provides management direction for activities on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest for the next 10 to 15 years, including direction on eight topics (vegetation, wildlife, aquatic resources, recreation and travel management, fire management, livestock grazing, timber and recommended wilderness).

In 2010, WildEarth Guardians, Friends of the Bitterroot, Inc., and Montanans for Quiet Recreation, Inc., filed a complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of Montana (Case 9:10-cv-00104-DWM) alleging inadequate analysis of the “site-specific impacts of snowmobile use on big game winter habitat and conflicting recreational uses” when developing the Forest Plan, failure “to apply certain criteria [referred to as the minimization criteria] when designating areas open to snowmobile use” and that Subpart C of the 2005 Travel Management Rule concerning over-snow vehicles was invalid. In its June 22, 2015 Opinion (WildEarth Guardians et al. v. Montana Snowmobile Ass'n, 790 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 2015)), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found the Forest Service provided sufficient information to establish that it took a “hard look” at the impacts of snowmobile use on non-motorized recreational uses and sufficiently analyzed these conflicts. Further, the U.S. Court of Appeals found that plaintiffs' challenge to the Subpart C exemption in the Travel Management Rule was not ripe for review.

However, in the same opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals held that the Forest Service did not provide the public adequate access to information about the impact of snowmobiles on big game wildlife and habitat and did not allow the public to play an appropriate role in the decision-making process. The U.S. Court of Appeals also found the Forest Service did not adequately apply the minimization criteria found in the Travel Management Rule. The matter was remanded to the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana.

In an August 27, 2015 Order, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana ordered the Forest Service to “properly disclose the information underlying its analysis of snowmobile impacts on big game wildlife” and “adequately appl[y] the minimization criteria in the [2005 Travel Managment Rule].” The SEIS will disclose information underlying its analysis of snowmobile impacts on big game wildlife and apply the minimization criteria to areas on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest open to over-snow vehicle use during the winter recreation season (December 2 through May 15).

A Draft SEIS is expected to be available for public review and comment in November 2015. The comment period for the Draft SEIS will be 90 days from the date the Notice of Availability is published in the Federal Register 36 CFR 219.16(a)(2).

Agenda

The Committee will review draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for NMFS-led omnibus amendment, which would establish provisions for industry-funded monitoring (IFM) across all New England and Mid-Atlantic Council-managed fisheries and also proposes requirements for IFM in the Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries. The Committee will also review/discuss omnibus alternatives in the IFM amendment and options for IFM in the Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries; herring/mackerel options may include requirements for industry-funded observer coverage, at-sea monitoring, portside sampling, and/or electronic monitoring (EM) as well as develop recommendations regarding any additional management measures to be considered in the omnibus IFM amendment. They will also develop recommendations regarding the selection of preferred alternatives for the omnibus IFM amendment and the approval of the Draft EA for public comment. The Committee may address other business as necessary.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

The items of discussion are as follows:

1. Review progress of ongoing assessment projects.

2. Receive a report on the Data Best Practices Workshop.

3. Review Southeast Fishery Science Center progress on recommendations from the Data and Assessment Program Reviews.

4. Receive a report on the NOAA Fisheries Stock Assessment Prioritization Plan.

5. Approve SEDAR Operating Procedures changes.

6. Address the SEDAR assessment schedule: identify assessment capability, determine 2017 priorities and identify projects for 2018-19.

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.

This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

The purpose of the SSC's Groundfish Subcommittee meeting is to review draft 2015 stock assessment documents and any other pertinent information for new full stock assessment of black rockfish off Oregon, work with the Stock Assessment Teams to make necessary revisions, and produce a report for use by the Pacific Council family and other interested persons for developing management recommendations for fisheries in 2017 and beyond. Additionally, the SSC Groundfish Subcommittee will review an updated yelloweye rockfish rebuilding analysis, review new overfishing limit (OFL) projections for arrowtooth flounder, and review new methodology for determining a big skate OFL. No management actions will be decided by the SSC Groundfish Subcommittee. The Subcommittee's role will be development of recommendations and reports for consideration by the SSC and the Pacific Council at its November meeting in Garden Grove, California.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may come before the subcommittee meeting participants for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Subcommittee 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 Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Subcommittee participants' intent to take final action to address the emergency.

All visitors to the National Marine Fisheries Service Western Regional Center's Sand Point facility should bring one of the following forms of identification:

Visitors who are foreign nationals (defined as a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States) will require additional security clearance to access the Western Regional Center's Sand Point facility. Foreign national visitors should contact Dr. Martin Dorn at (206) 526-6548 at least 2 weeks prior to the meeting date to initiate the security clearance process.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at (503) 820-2425 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

If the Committee approves the proposed addition, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to provide the service listed below from the nonprofit agency employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

The following service is proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agency listed:

Service:

Service Type: Janitorial Service.

Service is Mandatory for: U.S. Geological Survey, 4611 Research Park Circle, Suites D and E, Las Cruces, NM.

Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Tresco, Inc., Las Cruces, NM.

Contracting Activity: Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Office of Acquisition and Grants—Denver, Denver, CO.

On 6/6/2014 (79 FR 32716-32718), 6/5/2015 (80 FR 32096-32097) and 6/12/2015 (80 FR 33485-33489), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notices of proposed additions to the Procurement List.

After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the products and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the products listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products to the Government.

2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the products proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following products are added to the Procurement List:

The text of the Agreement and Order appears below.

1. In accordance with the Consumer Product Safety Act (“CPSA”), 15 U.S.C. 2051-2089 and 16 CFR 1118.20, phil&teds USA, Inc. (“phil&teds USA” or “Firm”), and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“Commission”), through its staff (“Staff”), hereby enter into this Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and Affidavit of Corporate Officer, attached at Exhibit A (collectively the “Agreement”) and the incorporated attached Order (“Order”) resolve Staff's charges set forth below.

2. The Commission is an independent federal regulatory agency established pursuant to, and responsible for, the enforcement of the CPSA. By executing this Agreement, Staff is acting on behalf of the Commission, pursuant to 16 CFR § 1118.20(b). The Commission issues the Order under the provisions of the CPSA.

3. phil&teds USA is a corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the state of Colorado, with its principal corporate office located in Fort Collins, CO. phil&teds USA is an importer, distributor and retailer of children's strollers, child carriers and other baby products and accessories.

4. From May 2009 through January 2011, phil&teds USA imported and sold in the United States, approximately 13,500 clip-on high chairs under the brand name, MeToo Chairs (“Chairs”). The Firm sold the Chairs online and through independent retailers nationwide.

5. The Chairs are “consumer products,” and, at all relevant times, phil&teds USA was either the importer, “distributor” or “retailer” of these consumer products, which were “distributed in commerce,” as those terms are defined or used in sections 3(a)(5), (7), (8),and (13) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(5), (7), (8), and (13).

6. The Chairs are defective and create an unreasonable risk of serious injury because the clamps on the Chairs can detach from the table, posing a fall hazard. If only one side of the Chair detaches, the lack of space between the metal cross bar and the clamps creates a finger pinching, laceration, and amputation hazard.

7. Between September 2009 and October 2010, the Firm obtained sufficient information that reasonably supported the conclusion that the Chairs contained a defect that could create a substantial product hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury. Specifically, the Firm was aware of reports of incidents and injuries, including reports of fingertip amputations to children. The Firm was also aware that two design changes had been implemented to address the defects in the Chair.

8. Despite having information regarding the Chair's defect or risk, the Firm failed to inform the Commission immediately, as required by sections 15(b)(3) and (4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2064(b)(3) and (4).

9. Because the information in the Firm's possession constituted actual and presumed knowledge, the Firm knowingly violated section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2068(a)(4), as the term “knowingly” is defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2069(d).

10. When the Firm filed its Full Report, the Firm:

a. underreported the total number of incidents and injuries involving the Chairs, stating that it was aware of 10 “instances” involving the product, but provided no details on the instances and failed to indicate that the Firm was aware of two amputation injuries;

b. failed to notify staff that the Chairs posed an amputation hazard; and

c. withheld information that the Chair had been redesigned to address the hazard and that the sample product supplied with the Full Report was manufactured differently than the Chairs involved in the incident and injury reports.

11. The Firm's failure to report this information resulted in delayed implementation of the corrective action and recall of the product, which was not publicly announced until August 17, 2011.

12. By making these inaccurate and incomplete statements in the Full Report, the Firm knowingly committed a material misrepresentation to an officer or employee in the course of an investigation under the CPSA, which violates section 19(a)(13) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2068(a)(13), as the term “knowingly” is defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2069(d).

13. Under section 20 of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2069, the Firm is subject to civil penalties for its knowing violation of section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2068(a)(4) and for the Firm's knowing material misrepresentations in violation of section 19(a)(13) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2068(a)(13).

14. This Agreement does not constitute an admission by the Firm to the charges set forth in paragraphs 4 through 13, including charges that phil&teds USA violated any statute or regulation, failed to timely report, or committed a material misrepresentation in violation of the CPSA. In fact, phil&teds USA took the initiative in reporting incidents surrounding the Chair to the CPSC, disclosed the number of those incidents, and further explained that unreasonable misuse of the product was the cause of serious injuries.

15. Under the CPSA, the Commission has jurisdiction over the matter involving the Chairs and over phil&teds USA, Inc.

16. In settlement of Staff's charges, and to avoid the cost, distraction, delay, uncertainty, and inconvenience of protracted litigation or other proceedings, the Firm shall pay a civil penalty in the amount of three million, five hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000) (“Total Civil Penalty Amount”). In reliance on the accuracy and completeness of the Firm's representations and warranties in this Agreement, the Commission agrees to suspend all but two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) of the Total Civil Penalty Amount (“$200,000 Payment”), on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. The $200,000 Payment shall be paid within thirty (30) calendar days after the Firm receives service of the Commission's final Order accepting the Agreement. All payments to be made under the Agreement shall constitute debts owing to the United States and shall be made by electronic wire transfer to the United States via: http://www.pay.gov for allocation to and credit against the payment obligations of the Firm under this Agreement.

17. phil&teds USA represents and warrants that the financial statements of phil&teds USA provided to the Commission in connection with the matters addressed in this Agreement (“Financial Statements”) are complete, accurate and current and have been prepared on a consistent basis throughout the periods indicated except as otherwise noted therein, and that the Financial Statements fairly present the financial condition and results of operations and cash flow of the Firm as of the dates, and for the periods, indicated therein, all consistently applied during the periods involved except as noted therein, and subject, in the case of the unaudited interim financial statements, to the absence of notes and normal year-end adjustments.

18. The Firm represents and warrants that the information supplied by the Firm to the Commission in connection with the matters addressed in the Agreement (including information about the Firm's financial resources and ability to pay the Total Civil Penalty Amount) did not, at the time provided to the Commission, contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading.

19. The parties agree that an amount equal to Total Civil Penalty Amount minus any amounts paid by phil&teds USA pursuant to this Agreement shall become due and payable immediately upon the occurrence of an “Event of Default,” without notice or further action by any party. An “Event of Default” means:

a. a failure of phil&teds USA to pay the $200,000 Payment (or any portion thereof) when due and payable;

b. the breach or inaccuracy of any representation or warranty of phil&teds USA in this Agreement;

c. the breach or failure by phil&teds USA to observe or perform any of its obligations, covenants or agreements set forth in the Agreement; or

d. a failure of phil&teds USA to comply with all CPSC statutes or regulations for three (3) years after the effective date of this Agreement.

20. All unpaid amounts, if any, due and owing under the Agreement shall constitute a debt due and immediately owing by phil&teds USA to the United States, and interest shall accrue and be paid by phil&teds USA at the federal legal rate of interest set forth at 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) and (b) from the date of Event of Default until all amounts due have been paid in full (hereinafter “Default Payment Amount” and “Default Interest Balance”). phil&teds USA shall consent to a Consent Judgment in the amount of the Default Payment Amount and Default Interest Balance, and the United States, at its sole option, may collect the entire Default Payment Amount and Default Interest Balance or exercise any other rights granted by law or in equity, including but not limited to referring such matters for private collection, and phil&teds USA agrees not to contest, and hereby waives and discharges any defenses to, any collection action undertaken by the United States or its agents or contractors pursuant to this paragraph. phil&teds USA shall pay the United States all reasonable costs of collection and enforcement under this paragraph, respectively, including reasonable attorney's fees and expenses.

21. phil&teds USA shall notify CPSC in writing if any financial information supplied or to be supplied in writing by phil&teds USA to the Commission in connection with the Agreement is, in any material respect, discovered not to be true, accurate or complete; is no longer true, accurate or complete as a result of subsequent events; is discovered to contain an untrue statement of a material fact or to omit a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; or contains as a result of subsequent events an untrue statement of a material fact or an omission of a material fact required to be stated, not misleading.

22. After Staff receives this Agreement executed on behalf of phil&teds USA, Staff shall promptly submit the Agreement to the Commission for provisional acceptance. Promptly following the Commission's provisional acceptance of the Agreement, the Agreement shall be placed on the public record and published in the Federal Register, in accordance with the procedures set forth in 16 CFR § 1118.20(e). If within fifteen (15) calendar days the Commission does not receive any written request not to accept the Agreement, the Agreement shall be deemed finally accepted on the sixteenth (16th) calendar day after the date the Agreement is published in the Federal Register, in accordance with 16 CFR § 1118.20(f).

23. This Agreement is conditioned upon, and subject to, the Commission's final acceptance, as set forth above, and is subject to the provisions of 16 CFR § 1118.20(h). Upon the later of: (i) The Commission's final acceptance of this Agreement and service of the accepted Agreement upon phil&teds USA, and (ii) the date of issuance of the final Order, this Agreement shall be in full force and effect, and shall be binding upon the parties.

24. Effective upon the later of: (i) The Commission's final acceptance of the Agreement and service of the accepted Agreement upon phil&teds USA, and (ii) the date of issuance of the final Order, for good and valuable consideration, phil&teds USA hereby expressly and irrevocably waives and agrees not to assert any past, present, or future rights to the following, in connection with the matter described in the Agreement: (a) An administrative or judicial hearing; (b) judicial review or other challenge or contest of the validity of the Order or of the Commission's actions; (c) a determination by the Commission of whether phil&teds USA failed to comply with the CPSA and the underlying regulations; (d) a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (e) any claims under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

25. phil&teds USA shall implement and maintain a compliance program designed to ensure compliance with the statutes and regulations enforced by the Commission that, at a minimum, contains the following elements:

a. written standards and policies concerning products sold by phil&teds USA in the United States that may relate to, or impact, CPSA compliance;

b. procedures for verifying the accuracy and completeness of information conveyed to the Commission;

c. procedures for implementing corrective and preventive actions when compliance deficiencies or violations are identified;

d. procedures for collecting information from phil&teds USA's affiliates on incidents and injuries occurring outside the United States;

e. a mechanism for confidential employee reporting of compliance-related questions or concerns to either a compliance officer or to another senior manager with authority to act as necessary;

f. effective communication of company compliance-related policies and procedures to all employees through training programs or otherwise;

g. senior manager responsibility for compliance and accountability for violations of the statutes and regulations enforced by the Commission;

h. board oversight of compliance; and

i. retention of all compliance-related records for at least five (5) years and availability of such records to Staff, upon request.

26. phil&teds USA shall implement, maintain and enforce a system of internal controls and procedures designed to ensure that:

a. information required to be disclosed by phil&teds USA to the Commission is recorded, processed and reported in accordance with applicable law;

b. all reporting made to the Commission is timely, truthful, complete and accurate; and

c. prompt disclosure is made to phil&teds USA's management of any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design or operation of such internal controls that are reasonably likely to adversely affect in any material respect phil&teds USA's ability to record, process, and report to the Commission in accordance with applicable law.

27. Upon Staff's request, phil&teds USA shall provide written documentation of its compliance program and system of internal controls and procedures, including, but not limited to, the effective dates of the program, controls and procedures and improvements thereto. phil&teds USA shall cooperate fully and truthfully with Staff and shall make available all information, materials, and personnel deemed necessary by Staff to evaluate phil&teds USA's compliance with the terms of the Agreement.

28. phil&teds USA agrees that any settlement agreements with consumers involving products over which the Commission has jurisdiction, and which include a confidentiality clause, must include an exception to the confidentiality clause that allows consumers to discuss any issues related to their settlement agreement with officers and employees of the Commission and other local, state and federal government representatives.

29. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Commission may make public disclosure of the terms of the Agreement and Order.

30. phil&teds USA represents that the Agreement: (i) Is entered into freely and voluntarily, without any degree of duress or compulsion whatsoever; (ii) has been duly authorized; and (iii) constitutes the valid and binding obligation of phil&teds USA, and each of its successors, transferees, and/or assigns.

31. The signatories represent that they are authorized to execute this Agreement.

32. The Agreement is governed by the laws of the United States.

33. The Agreement and the Order shall apply to, and be binding upon, phil&teds USA and each of its successors, transferees, and/or assigns, and a violation of the Agreement or Order may subject phil&teds USA and each of its successors, transferees, and/or assigns to appropriate legal action.

34. The Agreement and the Order constitute the complete agreement between the parties on the subject matter.

35. The Agreement may be used in interpreting the Order. Understandings, agreements, representations, or interpretations apart from those contained in the Agreement and the Order may not be used to vary or contradict their terms. For purposes of construction, the Agreement shall be deemed to have been drafted by both of the parties, and therefore, shall not be construed against any party for that reason in any subsequent dispute.

36. The Agreement shall not be waived, amended, modified, or otherwise altered, except as in accordance with the provisions of 16 CFR 1118.20(h). The Agreement may be executed in counterparts.

37. If any provision of the Agreement or the Order is held to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable under present or future laws effective during the terms of the Agreement and the Order, such provision shall be fully severable. The balance of the Agreement and the Order shall remain in full force and effect, unless the Commission and phil&teds USA agree that severing the provision materially affects the purpose of the Agreement and Order.

I, the undersigned, swear and affirm that I am employed by phil&teds USA, Inc., that I hold the position indicated below, and, by reason of my position, I am authorized and qualified to make the following statements. All capitalized terms not defined in this affidavit shall have the meanings given to them in the Agreement between phil&teds USA, Inc. and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, of which this Affidavit is a part.

1. The financial statements of phil&teds USA provided to the Commission in connection with the matters addressed in this Agreement (“Financial Statements”) are complete, accurate and current and have been prepared on a consistent basis throughout the periods indicated except as otherwise noted therein, and that the Financial Statements fairly present the financial condition and results of operations and cash flow of phil&teds USA as of the dates, and for the periods, indicated therein, all consistently applied during the periods involved except as noted therein, and subject, in the case of the unaudited interim financial statements, to the absence of notes and normal year-end adjustments.

2. phil&teds USA has supplied all documents and information responsive to CPSC's requests.

3. The information supplied by phil&teds USA to the Commission in connection with the matters addressed in the Agreement (including information about the Firm's financial resources and ability to pay the Total Civil Penalty Amount) did not, at the time provided to the Commission, contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading.

4. For each of the fiscal years ended March 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the net income, the net worth/stockholder's equity and working capital of phil&teds USA, Inc., was negative and to satisfy liabilities, phil&teds USA, Inc. relied on payments from its parent entity, Most Excellent World Holdings, Limited (“MEW”), pursuant to an intercompany agreement.

5. phil&teds USA, Inc. has insufficient cash or other liquid assets to satisfy a civil penalty payment in excess of $200,000, has no sources of funding that could be used to provide the liquidity to make such a payment, and is unable to secure funds from MEW to fulfill a civil penalty payment obligation.

6. phil&teds USA, Inc. will not directly or indirectly receive reimbursement, indemnification, insurance-related payment or other payment in connection with the matters addressed in the Agreement.

7. Any civil penalty payment by phil&teds USA, Inc. in excess of $200,000 will require phil&teds USA, Inc. to cease operations as an ongoing business.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. I understand that any intentional false statement in this declaration may be a criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1001.

Upon consideration of the Settlement Agreement entered into between phil&teds USA, Inc. (“phil&teds USA”), and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“Commission”), and the Commission having jurisdiction over the subject matter and over phil&teds USA, and it appearing that the Settlement Agreement and the Order are in the public interest, it is

ORDERED that the Settlement Agreement be, and is, hereby, accepted; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that phil&teds USA shall comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and shall pay a civil penalty of $3,500,000, with $3,300,000 of the total suspended, subject to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement. phil&teds USA shall pay the non-suspended portion of the penalty, $200,000, in accordance with the terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, an amount equal to $3,500,000 (representing the entire civil penalty, including the suspended portion), plus any accrued and unpaid interest, minus any penalty amounts paid by phil&teds USA, shall immediately become due and payable.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4314(c) (1-5), the Department of the Air Force (AF) announces the appointment of members to the AF's Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB). Appointments are made by the authorizing official. Each board member shall review and evaluate performance scores provided by the SES' immediate supervisor. Performance standards must be applied consistently across the AF. The board will make final recommendations to the authorizing official relative to the performance of the executive.

The members of the 2015 Performance Review Board for the U.S. Air Force are:

1. Board President—Gen McDew, Commander, United States Transportation Command.

2. Gen Goldfein, Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force.

3. Honorable Lisa Disbrow, Under Secretary of the Air Force.

4. Honorable Miranda Ballentine, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment, and Logistics.

5. Lt Gen James McLaughlin, Deputy Commander at United States Cyber Command.

6. Lt Gen Andrew Busch, Director, Defense Logistics Agency.

7. Ms. Thomas, Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Air Force.

8. Mr. Gill, Executive Director, Air Force Materiel Command.

9. Mr. Hartley, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment and Energy.

10. Mr. Bennett, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Financial Management and Comptroller.

11. Mr. Lombardi, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition).

12. Mr. Corsi, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel and Services.

13. Mr. Salvatori, Director, Capabilities Management Office.

14. Mr. Geurts, Acquisition Executive, U.S. Special Operations Command.

15. Mr. Fedrigo, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Reserve Affairs and Airman Readiness.

16. Ms. Kay, Director of Security, Special Program Oversight and Information Protection. Additionally, all career status Air Force Tier 3 SES members not included in the above list are eligible to serve on the 2015 Performance Review Board and are hereby nominated for inclusion on an ad hoc basis in the event of absence(s).

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Exchange Security Clearance Process for Contractor/Vendor Personnel, Exchange Form 3900-013 “Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) Request”, Exchange Form 3900-002 “Trusted Associate Sponsorship System (TASS Request Form)”, Exchange Form 3900-006 “Background Check for Vendors/Contractors”, OMB Control Number 0702-XXXX.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary for the processing of all Army and Air Force Exchange security clearance actions, to record security clearances issued or denied; and to verify eligibility for access to classified information or assignment to a sensitive position.

Affected Public: Individuals and/or households, Business or other for profit.

Annual Burden Hours: 4,600.

Number of Respondents: 2,300.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 2,300.

Average Burden per Response: 120 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondents are individuals and/or households affiliated with Army and Air Force Exchange Service (Exchange) by assignment, employment contractual relationship, or as a result of an inter service support agreement on which personnel security clearance determination has been completed or is pending. Information collected is utilized to process the personnel security clearance of contractors and/or vendors to work at an Exchange facility, record the security clearances issued or denied, and to verify the eligibility for access to classified information or assignment to a sensitive position. In addition to utilizing the information for processing security clearances, the information may also be used by Exchange executives for adverse personnel actions such as removal from sensitive duties, removal from contract agreement, denial to a restricted or sensitive area, and revocation of security clearance.

NACIQI's Statutory Authority and Function: The NACIQI is established under section 114 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), 20 U.S.C. 1011c. The NACIQI advises the Secretary of Education about:

• The establishment and enforcement of the criteria for recognition of accrediting agencies or associations under subpart 2, part H, title IV of the HEA, as amended.

• The recognition of specific accrediting agencies or associations or a specific State public postsecondary vocational education or nurse education approval agency.

• The preparation and publication of the list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies and associations.

• The eligibility and certification process for institutions of higher education under title IV of the HEA, together with recommendations for improvement in such process.

• The relationship between (1) accreditation of institutions of higher education and the certification and eligibility of such institutions, and (2) State licensing responsibilities with respect to such institutions.

• Any other advisory function relating to accreditation and institutional eligibility that the Secretary may prescribe.

Meeting Agenda: Below is a list of agencies, including their current and requested scopes of recognition, scheduled for review during the December 2015 meeting:

Association of Institutions for Jewish Studies Requested scope of recognition: The accreditation of postsecondary institutions of Jewish Studies within the United States exclusively offering educational programs leading to a certificate, associate degree, baccalaureate degree or their equivalent credential in Jewish Studies or Classical Torah Studies.

(The agency does not accredit any institution or program that offers credit for distance education or correspondence education.)

Scope of recognition: The accreditation of institutions and programs within the United States awarding diplomas, associate degrees and bachelor's degrees in funeral service or mortuary science, including the accreditation of distance learning courses and programs offered by these programs and institutions.

Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (Accreditation Candidate) throughout the United States of education programs in audiology and speech-language pathology leading to the first professional or clinical degree at the master's or doctoral level, and the accreditation of these programs offered via distance education.

Scope of recognition: The accreditation of institutions and programs in the United States that award postsecondary certificates, postsecondary diplomas, academic Associate degrees and occupational Associate degrees, in the practice of massage therapy, bodywork, and aesthetics/esthetics and skin care, including components of programs which are offered through distance learning modalities.

Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation throughout the United States of graduate-level, four-year naturopathic medical education programs leading to the Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine (N.M.D.) or Doctor of Naturopathy (N.D.)

Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation throughout the United States of direct- entry midwifery educational institutions and programs conferring degrees and certificates, including the accreditation of such programs offered via distance education.

Scope of recognition: The accreditation of Montessori teacher education institutions and programs throughout the United States, including those offered via distance education.

Scope of recognition: The accreditation throughout the United States of postsecondary schools and departments of cosmetology arts and sciences and massage therapy.

1. Accrediting Commission for Education in Nursing (Consideration of relevant and material information not contained in the record pursuant to 34 CFR 602.36(g)(1)(i) and (ii).)

Scope of recognition: Accreditation of nursing education programs and schools, both postsecondary and higher degree, which offer a certificate, diploma, or a recognized professional degree including clinical doctorate, masters, baccalaureate, associate, diploma, and practical nursing programs in the United States and its territories, including those offered via distance education.

2. Council on Accreditation of Nurse Anesthesia Educational Programs

Scope of recognition: The accreditation of institutions and programs of nurse anesthesia at the post master's certificate, master's, or doctoral degree levels in the United States, and its territories, including programs offering distance education.)

3. Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidacy status”) of postsecondary degree-granting educational institutions in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, and the accreditation of programs offered via distance education within these institutions.

4. Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges

Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidate for Accreditation”) of two-year, associate degree-granting institutions located in California, Hawaii, the United States territories of Guam and American Samoa, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, including the accreditation of such programs offered via distance education at these colleges.

Requested Scope of Recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidate for Accreditation”) of community and other colleges with a primarily pre-baccalaureate mission located in California, Hawaii, the United States territories of Guam and American Samoa, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, which offer certificates, associate degrees, and the first baccalaureate degree by means of a substantive change review offered by institutions that are already accredited by the agency, and such programs offered via distance education and correspondence education at these colleges. This recognition also extends to the Committee on Substantive Change of the Commission, for decisions on substantive changes, and the Appeals Panel.

United States Air Force Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Engineering and Management (request to offer Masters in Operations Management degree at an additional location at Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, NM).

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 9314, the United States Air Force Institute of Technology has submitted a request for modification of existing degree-granting authority to the U.S. Secretary of Education. The NACIQI is the designated review committee for matters concerning degree-granting authority of military educational institutions as outlined in the U.S. Department of Defense Instruction 5545.04 (DoDI 5545.04) and the Federal Policy Governing the Granting of Academic Degrees by Federal Agencies and Institutions (approved by a letter, dated December 23, 1954, from the Director, Bureau of the Budget, to the Secretary for Health, Education, and Welfare). Under DoDI 5545.04, recommendations by the U.S. Secretary of Education regarding substantive change requests submitted by military educational institutions will be included with subsequent notification to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

Submission of written comments regarding a specific accrediting agency or state approval agency under review: Written comments about the recognition of a specific accrediting or State agency must be received by September 25, 2015, in the [email protected] mailbox and include the subject line “Written Comments: (agency name).” 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. Comments about an agency's recognition after review of a compliance report must relate to issues identified in the compliance report and the criteria for recognition cited in the Secretary's letter that requested the report. Comments about the renewal of an agency's recognition based on a review of the agency's petition must relate to its compliance with the Criteria for the Recognition of Accrediting Agencies, or the Criteria and Procedures for Recognition of State Agencies for Approval of Public Postsecondary Vocational Education, as appropriate, which are available at http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html. Only material submitted by the deadline to the email address listed in this notice, and in accordance with these instructions, become part of the official record concerning agencies scheduled for review and are considered by the Department and NACIQI in their deliberations. Please do not send material directly to NACIQI members.

Submission of requests to make an oral comment regarding a specific accrediting agency or state approval agency under review: There are two methods the public may use to make a third-party oral comment of three minutes concerning one of the agencies scheduled for review at the December 16,17, and 18, 2015 meeting. Oral comments about agencies undergoing review must relate to the Criteria for Recognition of Accrediting Agencies, or the Criteria and Procedures for Recognition of State Agencies for Approval of Public Postsecondary Vocational Education, as appropriate, which are available at: http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html

Method One: Submit a request by email to the [email protected] mailbox. Please do not send material directly to NACIQI members. Requests must be received by September 25, 2015, and include the subject line “Oral Comment Request: (agency 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.

Method Two: Register at the meeting location on December 16, 17, or 18, 2015, to make an oral comment during NACIQI's deliberations concerning a particular agency or institution scheduled for review. The requestor must provide his or her name, title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, and telephone number. A total of up to fifteen minutes during each agency review will be allotted for oral commenters who register on December 16, 17, or 18, 2015. Individuals will be selected on a first-come, first-served basis. If selected, each commenter may not exceed three minutes.

The oral comments made will become part of the official record and will be considered by the Department and NACIQI in their deliberations. No individual in attendance or making oral presentations may distribute written materials at the meeting.

Access to Records of the Meeting: The Department will post the official report of the meeting on the NACIQI Web site 90 days after the meeting. Pursuant to the FACA, the public may also inspect the materials at 1990 K Street NW., Washington, DC, by emailing [email protected]or by calling (202) 502-7696 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 two weeks before the scheduled 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.

Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA granted partial waivers that allow gasoline containing greater than 10 volume percent (vol%) ethanol up to 15 vol% ethanol (E15) to be introduced into commerce for use in model year (MY) 2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, subject to certain conditions. EPA issued final rule establishing several measures to mitigate misfueling of other vehicles, engines and equipment with E15 and the potential emissions consequences of misfueling. The rule prohibits the use of gasoline containing more than 10 vol% ethanol in vehicles, engines and equipment that are not covered by the partial waiver decisions. The rule also requires all E15 gasoline fuel dispensers to have a specific label when a retail station or wholesale-purchaser consumer chooses to sell E15. In addition, the rule requires that product transfer documents (PTDs) specifying ethanol content and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) accompany the transfer of gasoline blended with ethanol, and a survey of retail stations to ensure compliance with these requirements. The rule also modifies the Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) program by updating the Complex Model to allow fuel manufacturers to certify batches of gasoline containing up to 15 vol% ethanol. This ICR supporting statement addresses associated recordkeeping and reporting items.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 80).

Estimated number of respondents: 2,103 (total).

Estimated number of responses: 44,000,103.

Frequency of response: On occasion.

Total estimated burden: 13,270 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

Total estimated cost: $ 1,340,292, which includes no annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in Estimates: We expect there will be a decrease in the total estimated respondents, responses and cost to the industry compared to the ICR currently approved by OMB. This change in burden is due to no longer requiring the programing of product transfer codes in this collection. The respondent universe decreased from 6,211 to 2,103, a difference of 4,108 members. The number of responses declined from 44,010,211 to 44,000,103, a difference of 10,108 reports. This reduced the industry burden hours from 37,350 to 13,270.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), and any changes, or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit an initial notification report, performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required semiannually.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Semiconductor manufacturing facilities.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBB).

Estimated number of respondents: 1 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally and semiannually.

Total estimated burden: 41 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $4,710 (per year), including $550 in either annualized capital/start-up and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a small increase in the respondent burden from the most- recently approved ICR due to an update in assumption and an adjustment in labor rates. In this ICR, we assume the existing major source will read and re-familiar with the rule requirement annually. We have also updated all burden calculations using the latest labor rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart A) and any changes, or additions, to the Provisions are specified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJ. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must make an initial notification, performance tests, and maintain records of the initial and repeat performance test.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Petroleum dry cleaners.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJ).

Estimated number of respondents: 20 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially.

Total estimated burden: 1,850 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $186,000 (per year), including $0 for annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: In addition, we have updated all calculations using the latest labor rates, which results in an adjustment increase in total labor costs.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202) 566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), and any changes or additions to the Provisions are specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart VVV. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit initial notification reports, performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required semiannually.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of publicly owned treatment works.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart VVV).

Estimated number of respondents: 6 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.

Total estimated burden: 17 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $1,730 (per year), including no annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in the respondent burden from the most recently approved ICR. This increase is not due to any program changes. EPA revised the burden calculations to assume that all respondents incur a rule familiarization burden annually. Previously, EPA assumed that only new sources would incur this burden. This change resulted in the burden increase in this ICR.

Throughout this document, whenever “we,” “us,” or “our,” are used, we mean the EPA. Whenever “State” is used, we mean the State of Utah.

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The conformity rule provisions at 40 CFR 93 require that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to a State Implementation Plan (SIP) and establish the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP revision's MVEBs are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), which was promulgated August 15, 1997 (62 FR 43780). We described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs in our July 1, 2004 Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments (69 FR 40004). We used these resources in making our adequacy determinations announced in this notice.

This notice is simply an announcement of findings that we have already made and are as described below:

The Governor submitted the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan, Utah SIP Section IX. Part A.23 1 to EPA on December 16, 2014. The State prepared the SIP revision submittal to meet the requirements of Part D of Title I of the CAA for PM2.5 attainment plans, subparts 1 and 4 for “moderate” areas. As part of our adequacy review, we posted the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan, Utah SIP Section IX. Part A.23, with its identified MVEBs, for adequacy review on EPA's transportation conformity Web site on March 23, 2015 (see: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm). We requested public comments by April 22, 2015. We did not receive any comments. The EPA sent a letter to the Utah Division of Air Quality on June 17, 2015, stating that the submitted Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan, Utah SIP Section IX. Part A.23 and its MVEBs were adequate for transportation conformity purposes.

For the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan, Utah SIP Section IX. Part A.23, the MVEBs we found adequate were 0.32 tons per day (tpd) for PM2.5, 4.49 tpd for nitrogen oxides, and 3.23 tpd for volatile organic compounds. Following the effective date listed in the DATES section of this notice, the Cache County Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Utah Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Department of Transportation are required to use these MVEBs for future transportation conformity determinations for projects in the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 nonattainment area.

Please note that our adequacy review of the MVEBs as described above is separate from our future rulemaking action on the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan, Utah SIP Section IX. Part A.23 revision discussed above and should not be used to prejudge our ultimate approval or disapproval of that SIP revision. Even if we find the Cache County, Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Attainment Plan and its MVEBs adequate for transportation conformity purposes now, we may later find it necessary to disapprove the SIP revision. Should this situation arise, we would then revisit our adequacy finding.

Final approval under OMB delegated authority of the extension for three years, without revision, of the following reports:

1. Report title: Notice of Mutual Holding Company Reorganization and the Application for Approval of a Minority Stock Issuance by a Savings Association Subsidiary of a Mutual Holding Company.

Agency form number: Form 1522; Form 1523.

OMB control number: 7100-0340.

Frequency: On occasion.

Reporters: Mutual savings associations and savings association subsidiaries or subsidiary holding companies of a mutual holding company.

Estimated annual reporting hours: Form 1522: 400 hours; Form 1523: 1,050 hours.

Estimated average hours per response: Form 1522: 400 hours; Form 1523: 350 hours.

Number of respondents: Form 1522: 1; Form 1523: 3.

General description of report: Forms 1522 and 1523 are mandatory and authorized pursuant to section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (HOLA). Section 10 of HOLA (“Regulations of holding companies”) provides generally that “[t]he Board is authorized to issue such regulations . . . as the Board deems necessary or appropriate to enable the Board to administer and carry out the purposes of this section, and to require compliance therewith and prevent evasions thereof.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(g)(1)). With respect to mutual holding companies, HOLA states that a mutual holding company “shall be subject to such regulations as the Board may prescribe.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(o)(7)). Section 10 of HOLA also requires a savings and loan holding company to file “such reports as may be required by the Board” and provides that such reports “shall contain such information concerning the operations of such savings and loan holding company and its subsidiaries as the Board may require.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(b)(2)).

The information on Forms 1522 and 1523 generally are not considered confidential. However, the notificant or applicant may request confidential treatment for portions of these forms pursuant to exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)) if it believes disclosure of those portions would likely result in substantial competitive harm. All such requests for confidential treatment would need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and in response to a specific request for disclosure.

Abstract: Any mutual savings association that wishes to reorganize to form a mutual holding company must submit a notice (Form 1522) to the Federal Reserve. The notice provides details of the reorganization plan, which is to be approved by the majority of the association's board of directors and any acquired association. Details of the reorganization plan should contain a complete description of all significant terms of the proposed reorganization, shall attach and incorporate any Stock Issuance Plan proposed in connection with the reorganization plan, and comply with other informational requirements specified in (12 CFR 239.6).

Any savings association subsidiary or subsidiary holding company of a mutual holding company must file an application (Form 1523) for minority stock issuance. Minority stock issuances applications are required to provide the Federal Reserve with information to determine whether mutual holding companies and their subsidiaries are conducting insider abuse or unsafe and unsound practices.

The Federal Reserve intends to update and revise the Notice and Application to conform to Federal Reserve standards in the near future.

Current Actions: On June 17, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 34641) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Notice of Mutual Holding Company Reorganization and the Application for Approval of a Minority Stock Issuance by a Savings Association Subsidiary of a Mutual Holding Company. The comment period for this notice expired on August 17, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The information collection will be extended as proposed.

2. Report title: Application for Conversion, Proxy Statement, Offering Circular, and Order Form.

Agency form number: Form 1680, Form 1681, Form 1682, Form 1683.

OMB control number: 7100-0335.

Frequency: On occasion.

Reporters: Mutual holding companies.

Estimated annual reporting hours: Form 1680: 2,990 hours; Form 1681: 50 hours; Form 1682: 1.50 hours; Form 1683: 10 hours.

Estimated average hours per response: Form 1680: 299 hours; Form 1681: 500 hours; Form 1682: 150 hours; Form 1683: 1 hour.

Number of respondents: Form 1680: 10; Form 1681: 10; Form 1682: 10; Form 1683: 10.

General description of report: The mutual stock conversion forms are mandatory and authorized by Home Owners' Loan Act (HOLA) section 10, which provides generally that “the Board is authorized to issue such regulations . . . as the Board deems necessary or appropriate to enable the Board to administer and carry out the purposes of this section, and to require compliance therewith and prevent evasions thereof.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(g)(1)). With respect to mutual holding companies, HOLA states that a mutual holding company “shall be subject to such regulations as the Board may prescribe.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(o)(7)). Section 10 of HOLA also requires a savings and loan holding company to file “such reports as may be required by the Board” and provides that such reports “shall contain such information concerning the operations of such savings and loan holding company and its subsidiaries as the Board may require.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(b)(2).

Forms 1681, 1682, and 1683 are distributed to the owners of the mutual holding company; no issues of confidentiality should arise in connection with these forms. One of the elements required for the application on Form 1680 is a consolidated business plan showing how the capital acquired in the conversion will be used. Business plans are not considered confidential, although the applicant may request confidential treatment pursuant to sections (b)(4), of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4),) for portions of the business plan if disclosure would likely result in substantial competitive harm. All such requests for confidential treatment would need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and in response to a specific request for disclosure.

Abstract: Sections 5(i) (standard conversions) and 5(p) (supervisory conversions) of HOLA authorize mutual to stock conversions. The four individual forms are all one-time submissions that are used by mutual holding companies requesting approval to convert to a stock institution. The Federal Reserve intends to update and revise the mutual stock conversion application forms to conform to Federal Reserve standards in the near future.

Current Actions: On June 17, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 34641) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Application for Conversion, Proxy Statement, Offering Circular, and Order Form. The comment period for this notice expired on August 17, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The information collection will be extended as proposed.

3. Report title: Savings and Loan Holding Company Application.

Agency form number: Form H-(e).

OMB control number: 7100-0336.

Frequency: On occasion.

Reporters: Entities seeking prior approval to become a savings and loan holding company (SLHC).

Estimated annual reporting hours: 6,000 hours.

Estimated average hours per response: 500 hours.

Number of respondents: 12.

General description of report: The Savings and Loan Holding Company Application is mandatory and authorized pursuant to section 10 of HOLA, which provides that “the Board is authorized to issue such regulations . . . as the Board deems necessary or appropriate to enable the Board to administer and carry out the purposes of this sections, and require compliance therewith and prevent evasions thereof.” (12 U.S.C. 1467a(g)(1)). Section 10 of HOLA also requires a savings and loan holding company to file “such reports as may be required by the Board” and provides that such reports “shall contain such information concerning the operations of such savings and loan holding company and its subsidiaries as the Board may require (12 U.S.C. 1467a(b)(2).

The information on Form H-(e) is not considered confidential unless the applicant requests confidential treatment pursuant to exemption 4 or 6 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4),(6)). All such requests for confidential treatment would need to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and in response to a specific request for disclosure.

Abstract: The Federal Reserve analyzes each holding company application to determine whether the applicant meets the statutory criteria set forth in section 10(e) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (Act), as amended, to become a savings and loan holding company. The applications are reviewed for adequacy of answers to items and completeness in all material respects. The applications are event-generated and provide the Federal Reserve with information necessary to evaluate the proposed transaction. The Federal Reserve intends to update and revise the Application forms to conform to Federal Reserve standards in the near future.

Current Actions: On June 17, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 34641) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Savings and Loan Holding Company Application. The comment period for this notice expired on August 17, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The information collection will be extended as proposed.

4. Report title: Recordkeeping Requirements Associated with the Guidance on Sound Incentive Compensation Policies.

Agency form number: FR 4027.

OMB control number: 7100-0327.

Frequency: On occasion.

Reporters: State member banks, U.S. bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, Edge Act and agreement corporations, and the U.S. operations of foreign banks with a branch, agency, or commercial lending company in the United States.

Estimated annual reporting hours: One-time implementation: Large institutions: 2,400 hours and small institutions: 400 hours; Ongoing maintenance: 228,400 hours.

Estimated average hours per response: One-time implementation: Large institutions: 480 hours and small institutions: 80 hours; Ongoing maintenance: 40 hours.

Number of respondents: One-time implementation: Large institutions: 5 respondents and small institutions: 5 respondents; Ongoing maintenance: 5,710 respondents.

General description of report: This information collection is authorized pursuant to sections 9, 11(a), 11(i), 25, and 25A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 248(a), 248(i), 324, 602, and 625), section 5 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1844), section 10(b)(2) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a(b)(2)), and section 7(c) of the International Banking Act (12 U.S.C. 3105(c)). Because the recordkeeping requirements are contained within guidance (and not a statute or regulation) they are voluntary. Because the records will be maintained by each banking institution, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) would only be implicated if the Board's examiners retained a copy of the records as part of an examination or supervision of the banking institution. To the extent the Board collects this information during the course of an examination or supervision of a banking institution, the information is considered confidential under exemption 8 of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8)). In addition, the information may also be kept confidential under exemption 4 of the FOIA which protects commercial or financial information obtained from a person that is privileged or confidential (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)).

Abstract: Incentive compensation practices in the financial services industry were one of many factors contributing to the financial crisis that began in 2007. Banking organizations too often rewarded employees for increasing the firm's short-term revenue or profit without adequate recognition of the risks the employees' activities posed for the firm. More importantly, problematic compensation practices were not limited to the most senior executives at financial firms. Compensation practices can encourage employees at various levels of a banking organization, either individually or as a group, to undertake imprudent risks that can significantly and adversely affect the risk profile of the firm.

The Sound Incentive Compensation Policies (the Guidance) was developed to help protect the safety and soundness of banking organizations and promote the prompt improvement of incentive compensation practices throughout the banking industry. In addition, the guidance is consistent with the Principles for Sound Compensation Practices adopted by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) in April 2009, as well as the Implementation Standards for those principles issued by the FSB in September 2009.

Principle 2 of the Guidance states that a banking organization should have strong controls governing its process for designing, implementing, and monitoring incentive compensation arrangements. An organization's policies and procedures should:

• Identify and describe the role(s) of the personnel, business units, and control units authorized to be involved in the design, implementation, and monitoring of incentive compensation arrangements;

• identify the source of significant risk-related inputs into these processes and establish appropriate controls governing the development and approval of these inputs to help ensure their integrity; and

• identify the individual(s) and control unit(s) whose approval is necessary for the establishment of new incentive compensation arrangements or modification of existing arrangements. Banking organizations also should create and maintain sufficient documentation to permit an audit of the organization's processes for establishing, modifying, and monitoring incentive compensation arrangements.

The Guidance also states that a banking organization should conduct regular internal reviews to ensure that its processes for achieving and maintaining balanced incentive compensation arrangements are consistently followed. Such reviews should be conducted by audit, compliance, or other personnel in a manner consistent with the organization's overall framework for compliance monitoring. An organization's internal audit department also should separately conduct regular audits of the organization's compliance with its established policies and controls relating to incentive compensation arrangements. The results should be reported to appropriate levels of management and, where appropriate, the organization's board of directors.

Principle 3 of the Guidance states that the board of directors should review and approve the overall goals and purposes of the firm's incentive compensation system. The board of directors should provide clear direction to management to ensure that its policies and procedures are carried out in a manner that achieves balance and is consistent with safety and soundness.

The board of directors should approve and document any material exceptions or adjustments to the incentive compensation arrangements established for senior executives and should carefully consider and monitor the effects of any approved exceptions or adjustments on the balance of the arrangement, the risk-taking incentives of the senior executive, and the safety and soundness of the organization.

The board of directors should receive and review, on an annual or more frequent basis, an assessment by management, with appropriate input from risk management personnel, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the organization's incentive compensation system in providing risk taking incentives that are consistent with the organization's safety and soundness. These reports should include an evaluation of whether or how incentive compensation practices may be encouraging excessive risk taking. These reviews and reports should be appropriately scoped to reflect the size and complexity of the banking organization's activities and the prevalence and scope of its incentive compensation arrangements. In addition, at banking organizations that are significant users of incentive compensation arrangements, the board should receive periodic reports that review incentive compensation awards and payments relative to risk outcomes on a backward-looking basis to determine whether the organization's incentive compensation arrangements may be promoting excessive risk-taking.

Current Actions: On June 23, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 35953) requesting comment for 60 days on the Recordkeeping Requirements Associated with the Guidance on Sound Incentive Compensation Policies. The comment period for this notice expired on August 24, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The information collection will be extended as proposed.

5. Report title: Interagency Guidance on Managing Compliance and Reputation Risks for Reverse Mortgage Products.

Agency form number: FR 4029.

OMB control number: 7100-0330.

Frequency: On occasion.

Reporters: State member banks that originate proprietary and Home Equity Conversion Program (HECM) reverse mortgages.

Estimated annual reporting hours: Implementation of policies and procedures, 680 hours; Review and maintenance of policies and procedures, 136 hours.

Estimated average hours per response: Implementation of policies and procedures, 40 hours; Review and maintenance of policies and procedures, 8 hours.

Number of respondents: Implementation of policies and procedures, 17 respondents; Review and maintenance of policies and procedures, 17 respondents.

General description of report: Previously, the Board's Legal Division determined that the Board was authorized to issue this guidance pursuant to its authority under section 18(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which authorized the Board to prescribe regulations regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practice by banks (15 U.S.C. 57a(f)) and section 105 of the Truth in Lending Act, which authorized the Board to prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) (15 U.S.C. 1604). However, under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) much of the Board's authority under these laws was transferred to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Nonetheless, we continue to believe that the Board has the authority to issue this guidance pursuant to its authority under section 39 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act), which generally authorizes the Board to establish safety and soundness standards for depository institutions supervised by the Board (12 U.S.C. 1381p-1(a)). Financial institutions' obligation under this guidance is voluntary. Because the documentation required by the guidance is maintained by each institution, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) would only be implicated if the Board's examiners retained a copy of this information as part of an examination or supervision of a bank. However, records obtained as a part of an examination or supervision of a bank are exempt from disclosure under FOIA exemption (b)(8), for examination material (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8)). In addition, the information may also be kept confidential under exemption 4 of the FOIA which protects commercial or financial information obtained from a person that is privileged or confidential (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)).

Abstract: Reverse mortgages are home-secured loans typically offered to elderly consumers. Financial institutions currently provide two types of reverse mortgage products: the lenders' own proprietary reverse mortgage products and reverse mortgages insured by the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Federal Housing Administration (FHA). Reverse mortgage loans insured by the FHA are made pursuant to the guidelines and rules established by HUD's HECM program. HECM loans and proprietary reverse mortgages are also subject to the rules that implement consumer protection laws such as the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and TILA.

In August 2010, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, on behalf of its member agencies,1 published a Federal Register notice adopting supervisory guidance titled “Reverse Mortgage Products: Guidance for Managing Compliance and Reputation Risks.” 2 The guidance is designed to help financial institutions with risk management and assist financial institutions' efforts to ensure that their reverse mortgage lending practices adequately address consumer compliance and reputation risks.

The guidance describes reporting, recordkeeping, and disclosures for both proprietary and HECM reverse mortgages. A number of these disclosures are “usual and customary” business practices for proprietary and HECM reverse mortgages, and these would not meet the PRA's definition of “paperwork.” Other included disclosure requirements are currently mandated by RESPA or TILA for all reverse mortgage loans and information collections required by HUD's rules for HECM loans.3 Discussion of these requirements in the guidance is also not considered additional paperwork burden imposed by the guidance.

Proprietary reverse mortgage products, however, are not subject to HUD's rules for HECM loans. To the extent that the interagency guidance applies HECM requirements to proprietary loans, this would meet the PRA's definition of paperwork burden.

There are also additional provisions in the guidance that apply to both proprietary and HECM reverse mortgages that do not meet the “usual and customary” standard, are not covered by already approved information collections and, therefore, likewise meet the PRA's definition of paperwork burden.

Financial institutions offering proprietary reverse mortgages are encouraged under the guidance to follow or adopt relevant HECM requirements for mandatory counseling, disclosures, affordable origination fees, restrictions on cross-selling of ancillary products, and reliable appraisals.

Financial institutions offering either proprietary or HECM reverse mortgages are encouraged to develop clear and balanced product descriptions and make them available to consumers shopping for a mortgage. They should set forth a description of how disbursements can be received and include timely information to supplement disclosures mandated by TILA and other disclosures. Promotional materials and product descriptions should include information about the costs, terms, features, and risks of reverse mortgage products.

Financial institutions should adopt policies and procedures that prohibit directing a consumer to a particular counseling agency or contacting a counselor on the consumer's behalf. They should adopt clear written policies and establish internal controls specifying that neither the lender nor any broker will require the borrower to purchase any other product from the lender in order to obtain the mortgage. Policies should be clear so that originators do not have an inappropriate incentive to sell other products that appear linked to the granting of a mortgage. Legal and compliance reviews should include oversight of compensation programs so that lending personnel are not improperly encouraged to direct consumers to particular products.

Financial institutions making, purchasing, or servicing reverse mortgages through a third party should conduct due diligence and establish criteria for third-party relationships and compensation. They should set requirements for agreements and establish systems to monitor compliance with the agreement and applicable laws and regulations. They should also take corrective action if a third party fails to comply. Third-party relationships should be structured in a way that does not conflict with RESPA.

Current Actions: On June 23, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 35953) requesting comment for 60 days on the Supervisory Guidance on Managing Compliance and Reputation Risks for Reverse Mortgage Products. The comment period for this notice expired on August 24, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The information collection will be extended as proposed.

This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection;

Title of Information Collection: Medicare Enrollment Application—Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies (DMEPOS) Suppliers; Use: The primary function of the CMS 855S Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies (DMEPOS) supplier enrollment application is to gather information from a supplier that tells us who it is, whether it meets certain qualifications to be a health care supplier, where it renders its services or supplies, the identity of the owners of the enrolling entity, and information necessary to establish correct claims payment.

The goal of this revision of the CMS 855S is to simplify and clarify the current data collection and to remove obsolete and/or redundant questions. Grammar and spelling errors were corrected. Limited informational text has been added within the application form and instructions in conjunction with links to Web sites when greater detail is needed by the supplier. To clarify current data collection differentiations and to be in sync with accreditation coding, Section 3D (“Products and Services Furnished by This Supplier”) has been updated. This revision does not offer any new material data collection. Form Number: CMS-855S (OMB Control Number: 0938-1056); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Private Sector (Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 31,915; Total Annual Responses: 31,915; Total Annual Hours: 36,842. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Kim McPhillips at 410-786-5374.)

I. Background

In general, HCs are highly effective in preventing pregnancy when used correctly. However, concomitant use of other drugs may affect the safety and/or efficacy of HCs due to drug interactions affecting either blood levels (PK) and/or physiologic effects (PD) of HC components (e.g., estrogen and progestins). Understanding drug interaction potential of HCs and other drugs is important when investigating HC-related issues, and in the design and conduct of clinical trials. Evolving knowledge on drug interaction mechanisms has led to new insights and increased interest in the clinical investigation of drug interactions with HCs.

Historically, most drug interaction studies conducted during drug development with HCs have not had a clearly stated rationale for the choice of HCs being studied. Questions remain as to whether the study results of specific contraceptive steroids can be extrapolated to other progestins or estrogens or other dose strengths. The choice of HC is important because different progestins may have different metabolic and/or transporter pathways and safety profiles. Without a mechanistic understanding of the underlying drug-drug interaction (DDI) mechanism, it is difficult to interpret and extrapolate study results from one HC to another.

The public meeting on November 9, 2015, will include a discussion of the following topics on which FDA is also seeking public comment:

• Public health concerns associated with use of HCs and interacting drugs that might affect efficacy and safety.

• PK and PD considerations in designing drug interaction studies with HCs during drug development. Key elements in designing a study include a mechanistic understanding of potential DDI mechanisms, the choice of contraceptive products and their dose, study population/duration, and proper selection of a PK alone or PK-PD-based drug interaction study approach.

• Drug interaction study result interpretation and its potential impact on guidance of HC use in women of childbearing potential who are enrolled in clinical trials for other therapeutic agents during drug development.

• The current approach of translating the results from drug interaction studies into labeling recommendations and opportunities to improve the communication to healthcare providers.

• Research opportunities and tools for investigating the safe use of HCs in the presence of other drugs.

The input received may be used to refine FDA's thinking on the drug interaction study design with HCs and labeling communication of drug interaction risks with HCs.

If you wish to attend these meetings, register online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/HC-DDIMeeting. Please register by October 9, 2015. Those who are unable to attend the meetings in person can register to view a live Web cast of the meetings. You will be asked to indicate in your registration whether you plan to attend in person or via the Web cast. Your registration should also contain your complete contact information, including name, title, affiliation, address, email address, and phone number.

Seating will be limited, so early registration is recommended. Registration is free and will be on a first-come, first-served basis. However, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization based on space limitations. Registrants will receive confirmation once they have been accepted. Onsite registration on the day of the meetings will be based on space availability. If you need special accommodations because of disability, please contact Christine Le (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days before the meeting.

FDA will hold an open public comment period during the November 9, 2015, public meeting to give the public an opportunity to comment. Registration for open public comment will occur at the registration desk on the day of the meeting on a first-come, first-served basis.

Regardless of whether you attend this meeting, you can submit electronic or written comments, including responses to the public docket (see ADDRESS above), by December 15, 2015. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

Transcripts for the November 9, 2015, meeting will be posted, when available, at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm459342.htm.

Under Executive Order 13676, dated September 18, 2014, authority was given to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish the Presidential Advisory Council on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria (Advisory Council), in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Agriculture. Activities of the Advisory Council are governed by the provisions of Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of federal advisory committees.

The Advisory Council will provide advice, information, and recommendations to the Secretary of HHS regarding programs and policies intended to support and evaluate the implementation of Executive Order 13676, including the National Strategy for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria and the National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria. The Advisory Council shall function solely for advisory purposes.

In carrying out its mission, the Advisory Council will provide advice, information, and recommendations to the Secretary regarding programs and policies intended to preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics by optimizing their use; advance research to develop improved methods for combating antibiotic resistance and conducting antibiotic stewardship; strengthen surveillance of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections; prevent the transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections; advance the development of rapid point-of-care and agricultural diagnostics; further research on new treatments for bacterial infections; develop alternatives to antibiotics for agricultural purposes; maximize the dissemination of up-to-date information on the appropriate and proper use of antibiotics to the general public and human and animal healthcare providers; and improve international coordination of efforts to combat antibiotic resistance.

The September public meeting will be the inaugural meeting for the Advisory Council. The Advisory Council members will be sworn in and presented with an overview of different topics surrounding antibiotic resistance, including an overview of the National Strategy for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria and Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria. The meeting agenda will be posted on the Advisory Council Web site at http://www.hhs.gov/ash/carb/ when it has been finalized.

Public attendance at the meeting is limited to the available space. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the National Vaccine Program Office at the address/telephone number listed above at least one week prior to the meeting. For those unable to attend in person, a live webcast will be available. More information on registration and accessing the webcast can be found at http://www.hhs.gov/ash/carb/.

Members of the public will have the opportunity to provide comments prior to the Advisory Council meeting by emailing [email protected]. Public comments should be sent in by midnight September 28, 2015, and should be limited to no more than one page. All public comments will be read during the public comment period designated on the agenda; limited to two minutes per comment.

Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.

As required by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012, the TMAC makes recommendations to the FEMA Administrator on: (1) How to improve, in a cost-effective manner, the (a) accuracy, general quality, ease of use, and distribution and dissemination of flood insurance rate maps and risk data; and (b) performance metrics and milestones required to effectively and efficiently map flood risk areas in the United States; (2) mapping standards and guidelines for (a) flood insurance rate maps, and (b) data accuracy, data quality, data currency, and data eligibility; (3) how to maintain, on an ongoing basis, flood insurance rate maps and flood risk identification; (4) procedures for delegating mapping activities to State and local mapping partners; and (5)(a) methods for improving interagency and intergovernmental coordination on flood mapping and flood risk determination, and (b) a funding strategy to leverage and coordinate budgets and expenditures across Federal agencies. Furthermore, the TMAC is required to submit an annual report to the FEMA Administrator that contains: (1) A description of the activities of the Council; (2) an evaluation of the status and performance of flood insurance rate maps and mapping activities to revise and update Flood Insurance Rate Maps; and (3) a summary of recommendations made by the Council to the FEMA Administrator.

The TMAC must also develop recommendations on how to ensure that flood insurance rate maps incorporate the best available climate science to assess flood risks and ensure that FEMA uses the best available methodology to consider the impact of the rise in sea level and future development on flood risk. The TMAC must collect these recommendations and present them to the FEMA Administrator in a future conditions risk assessment and modeling report. Further, in accordance with the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014, the TMAC must develop a review report related to flood mapping in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Agenda: On September 29, 2015, the TMAC members will present and deliberate on draft narrative and proposed recommendations concerning (1) the flood hazard mapping process and product, and (2) future conditions methods and considerations that will be incorporated into both the 2015 Annual Report and Future Conditions Report. A brief public comment period will take place prior to the end of the meeting, and before any voting on recommendations that takes place before the full TMAC. In addition, the TMAC members will identify and coordinate next steps of TMAC report development. The full agenda and related briefing materials will be posted for review by September 22, 2015, at http://www.fema.gov/TMAC.

With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Chincoteague NWR and Wallops Island NWR, which we began by publishing a notice of intent in the Federal Register (75 FR 57056) on September 17, 2010. For more about the initial process and the history of the refuges, see that notice. On May 15, 2014, we announced the release of the draft CCP/EIS to the public and requested comments in a notice of availability in the Federal Register (79 FR 27906). We subsequently extended the public comment period in another notice in the Federal Register (79 FR 41300) on July 15, 2014. In addition, EPA published a notice announcing the draft CCP and EIS (79 FR 29759; May 23, 2014), as required under section 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). We now announce the final CCP and EIS. Under the CAA, EPA also will announce the final CCP and EIS via the Federal Register.

The EPA is charged under section 309 of the Clean Air Act to review all Federal agencies' EISs and to comment on the adequacy and the acceptability of the environmental impacts of proposed actions in the EISs.

EPA also serves as the repository (EIS database) for EISs prepared by Federal agencies and provides notice of their availability in the Federal Register. The EIS Database provides information about EISs prepared by Federal agencies, as well as EPA's comments concerning the EISs. All EISs are filed with EPA, which publishes a notice of availability on Fridays in the Federal Register.

The notice of availability is the start of the 45-day public comment period for draft EISs, and the start of the 30-day “wait period” for final EISs, during which agencies are generally required to wait 30 days before making a decision on a proposed action. For more information, see http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html. You may search for EPA comments on EISs, along with EISs themselves, at https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search. We completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human environment in the final CCP/EIS, and responded to public comments.

The CCP will guide us in managing and administering the refuges for 15 years. Alternative B, as we described in the final CCP/EIS, is our preferred alternative.

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Refuge Administration Act), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to develop a CCP for each NWR. The purpose for developing a CCP is to provide refuge managers with a 15-year plan for achieving refuge purposes and goals and contributing to the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. CCPs should be consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife management, conservation, legal mandates, and our policies, as well as respond to key issues and public concerns. In addition to outlining broad management direction on conserving wildlife and their habitats, CCPs identify wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities available to the public, including opportunities for hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update the CCP at least every 15 years, in accordance with the Refuge Administration Act.

We evaluated three alternatives for managing Chincoteague NWR and Wallops Island NWR; alternative B is our preferred alternative. Based on feedback on the draft CCP/EIS, some modifications have been made to alternative B and are summarized below. A full description of all alternatives, including changes to our preferred alternative, can be found in the final CCP/EIS at the sources identified in ADDRESSES.

• The assigned area, consisting of the 1-mile recreational beach, associated parking, and new Visitor Contact Station, would extend south 1 more mile to the terminus of Swan Cove Trail (2 miles total), thus doubling the length of the assigned area.

• Over sand vehicles (OSV) and hiking access would continue via Beach Road across Toms Cove south to Fishing Point September 16 through March 14.

• A new 1/2-mile, OSV zone to facilitate the six priority uses (March 15 through September 15) would be developed south of new recreational beach, and added to the new assigned area. We would continue current management of the Overwash and Hook area for shorebirds until the new recreational beach is established, at which time the March 15 through September 15 closure would go into effect.

• We will keep current biking access open via Swan Cove Trail and will not propose an alternative bike route north to the relocated public beach (from Wildlife Loop to Mallard (C Dike)).

• The Service Road would continue to be open year-round to hikers north to the refuge/National Seashore boundary.

• A section of the Affected Environment (Chapter 3) on cultural resources was inadvertently left out of the draft CCP/EIS. This section, which has been coordinated with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, is included in the final CCP/EIS.

Alternative B would continue established habitat and wildlife management strategies but focus them in light of the new goals and vision established by the CCP. The alternative balances habitat management, public use and access, and administration of the refuge. We would continue to preserve approximately 2,650 acres of wetland impoundments, but make adjustments in accordance with a new impoundment management plan that takes into account various factors, such as the habitat needs of black ducks and monarch butterflies, climate change and natural coastal processes, and relocated beach access and parking. The refuge would continue to protect and enhance the wilderness character of the 1974 proposed wilderness area, and there would be no change in its size (1,300 acres) or location.

In recognition of the vulnerability of the current parking, the refuge would develop and implement a site design plan for parking and access to a new beach location, approximately 1.5 miles north of the existing beach. We are committed to working with the National Park Service (NPS) and others to future design, refine, and analyze beach relocation infrastructure in a separate National Environmental Policy Act document.

Over the next 15 years, the refuge would maintain and, where possible, expand current hunting opportunities by including additional species, extending hours, and providing special events. The refuge would add mourning doves, light geese, and non-migratory Canada goose hunting opportunities to the refuge's migratory bird hunting program. Additionally, the refuge would allow migratory bird hunting on Federal holidays within the Commonwealth of Virginia hunting seasons. The refuge would also add turkeys to the big game hunting program and pursue development of a trapping program for furbearers. The refuge would continue sika hunting and would conduct research to identify a desired population size.

The refuge would pursue partnerships to enhance land conservation, environmental education, and interpretation on the Delmarva Peninsula. The “Chincoteague ponies” have a strong cultural tie to the community, and the refuge would implement a Chincoteague pony management plan that meets multiple objectives: visitor viewing, habitat management, and pony health. The refuge would allow grazing of the current pony population, with a maximum pony herd size of 150, per the management agreement with the Chincoteague Volunteer Fire Company.

You can view or obtain the final CCP/EIS as indicated under ADDRESSES.

During the public comment period, a total of 236 emails and 94 letters were received, including official comments from the town of Chincoteague, the Chincoteague Chamber of Commerce, The Nature Conservancy, NPS, Environmental Protection Agency, various departments from the Commonwealth of Virginia, and other local interest groups. In addition a petition was submitted supporting Alternative “A plus,” an alternative with elements of both alternative A and B, with approximately 600 individuals signing. Another petition supporting the preferred alternative (alternative B) was submitted with 112 individuals signing. We held two public open house meetings in Chincoteague, and additional meetings in Melfa, Virginia, and Pocomoke City, Maryland. As part of the public involvement process, we held a public hearing on June 26, 2014, in Chincoteague with 28 people formally raising a variety of issues and concerns.

We evaluated all the letters and emails sent to us during that comment period, along with comments recorded at our public hearing, and addressed all substantive comments. A summary of those comments and our responses to them is included in the final CCP/EIS as appendix R.

We will document the final decision in a record of decision, which will be published in the Federal Register after a 30-day “wait period” that begins when EPA announces this final CCP-EIS. For more information, see EPA's Role in the EIS Process.

McEwen Mining Inc. (McEwen) proposes to develop a gold mine in the southwest portion of the Roberts Mountains, approximately 30 miles northwest of Eureka, Nevada. The proposed McEwen Gold Bar Mine Project (Project) consists of a mining Plan of Operations and four ROW grant authorizations to be analyzed in a single NEPA analysis document. Mining would occur from the existing Gold Pick and Gold Ridge pits and the proposed Cabin Creek North and South pits. Additional disturbance would be result from activities associated with gold mining operations, including waste rock disposal areas, crusher and ore stockpile pad, growth media stockpiles, process ponds, haul roads, access roads and power lines, heap leach facility, ancillary facilities, and diversion channels and sediment basins. Total proposed Project disturbance would be approximately 1,300 acres, including disturbance associated with the ROWs (consisting of approximately 1,137 acres of surface disturbance on public land and 163 acres of surface disturbance on private land controlled by McEwen, as well as other private land owners); 366 acres of the total disturbance would occur on areas disturbed by previous mining operations. The proposed Project would take up to 17 years to complete, including: A year of pre-stripping and construction, 8 years of mining, 4 years of reclamation following mine closure, and 4 years of post-reclamation monitoring. The proposed pit depths would not intercept groundwater. No pit dewatering would be necessary and no pit lakes are expected to form after mining operations end. The Project is expected to employ 151 individuals comprised of 90 contractors and 61 staff.

Mt. Wheeler Power requested a ROW grant authorization to supply needed power to the Project. McEwen has requested three ROW grant authorizations for the following: 1) Primary access along the Atlas Haul Road; 2) Employee transport and emergency secondary access along North Roberts Creek Road and GB Process Road; and 3) A water supply pipeline.

The Gold Bar Project boundary contains 916.5 acres of Greater Sage-Grouse Preliminary Priority Habitat (PPH) on BLM-managed public lands. The total mine disturbance, including the right-of-way (ROW), affecting Greater Sage-Grouse habitat on public land is 294 acres of PPH and 36 acres of Preliminary General Habitat (PGH). Since 2013, BLM biologists at the Mount Lewis Field Office have coordinated with the Nevada Department of Wildlife and the BLM State Office regarding Gold Bar's ROW and disturbance to Greater Sage-Grouse habitat. Collectively, the organizations formulated best management practices for Greater Sage-Grouse and other wildlife species and developed measures to offset the potential disturbance associated with the project to benefit Greater Sage-Grouse habitat. For example, as a result of this collaboration, the proposed project's power line was re-routed to use pre-existing routes in order to minimize effects to Greater Sage-Grouse habitat. These and other measures, including compliance with the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment, if finalized, will be among the issues analyzed in the EIS.

The purpose of the public scoping process is to determine relevant issues that will influence the scope of the environmental analysis, including alternatives, and guide the process for developing the EIS. At present, the BLM has identified the following preliminary issues: Water resources; air quality; vegetation resources (including noxious weeds); wildlife (including migratory birds and Greater Sage-Grouse); special status species; grazing management; land use and access; aesthetics (noise and visual); cultural resources; geological resources; minerals; soils; recreation; social and economic values; hazardous materials; Native American cultural concerns; and wild horses.

The BLM will utilize and coordinate the NEPA scoping process to help fulfill the public involvement requirements under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 U.S.C. 306108) as provided in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3). The information about historic and cultural resources within the area potentially affected by the proposed Project will assist the BLM in identifying and evaluating impacts to such resources in the context of both NEPA and NHPA.

The BLM will consult with Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order 13175 and other policies. Tribal concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration. Federal, State, and local agencies, along with tribes and other stakeholders that may be interested in or affected by the proposed Project that the BLM is evaluating, are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate in the development of the environmental analysis as a cooperating agency.

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

The Executive Order withdrew 40 acres of land on Smith Mountain for a lookout station used by the State of California Division of Forestry. Because the land is no longer used for lookout station purposes, the Bureau of Land Management has determined that the withdrawal is no longer needed.

By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714, it is ordered as follows:

The withdrawal created by Executive Order No. 5732 of October 14, 1931, which temporarily withdrew the following described land from settlement, location, sale, or entry for use as a lookout station, is hereby revoked in its entirety:

At 10 a.m., on October 13, 2015, the above-described land will be open to operation of the public land laws, generally, including the mining laws, and to settlement, location, sale, or entry, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, and the requirements of applicable law. All valid applications received at or prior to 10 a.m. on October 13, 2015, shall be considered as simultaneously filed at that time. Those received thereafter shall be considered in the order of filing.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Applications for Special Deputation.

3. The agency form number: The form numbers are USM-3A and USM-3C.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Federal government and State/local government. Form USM-3A Application for Special Deputation/Sponsoring Federal Agency Information; Form USM-3C Group Special Deputation Request. The collection of information for these forms is authorized by 28 U.S.C. 562. The USMS is authorized to deputize selected persons to perform the functions of a Special Deputy U.S. Marshal whenever the law enforcement needs of the USMS so require and as designated by the Associate Attorney General pursuant to 28 CFR 0.19(a)(3). USMS Special Deputation files serve as a centralized record of the special deputations granted by the USMS to assist in tracking, controlling and monitoring the Special Deputation Program.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 6,000 respondents will complete a 15 minute form (Form USM-3A) and 4,500 respondents will complete a 10 minute form (Form USM-3C).

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 2,250 annual burden hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

I. Background: Individuals filing for compensation benefits with the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) may be represented by an attorney or other representative. The representative is entitled to request a fee for services under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA) and under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA). The fee must be approved by the OWCP before any demand for payment can be made by the representative. This information collection request sets forth the criteria for the information, which must be presented by the respondent in order to have the fee approved by the OWCP. The information collection does not have a particular form or format; the respondent must present the information in any format which is convenient and which meets all the required information criteria. This information collection is currently approved for use through January 31, 2016.

II. Review Focus: The Department of Labor is particularly interested in comments which:

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

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

* enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

III. Current Actions: The Department of Labor seeks the approval for the extension of this currently approved information collection in order to carry out its responsibility to approve representative fees under the two Acts.

Type of Review: Extension.

Agency: Office of Workers' Compensation Programs.

Title: Representative Fee Request.

OMB Number: 1240-0049.

Agency Number: CA-143/CA-155.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit, Individuals or households.

Total Respondents: 9,307.

Total Annual Responses: 9,307.

Average Time per Response: 30 minutes.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 4,654.

Frequency: On occasion.

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): $0.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): $8,609.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record.