Federal Register Vol. 80, No.219,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 219 (November 13, 2015)

Page Range70149-70667
FR Document

80_FR_219
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 70191 - Notice of Public Hearing and Business Meeting November 10 and December 9, 2015PDF
80 FR 70667 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass DestructionPDF
80 FR 70663 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to IranPDF
80 FR 70258 - Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency MeetingPDF
80 FR 70211 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
80 FR 70259 - Sunshine Act Meetings; National Science BoardPDF
80 FR 70258 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
80 FR 70239 - Recreational Boating Safety-2016 Nonprofit Organization GrantsPDF
80 FR 70658 - Schedules of Controlled Substances: Extension of Temporary Placement of Three Synthetic Phenethylamines in Schedule IPDF
80 FR 70650 - Schedules of Controlled Substances: Placement of Three Synthetic Phenethylamines Into Schedule IPDF
80 FR 70293 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Revenue Procedure 2002-67PDF
80 FR 70238 - Decision To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees From the Battelle King Avenue Site in Columbus, Ohio, To Be Included in the Special Exposure CohortPDF
80 FR 70289 - Qualification of Drivers; Application for Exemptions; HearingPDF
80 FR 70184 - Media Outlets for Publication of Legal and Action Notices in the Southern RegionPDF
80 FR 70206 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepaPDF
80 FR 70186 - Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Turkey: Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2013PDF
80 FR 70246 - Agency Information Collection Activities: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies (NICCS) Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog (Training/Workforce Development Catalog) CollectionPDF
80 FR 70261 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 70294 - Sentencing Guidelines for United States CourtsPDF
80 FR 70189 - Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
80 FR 70252 - Extension of Public Comment Period and Schedule of Public Scoping Meetings and Public Meetings for the Proposed Withdrawal of Sagebrush Focal Areas in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, and an Associated Environmental Impact StatementPDF
80 FR 70253 - Opportunity To Comment on Changes to the Nevada and California Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan and the Tonopah Field Office Resource Management Plan Amendment, NevadaPDF
80 FR 70192 - Notice of Public Meeting to Provide Comments on Draft Materials to Improve FERC-USACE Coordinated Regulatory Processes for Non-Federal Development of Hydropower at USACE Non-Hydropower DamsPDF
80 FR 70287 - California; Disaster Number CA-00238PDF
80 FR 70287 - California Disaster Number CA-00240PDF
80 FR 70286 - Alaska Disaster #AK-00034PDF
80 FR 70218 - Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Quarterly Listing of Program Issuances-July through September 2015PDF
80 FR 70286 - Texas Disaster #TX-00457PDF
80 FR 70286 - South Carolina Disaster Number SC-00032PDF
80 FR 70287 - Advisory Committee on Veterans Business AffairsPDF
80 FR 70285 - Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business DevelopmentPDF
80 FR 70206 - Cancellation of Pesticides for Non-Payment of Year 2015 Registration Maintenance Fees; Summary of Orders IssuedPDF
80 FR 70295 - Request for Applications; Victims Advisory GroupPDF
80 FR 70171 - Modification of Significant New Uses of Certain Chemical SubstancesPDF
80 FR 70241 - Test To Collect Biometric Information at the Otay Mesa Port-of-EntryPDF
80 FR 70201 - Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and Status Information for September 2015PDF
80 FR 70191 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and approval; Comment Request; Recent Graduates Employment and Earnings Survey (RGEES) Standards and Survey FormPDF
80 FR 70199 - Proposed CERCLA Section 122(h) Cost Recovery Settlements for the Power City Superfund Site, Niagara Falls, Niagara County, New YorkPDF
80 FR 70200 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Federal Implementation Plan for Oil and Natural Gas Well Production Facilities; Fort Berthold Indian Reservation (Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation), North DakotaPDF
80 FR 70243 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Canadian Border Boat Landing PermitPDF
80 FR 70190 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 70245 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Cargo Container and Road Vehicle Certification for Transport Under Customs SealPDF
80 FR 70243 - Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning Acyclovir TabletsPDF
80 FR 70256 - Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee: Notice of Nomination SolicitationPDF
80 FR 70293 - BNSF Railway Company-Temporary Trackage Rights Exemption-Union Pacific Railroad CompanyPDF
80 FR 70292 - Notice of Rescheduled Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
80 FR 70211 - Supervisory Rating System for Financial Market InfrastructuresPDF
80 FR 70231 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 70188 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 70188 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 70291 - Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Mazda Motor CorporationPDF
80 FR 70151 - NASA Protective Services EnforcementPDF
80 FR 70258 - Notice of Intent To Award-Grant Awards for the Provision of Civil Legal Services to Eligible Low-Income Clients in February 2016PDF
80 FR 70261 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 11.1, Hours of Trading, To Rescind Interpretations and Policies .01, “Cessation of Trading Operations on NSX;” Adopting Rule 11.25 Relating to Use of Market Data Feeds; Amending NSX Rule 11.13 Relating to the Order Delivery Mode of Order Interaction; Amending NSX Rule 11.11 To Remove Certain Order Types and Correct Technical Deficiencies in the Numbering of Certain Sections of the Rule; and Amending Rule 11.12, Cross Message and Making Conforming Amendments to NSX Rules 11.11(c) and 16.2PDF
80 FR 70282 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Chapter XV, Entitled “Options Pricing,” at Section 2 Governing Pricing for NASDAQ MembersPDF
80 FR 70277 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Rule 7640A (Data Products Offered by Nasdaq)PDF
80 FR 70268 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding NASDAQ Last Sale PlusPDF
80 FR 70279 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding NASDAQ Last Sale PlusPDF
80 FR 70271 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Consisting of Proposed Amendments to Rule G-20, on Gifts, Gratuities and Non-Cash Compensation, and Rule G-8, on Books and Records To Be Made by Brokers, Dealers, Municipal Securities Dealers, and Municipal Advisors, and the Deletion of Prior Interpretive GuidancePDF
80 FR 70250 - Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Cowlitz Indian TribePDF
80 FR 70235 - Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker-Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
80 FR 70217 - Information Collection; Advance PaymentsPDF
80 FR 70217 - Information Collection; Permits, Authorities, or FranchisesPDF
80 FR 70257 - Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public InterestPDF
80 FR 70260 - Notice of permit applications received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
80 FR 70238 - National Institute On Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 70238 - Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 70284 - Order Granting Exemption From Compliance With the National Market System Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot ProgramPDF
80 FR 70177 - Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, Revocation of Class E Airspace; Chico, CAPDF
80 FR 70254 - Notice of Availability of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment to the California Desert Conservation Plan and the Bakersfield and Bishop Resource Management Plans and Final Environmental Impact StatementPDF
80 FR 70232 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human FoodPDF
80 FR 70236 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for AnimalsPDF
80 FR 70237 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Dietary Supplement Labeling Requirements and Recommendations Under the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection ActPDF
80 FR 70232 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic ActPDF
80 FR 70149 - Revocation of Class E Airspace; Burbank, CAPDF
80 FR 70176 - Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Boise, IDPDF
80 FR 70261 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
80 FR 70150 - Establishment of Class E Airspace; Placida, FLPDF
80 FR 70248 - Endangered Species; Marine Mammals; Issuance of PermitsPDF
80 FR 70249 - Endangered Species; Receipt of Applications for PermitPDF
80 FR 70210 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
80 FR 70209 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
80 FR 70187 - Pacific Whiting; Advisory PanelPDF
80 FR 70195 - Deschutes Valley Water District; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Fishway PrescriptionsPDF
80 FR 70198 - Yuba County Water Agency; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
80 FR 70196 - Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC; Equitrans, LP; Notice of ApplicationsPDF
80 FR 70196 - Notice of ApplicationPDF
80 FR 70199 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 70209 - Meetings of the Small Community Advisory Subcommittee and the Local Government Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 70179 - Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector; Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources; Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions From True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in Indian CountryPDF
80 FR 70170 - Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying BenefitsPDF
80 FR 70288 - Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) TransitionPDF
80 FR 70153 - Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Regulations, Nomenclature ChangePDF
80 FR 70247 - Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the HomelessPDF
80 FR 70180 - Revision to the Research, Development and Demonstration Permits Rule for Municipal Solid Waste LandfillsPDF
80 FR 70610 - Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis EventsPDF
80 FR 70192 - Notice of Availability of the Plains & Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project Final Environmental Impact StatementPDF
80 FR 70294 - Notice of Open Public Hearing; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 70154 - Customs and Border Protection's Bond ProgramPDF
80 FR 70298 - Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs; Short Inpatient Hospital Stays; Transition for Certain Medicare-Dependent, Small Rural Hospitals Under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System; Provider Administrative Appeals and Judicial ReviewPDF

Issue

80 219 Friday, November 13, 2015 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Forest Service

Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs; Short Inpatient Hospital Stays; Transition for Certain Medicare-Dependent, Small Rural Hospitals under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System; Provider Administrative Appeals and Judicial Review, 70298-70607 2015-27943 NOTICES Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Quarterly Listing of Program Issuances: July through September 2015, 70218-70231 2015-28870 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 70231-70232 2015-28815 2015-28820 Coast Guard Coast Guard NOTICES Recreational Boating Safety: 2016 Nonprofit Organization Grants, 70239-70240 2015-29139 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

RULES Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Regulations; Nomenclature Changes, 70153-70154 2015-28712
Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 70190-70191 2015-28829 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Advance Payments, 70217 2015-28803 Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, 70217-70218 2015-28802 Delaware Delaware River Basin Commission NOTICES Meetings, 70191 C2--2015--26837 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration RULES Schedules of Controlled Substances: Three Synthetic Phenethylamines; Extension of Temporary Placement in Schedule I, 70658-70659 2015-29028 PROPOSED RULES Schedules of Controlled Substances: Three Synthetic Phenethylamines; Placement into Schedule I, 70650-70655 2015-29026 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Recent Graduates Employment and Earnings Survey Standards and Survey Form, 70191-70192 2015-28839 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project, 70192-70194 2015-28574 Meetings: Comments on Draft Materials to improve FERC-USACE Coordinated Regulatory Processes for Non-Federal Development of Hydropower at USACE Non-Hydropower Dams, 70192 2015-28875
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Significant New Uses of Certain Chemical Substances; Modifications, 70171-70175 2015-28844 PROPOSED RULES Municipal Solid Waste Landfills: Research, Development and Demonstration Permits; Revision, 70180-70183 2015-28666 Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector, etc., 70179-70180 2015-28764 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Implementation Plan for Oil and Natural Gas Well Production Facilities; Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation, ND, 70200-70201 2015-28836 Cancellation of Pesticides for Non-Payment of Year 2015 Registration Maintenance Fees; Summary of Orders Issued, 70206-70209 2015-28855 Certain New Chemicals: Receipt and Status Information for September 2015, 70201-70206 2015-28842 Cost Recovery Settlements: Power City Superfund Site, Niagara Falls, Niagara County, NY, 70199-70200 2015-28837 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Weekly Receipts, 70206 2015-28890 Meetings: Small Community Advisory Subcommittee and Local Government Advisory Committee, 70209 2015-28765 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Establishment of Class E Airspace: Placida, FL, 70150-70151 2015-28782 Revocation of Class E Airspace: Burbank, CA, 70149-70150 2015-28785 PROPOSED RULES Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, Revocation of Class E Airspace: Chico, CA, 70177-70179 2015-28793 Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace: Boise, ID, 70176-70177 2015-28784 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 70209-70211 2015-28776 2015-28777 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 70211 2015-29173 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC; Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C., 70196 2015-28770 Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC; Equitrans, LP, 70196-70198 2015-28771 Combined Filings, 70199 2015-28769 Hydroelectric Applications: Deschutes Valley Water District, 70195 2015-28773 Yuba County Water Agency, 70198 2015-28772 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware Transition, 70288-70289 2015-28753 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 70211 2015-29161 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Hearing, 70289-70291 2015-28902 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Supervisory Rating System for Financial Market Infrastructures, 70211-70217 2015-28821 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Endangered Species Permit Applications, 70249-70250 2015-28780 Permits: Endangered Species; Marine Mammals, 70248-70249 2015-28781 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals, 70236-70237 2015-28789 Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food, 70232 2015-28790 Dietary Supplement Labeling Requirements and Recommendations under the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act, 70237-70238 2015-28788 Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 70232-70235 2015-28787 Guidance for Industry and Staff: Qualification of Biomarker--Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis, 70235-70236 2015-28804 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Southern Region Media Outlets for Publication of Legal and Action Notices: Southern Region, 70184-70186 2015-28900 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Advance Payments, 70217 2015-28803 Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, 70217-70218 2015-28802 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Designations of Classes of Employees to be Included in the Special Exposure Cohort; Petitions: Battelle, King Avenue Site, Columbus, OH, 70238 2015-28905
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog (Training/Workforce Development Catalog) Collection, 70246-70247 2015-28884
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 70247-70248 2015-28678 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Reservation Proclamations: Cowlitz Indian Tribe, 70250-70252 2015-28805 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 70293-70294 2015-28906 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Turkey, 70186-70187 2015-28887 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Aquarium Fittings and Parts Thereof, 70257-70258 2015-28800 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 70258 2015-29142 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Consolidated Resource Management Plans: Nevada and California Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment, etc., 70253-70254 2015-28876 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment to the California Desert Conservation Plan and the Bakersfield and Bishop Resource Management Plans, 70254-70256 2015-28791 Proposed Withdrawal of Sagebrush Focal Areas in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, 70252-70253 2015-28877 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Grant Awards: Provision of Civil Legal Services to Eligible Low-Income Clients, 70258 2015-28812 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES NASA Protective Services Enforcement, 70151-70153 2015-28813 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Advance Payments, 70217 2015-28803 Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, 70217-70218 2015-28802 National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 70258-70259 2015-29187 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petitions for Exemptions: Mazda Motor Corp.; Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standards, 70291-70292 2015-28814 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: National Institute on Aging, 70238-70239 2015-28798 Office of the Director, 70238 2015-28797 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 70188 2015-28816 New England Fishery Management Council, 70188-70189 2015-28817 Requests for Nominations: Pacific Whiting; Advisory Panel, 70187-70188 2015-28775 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee, 70256-70257 2015-28826 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 70259-70260 2015-29167 Permit Applications Received under the Antarctic Conservation Act, 70260-70261 2015-28799 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Meetings: Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, 70189-70190 2015-28878 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events, 70610-70647 2015-28589 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying Benefits, 70170-70171 2015-28763 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 70261 2015-28881 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Change: Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 70261 2015-28783 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Iran; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of November 10, 2015), 70661-70663 2015-29271 Weapons of Mass Destruction; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of November 12, 2015), 70665-70667 2015-29285 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Order Granting Exemption from Compliance with the National Market System Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program, 70284-70285 2015-28795 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 70277-70279 2015-28809 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 70271-70276 2015-28806 NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., 70279-70282 2015-28807 National Stock Exchange, Inc., 70261-70268 2015-28811 The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 70268-70271, 70282-70284 2015-28808 2015-28810 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: Alaska, 70286 2015-28871 California; Amendment 1, 70287 2015-28872 California; Amendment 3, 70287 2015-28874 South Carolina; Amendment 5, 70286-70287 2015-28868 Texas, 70286 2015-28869 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs, 70287 2015-28867 Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development, 70285-70286 2015-28866 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Meetings: Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee, 70292-70293 2015-28823 Temporary Trackage Rights Exemptions: BNSF Railway Co.; Union Pacific Railroad Co., 70293 2015-28825 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Surface Transportation Board

Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

RULES Custom and Bordwer Protection's Bond Program, 70154-70170 2015-28503
Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection RULES Custom and Bordwer Protection's Bond Program, 70154-70170 2015-28503 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit, 70243 2015-28831 Cargo Container and Road Vehicle Certification for Transport under Customs Seal, 70245-70246 2015-28828 Final Determinations: Acyclovir Tablets, 70243-70245 2015-28827 Test to Collect Biometric Information at the Otay Mesa Port-of-Entry, 70241-70243 2015-28843 U.S. China U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission NOTICES Public Hearing; Correction, 70294 2015-28517 U.S. Sentencing United States Sentencing Commission NOTICES Applications: Victims Advisory Group, 70295 2015-28849 Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts, 70294-70295 2015-28879 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 70298-70607 2015-27943 Part III Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 70610-70647 2015-28589 Part IV Justice Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, 70650-70655 2015-29026 Part V Justice Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, 70658-70659 2015-29028 Part VI Presidential Documents, 70661-70663 2015-29271 Part VII Presidential Documents, 70665-70667 2015-29285 Reader Aids

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

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

80 219 Friday, November 13, 2015 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-1140; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-5] Revocation of Class E Airspace; Burbank, CA AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action removes Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to Class C airspace at Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, Burbank, CA. After reviewing the airspace, the FAA found no standard instrument approach procedures requiring Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to the Class C airspace. This action enhances the safety and airspace management within the National Airspace System.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, February 4, 2016. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and ATC Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steve Haga, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it removes controlled airspace designated as an extension at Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, Burbank, CA.

History

On August 19, 2015, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to remove Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to Class C airspace at Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, Burbank, CA (80 FR 50237). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One comment was received from Jeffrey Aryan, in support of the proposal.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6003 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 removes Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class C airspace at Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, Burbank, CA. A review of the airspace revealed that there are no standard instrument approach procedures in place requiring Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to the Class C airspace, and, therefore, is removed from FAA Order 7400.9Z.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6003 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension. AWP CA E3 Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, CA [Removed]
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 3, 2015. Christopher Ramirez, Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2015-28785 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-2890; Airspace Docket No. 15-ASO-8] Establishment of Class E Airspace; Placida, FL AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action establishes Class E Airspace at Placida, FL, to accommodate new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) serving Coral Creek Airport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, December 10, 2015. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/airtraffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 305-6364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes Class E airspace at Coral Creek Airport, Placida, FL.

History

On August 14, 2015, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the earth at Coral Creek Airport, Placida, FL, (80 FR 48767). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9Z dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile radius of Coral Creek Airport, Placida, FL., providing the controlled airspace required to support the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for Coral Creek Airport.

Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO FL E5 Placida, FL [NEW] Coral Creek Airport, FL (Lat. 26°51′13″ N., long. 82°15′09″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile radius of Coral Creek Airport.

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 27, 2015. Ryan W. Almasy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2015-28782 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 14 CFR Part 1204 [Docket Number—NASA-2015-0009] RIN 2700-AE24 NASA Protective Services Enforcement AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

This direct final rule makes nonsubstantive changes to NASA's traffic enforcement regulations to correct citations and to clarify the regulation's scope, policy, responsibilities, procedures, and violation descriptions. The revisions to this rule are part of NASA's retrospective plan under E.O. 13563 completed in August 2011.

DATES:

This rule is effective January 12, 2016 without further action, unless adverse comments are received by December 14, 2015. If adverse comments are received, NASA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES:

Comments must be identified with RIN 2700-AE24 and may be sent to NASA via the Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Please note that NASA will post all comments on the Internet with changes, including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles Lombard, 202-358-0891, charles.e.lombard.nasa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments

NASA has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct final rule because it makes nonsubstantive changes to correct citations and clarifies the scope, policy, responsibilities, procedures, and violations described in NASA's traffic enforcement regulations. No opposition to these changes and no significant adverse comments are expected. However, if NASA receives significant adverse comments, it will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, NASA will consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and comment process.

II. Background

NASA published a final rule in the Federal Register at 79 FR 54902 on September 15, 2014, to add subpart 11, Enforcing Traffic Laws at NASA Centers and Component Facilities, that establishes traffic enforcement regulations, authorities, and procedures at all NASA Centers and component facilities. NASA is amending these regulations to make nonsubstantive changes to correct citations and to clarify the scope, policy, responsibilities, procedures, and violations described in these regulations. Amendments to this rule aligns Part 1204 with NASA objectives in the protection of its people and property. The revisions to this rule are part of NASA's retrospective plan under E.O. 13563 completed in August 2011. NASA's full plan can be accessed on the Agency's open Government Web site at http://www.nasa.gov/feature/compliance-and-other-documents.

III. Regulatory Analysis Section Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because this rule only pertains to NASA employees.

Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if the regulation is necessary, to select the regulatory approach that maximizes net benefits. This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, because this rule relates solely to the internal operations of NASA. Therefore, the Office of Management and Budget did not review this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply to this rule because it does not contain any information collection requirement that requires approval of the Office of Management and Budget.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

This rule relates to agency management or personnel, and therefore the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) does not cover the rule.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national Government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, Federalism, NASA has determined that the rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

For the purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. chapter 25, subchapter II), this rule would not significantly or uniquely affect small governments and would not result in increased expenditures by state, local, and tribal governments, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (as adjusted for inflation) in any one year.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 1204

Federal buildings and facilities, Security measures.

Accordingly, under the authority of the National Aeronautics and Space Act, as amended, (51 U.S.C. 20113), 5 U.S.C. 301, and 18 U.S.C. 799, NASA amends 14 CFR part 1204 as follows:

PART 1204—ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY AND POLICY Subpart 11—Enforcing Traffic Laws at NASA Centers and Component Facilities 1. The authority for subpart 11 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

The National and Commercial Space Program, 51 U.S.C. 20132 and 20133; 5 U.S.C. 301, and 18 U.S.C. 799.

2. Revise § 1204.1100 to read as follows:
§ 1204.1100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart establishes policies pursuant to the requirements of National and Commercial Space Programs (51 U.S.C.) authorizing the NASA Administrator to establish such security requirements, restrictions, and safeguards as he deems necessary in the interest of national security, under 5 U.S.C. 301, and 18 U.S.C. 799, providing for the imposition of fines and imprisonment for violating NASA regulations for the protection and security of NASA assets or assets that are in NASA's custody. The provisions of this subpart apply to all NASA installations, including NASA Headquarters, NASA Centers, and component facilities. NASA installations refers to all NASA-owned, controlled, or leased property, with exclusive or concurrent Federal jurisdiction, including non-contiguous or unfenced areas and including areas otherwise open to the public at large. These provisions are also applicable to all persons who are in or on a NASA installation over which the United States exercises exclusive or concurrent legislative jurisdiction.

3. Revise § 1204.1101 to read as follows:
§ 1204.1101 Policy.

(a) It is NASA policy that an effective, standardized, and comprehensive traffic safety program be established and maintained at all NASA Centers, and component facilities, as prescribed in NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8715.C, NASA General Safety Program Requirements. A traffic safety program is essential for the protection and security of NASA laboratories, stations, bases, or other facilities of NASA's aircraft, missiles, spacecraft, or similar vehicles or part thereof and of NASA's real and personal property, including property in the custody of NASA contractors and subcontractors.

(b) To ensure a safe and secure workplace and to provide better for preservation of life and property, all persons on or in a NASA installation or component facility shall comply with the vehicular and pedestrian traffic requirements of the installation per this Subpart.

(c) Vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The following requirements apply to the drivers or all vehicles on or in NASA-owned, controlled, or leased property:

(1) A driver shall be in possession of a current and valid state- or territory-issued driver's license and vehicle registration, and the vehicle shall display all current and valid tags and licenses required by the jurisdiction in which it is registered.

(2) A driver who has had his or her privilege or license to drive suspended or revoked by any state or territory shall not drive any vehicle in or on such property during such period of suspension or revocation.

(3) Drivers shall drive in a careful and safe manner at all times and shall comply with the signals and directions of security personnel and other authorized individuals; all posted traffic signs, including speed limits; and all rules implemented under section 1204.1102.

(4) Drivers shall not block entrances, driveways, walks, loading platforms, or fire hydrants.

(5) Drivers shall not park without authority, park in unauthorized locations or in locations reserved for other persons, park continuously in excess of 18 hours without permission, or park in any manner contrary to the direction of posted signs.

(d) A copy of this subpart shall be posted in an appropriate place at each NASA Center or component facility.

4. In § 1204.1102, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 1204.1102 Responsibilities.

(a) Consistent with this subpart and applicable statutes, Center Directors of NASA installations and the Executive Director for Headquarters Operations, over which the United States has exclusive or concurrent legislative jurisdiction, are delegated the authority to establish specific vehicular and pedestrian traffic rules and regulations for their installations; to specify maximum punishments for violating such rules and regulations; and to issue citations, including District Court Violation Notices to persons who violate such rules and regulations.

5. Revise § 1204.1103 to read as follows:
§ 1204.1103 Procedures.

The Center Directors and the Executive Director for Headquarters Operations shall issue local policies and procedural requirements, which will implement this regulation for their respective NASA Centers and component facilities.

6. Revise § 1204.1104 to read as follows:
§ 1204.1104 Violations.

As authorized by and consistent with 18 U.S.C. 799, local policies and procedural requirements issued under section 1204.1103 may provide for punishments for offenses, which shall be classified in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3559(a)(6)-(9). A person found in violation, in or on a NASA installation, of any vehicular or pedestrian traffic law, or local installation vehicular or pedestrian traffic rule or regulation made applicable to the installation under the provisions of this subpart, is subject to punishment as provided for by the applicable local policies and procedural requirements that a Center Director or the Executive Director for Headquarters Operations has issued under section 1204.1102 and in accordance with section 1204.1103.

Nanette Jennings, NASA Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-28813 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 15 CFR Part 4 [Docket Number: 150902802-5802-01] RIN 0605-AA39 Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Regulations, Nomenclature Change AGENCY:

Department of Commerce (Commerce).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Department) amends its regulations under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act (PA) to reflect an organizational change in the Department's Office of General Counsel (OGC). Specifically, this action removes from the provisions on FOIA appeals and the PA all references to the position of Assistant General Counsel for Administration, and replaces them with references to the new “Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight.” The Department's OGC recently eliminated the position “Assistant General Counsel for Administration,” and this amendment updates the rules to implement that change. The rule also reflects that the Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight will be conducting FOIA appeals and responding to requests for corrective action or review under the PA for the Department. This action merely makes a nomenclature change; the change has no substantive impact to the public, because the OGC has in the past and will continue to handle the FOIA and PA actions described above.

DATES:

This action is effective on November 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

The final rule is available at www.regulations.gov, or by contacting the Department of Commerce: Room 1854, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph Bartels, 202-482-3084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule modifies the sections of the Department of Commerce's FOIA and PA regulations addressing appeals of denials of requests under FOIA and requests for review or corrective action under the PA by updating the name and address of the office in the OGC that decides appeals. The current FOIA regulations state that the Assistant General Counsel for Administration (AGC-Admin) decides all appeals from FOIA requests (except those made to the Office of the Inspector General, or to the AGC-Admin). The regulations also require appellants to address requests for corrective action or review for overly delayed responses under the PA to the AGC-Admin.

The Department of Commerce's Office of General Counsel (OGC) has recently reorganized its offices, and the position of AGC-Admin no longer exists. In its place, the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight has been delegated the authority from the General Counsel to make final decisions on appeal of initially denied requests for records under FOIA. See Department Administrative Order 205-12, sections 4 and 5.

Accordingly, this rule amends part 4 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations to remove references to the now non-existent AGC-Admin, and replace it with the term “Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight.” This action is merely a nomenclature change, and does not modify or revise in any substantive way the Department of Commerce's FOIA or PA regulations, or FOIA or PA requirements.

Classification Executive Order 12866

This rule is limited to agency organization, and therefore is not considered a “regulation” under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. Accordingly, it is exempt from review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Because this rule addresses a matter of agency organization, and therefore is not subject to the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, it is also exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this action, and none has been prepared.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This action is merely administrative in nature, and addresses a matter of agency organization. It does not contain a “collection of information” as that term is defined in the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 4

Freedom of information, Privacy.

Dated: October 28, 2015. Catrina D. Purvis, Chief Privacy Officer and Director for Open Government, Department of Commerce.

For the reasons set forth above, the Department of Commerce amends 15 CFR part 4 as follows:

PART 4—DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION 1. The authority citation for this part continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301; 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. 552a; 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 3717; 44 U.S.C. 3101; Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950.

2. Amend § 4.10 by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c) to read as follows:
§ 4.10 Appeals from initial determinations or untimely delays.

(b)(1) Appeals, other than appeals from requests made to the Office of Inspector General, shall be decided by the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight. Written appeals should be addressed to the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight, at U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of the General Counsel, Room 5875, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. An appeal may also be sent via facsimile at 202-482-2552. For a written appeal, both the letter and the appeal envelope should be clearly marked “Freedom of Information Act Appeal.” Appeals may also be submitted electronically either by email to [email protected] or online at the FOIAonline Web site, http://foiaonline.regulations.gov, if requesters have a FOIAonline account. In all cases, the appeal (written or electronic) should include a copy of the original request and initial denial, if any. All appeals should include a statement of the reasons why the records requested should be made available and why the adverse determination was in error. No opportunity for personal appearance, oral argument or hearing on appeal is provided. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight ordinarily shall send an acknowledgement letter to the requester which shall confirm receipt of the requester's appeal.* * *

(c) Upon receipt of an appeal involving records initially denied on the basis of FOIA exemption (b)(1), the records shall be forwarded to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Security (DAS) for a declassification review. The DAS may overrule previous classification determinations in whole or in part if continued protection in the interest of national security is no longer required, or no longer required at the same level. The DAS shall advise the Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight, the General Counsel, the General Counsel to the Inspector General, or Deputy Inspector General, as appropriate, of his or her decision.

§§ 4.23, 4.25, 4.28, and 4.29 and Appendix B [Amended]
3. In addition to the amendments made above, in 15 CFR part 4, remove the words “Assistant General Counsel for Administration” and add, in their place, the words “Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, Employment, and Oversight” in the following places: a. Section 4.23(d)(2); b. Section 4.25(a)(2) and (g)(3)(ii); c. Section 4.28(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(ii)(D); d. Section 4.29(b), (c), (e), (g)(1), (h), and (i); and e. Appendix B.
[FR Doc. 2015-28712 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-BW-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 19 CFR Parts 101, 113, and 133 [CBP Dec. 15-15, USCBP-2006-0013] RIN 1515-AD56 [formerly 1505-AB54] Customs and Border Protection's Bond Program AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Department of the Treasury.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This document adopts as a final rule, with changes, proposed amendments to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations that serve to centralize the processing of continuous bonds at CBP's Revenue Division within the Office of Administration. Upon consideration of comments received from the public in response to the proposed rulemaking, and in light of CBP's ongoing efforts concerning the development of electronic bonds, CBP has determined not to proceed at this time with certain proposed regulatory changes relating to the application, approval, and execution of bonds. CBP has also determined not to proceed with proposals relating to provisions that are the subject of other rulemakings currently under inter-departmental review. In the notice of proposed rulemaking, CBP used the terms “CBP-approved electronic data interchange system” and “electronic filing” to describe the manner by which continuous bonds may be submitted to CBP. In this final rule, these terms are clarified to reflect that continuous bonds may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment, or by facsimile. This document also amends the CBP regulations to allow for the filing of single transaction bonds pursuant to these methods. In this rulemaking, CBP also clarifies the CBP regulations to reflect that intellectual property rights sample bonds are posted to protect the importer or owner of the sample, and changes provisions of the international carrier bond regarding the payment of fees. Lastly, this final rule adopts non-substantive amendments to the regulations regarding nomenclature and organizational changes, including editorial changes to enhance general readability, and makes technical corrections to reflect statutory amendments.

DATES:

Effective December 14, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kara Welty, Chief, Debt Management Branch, Revenue Division, Office of Administration, Tel. (317) 614-4614.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background Proposed Rule

On January 5, 2010, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published in the Federal Register (75 FR 266) a proposal to amend title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR) regarding CBP's bond program. The proposed amendments to CBP's bond regulations were intended to update and modernize CBP's bond program and centralize the filing, review and approval of continuous bonds at CBP's Revenue Division, Office of Administration, in Indianapolis, Indiana, which assumes the bond functions previously performed at the port level. In that document, CBP also proposed to amend § 113.64, which prescribes international carrier bond conditions, to state that an obligor must pay liquidated damages for failure to timely submit to CBP passenger processing fees that were required to be collected. In addition, CBP proposed to amend the regulations in part 133 to reflect that bonds relating to allegations of counterfeit trademarks are permitted to be continuous bonds.

Bond Final Rule Separate and Distinct From eBond Test

Title VI of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057 (Dec. 8, 1993), establishes the National Customs Automation Program (NCAP), an automated and electronic system for the processing of commercial importations. CBP is currently conducting a voluntary NCAP eBond test. In a general notice published in the Federal Register (79 FR 70881) on November 28, 2014, CBP described the terms and conditions of the eBond test which provides for the transmission to the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) of electronic bond contracts (eBonds) between principals and sureties, with CBP as the third-party beneficiary, for the purpose of linking those eBonds to the transactions they are intended to secure (eBond system). The test deployed on January 3, 2015, and a modification to the test was published in the Federal Register (80 FR 899) and went into effect on January 7, 2015.

The eBond test is separate and distinct from this bond final rule. In this regard, it is noted that the eBond test pertains to electronic bonds that are not submitted on the CBP Form 301 and that are transmitted through an electronic data interchange to ACE to secure a limited subset of ACE entry types. The bond regulations contained in this final rule, however, pertain to all entry types and provide for the filing of both continuous bonds and single transaction bonds primarily on the CBP Form 301. As a result of this rule, CBP Form 301 bonds may be scanned and emailed to CBP as a computer file attachment (i.e., in a .pdf or a .tif format), or submitted by facsimile (fax) or mail. Bonds emailed or faxed to CBP on the CBP Form 301 are not submitted via a “CBP-approved electronic data interchange system” in that they do not constitute a computer-to-computer interchange of strictly formatted messages. To clarify this fact, this final rule no longer refers to CBP Form 301 bonds, or the submission of bonds outside of the eBond test, as “electronic” or submitted or filed “electronically” or via a “CBP-authorized electronic data interchange system.” Moreover, as bonds may still be submitted to CBP outside of the eBond test, it is important to note the following:

• Non-eBond test participants must adhere to the regulatory provisions set forth in Chapter 1 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

• For eBond test participants, the regulatory provisions set forth in Chapter 1 of title 19 of the CFR are suspended to the extent that they conflict with the terms of the eBond test.

Amendments Suggested by Commenters

This final rule adopts changes suggested by commenters in response to the proposed rulemaking that are a natural outgrowth of that document. Specifically, the changes:

• Permit both single transaction bonds (STBs) and continuous bonds to be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax.

• Liberalize the existing procedure, set forth in § 113.37(d), by which agents or attorneys acting for a corporate surety may identify themselves to CBP by permitting the submission of a surety-generated 9-digit alphanumeric identification number as a substitute for submission of a social security number.

• Remove the reference, in § 113.38(c)(4), to “port director” as among the CBP personnel authorized to determine whether CBP will accept the bonds of a particular surety.

• Effect a technical correction to § 113.52, which currently requires that CBP report a bonded debt to the Department of Justice for prosecution if unpaid for 90 days. As section 2103 of the Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2004 amended 19 U.S.C. 1514 by extending the time to file and amend a protest from 90 days to 180 days after the date of liquidation or reliquidation, or date of the decision, order, or finding being protested for entries made on or after December 18, 2004, the 90-day period should be changed to 180 days to reflect that fact.

Clarifying and Conforming Amendments

This document also amends the regulations to effect clarifications that better explain the bond process and conform the regulations to reflect amendments to title 19 of the CFR that went into effect after publication of the proposed rule. Specifically, these changes:

• Clarify in § 113.14, which pertains to situations where the approved form of a bond is inadequate, that in situations where CBP determines that none of the conditions contained in Subpart G, CBP Bond Conditions, of part 113 are applicable to a transaction sought to be secured, either the Director, Revenue Division, or the port director, may draft conditions that cover the transaction as CBP deems appropriate and the port director is not limited to drafting conditions only for single transaction bonds (STBs) in these instances. This change is necessary to reflect the fact that there are certain continuous bonds for which the port director, and not the Revenue Division, will draft bond conditions that are specific to the issues and the geography of the port involved.

• Clarify in § 113.15, which prescribes the retention of approved bonds, that except for bonds containing the agreement to pay court costs (condemned goods) (see § 113.72), and as may otherwise be deemed appropriate by CBP, bonds that are approved by the port director will be retained at the port office and bonds that are approved at the Revenue Division (including bonds relating to repayment of erroneous drawback payments containing the conditions set forth in § 113.65) will be retained at the Revenue Division.

• Clarify the introductory language in § 113.39(a) to state that reports to CBP Headquarters are to be sent to the attention of the Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade.

• Clarify § 113.64(b)(1) and (2) to state, in positive terms, that the principal (carrier) must pay processing fees to CBP “within” the prescribed number of “calendar” days after the close of the calendar quarter in which they were due.

• Clarify § 133.25(c), relating to the terms of the IPR sample bond, by adding in the second sentence the phrase “. . ., conditioned to indemnify the importer or owner of the imported article against any loss or damage resulting from the furnishing of the sample by CBP to the owner of the mark.” This language is added to eliminate confusion and make clear that the IPR sample bond is posted to protect the importer or owner of the sample.

Proposals Not Adopted

As noted above, this final rule adopts changes suggested by commenters in response to the proposed rulemaking, including recommendations to not proceed with certain proposed amendments. In this document, CBP has also determined not to adopt as final certain regulatory proposals that are the subject of other CBP rulemakings that are currently in formal inter-departmental review. In addition, CBP is not finalizing certain proposals in light of ongoing efforts concerning the development and deployment of eBonds in the ACE environment. In this regard, it is noted that CBP has announced a deployment schedule that will include electronic filing of STBs. This schedule is available for viewing at: http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Product%20Backlog%20as%20of%2003-31-14.pdf. As many of the regulatory changes offered in the proposed rule may not be consistent with the deployment of eBonds in the ACE, or have otherwise been overtaken by events, the following proposed changes are not being adopted as final, in whole or in part (notwithstanding non-substantive editorial changes that are retained in this document), as described below:

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.11 relating to bond applications, with the exception that this section is amended to specify that both STBs and continuous bonds may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax, paper STBs may be filed at the Revenue Division or with the port director, and continuous bonds must be filed with the Director, Revenue Division.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.12 regarding bond approval, with the exception that paragraphs (a) and (b) are respectively amended to state that STBs may be approved by either the Revenue Division or by the director of the port where filed, and continuous bonds will be approved by the Director, Revenue Division.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.13(c) which would remove the 30-day time period from date of notification within which a principal must remedy a bond deficiency. Upon further review, and in response to commenters' suggestions, CBP has decided to reinstate a prescribed time period within which a principal must remedy the bond insufficiency. CBP views a 30-day response period as too lengthy to adequately protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations, and therefore this provision is amended to prescribe a 15-day period.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.21 relating to information required on the bond.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.22 relating to witnesses required on the bond.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.23 relating to changes made on the bond.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.24 relating to riders, with the exception that this section is amended to reflect that riders must be filed with the Revenue Division and may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. In addition, this section clarifies that riders must be attached to their related bond if submitted in a paper format and sets forth a reference to the CBP Web site containing a comprehensive listing of acceptable riders. In addition, this section sets forth a reference to the CBP Web site containing a comprehensive listing of acceptable riders.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.25 relating to seals on the bond.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.26 relating to riders, with the exception that this section is amended to allow the filing of riders up to sixty days prior to the effective date rather than thirty days.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.27 relating to termination of bonds, with the exception that this section is amended to reflect that termination notices must be sent to the Revenue Division.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.33 relating to bond execution requirements of corporations, with the exception that paragraph (c) is amended to include a reference to the Revenue Division.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.37 relating to signature and seal requirements of corporate sureties, with the exception that the outdated existing reference to the “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” is replaced with an updated reference to “Bureau of the Fiscal Service” to reflect current administrative and legal authorities. Also, as noted above, CBP is adopting as final the proposed amendments to paragraph (d) whereby agents or attorneys acting for a corporate surety may identify themselves to CBP by submitting a surety-generated 9-digit alphanumeric identification number as a substitute for submission of a social security number.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.39 to reflect a generalized reference to “authorized CBP officer” as to who may recommend the removal of a surety company from Treasury Department Circular 570, with the exception that this section is amended by adding references to the Revenue Division and also to replace the outdated existing reference to the “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” with an updated reference to “Bureau of the Fiscal Service”.

• Proposed changes to § 113.40, which provides for acceptance of cash deposits or obligations of the United States in lieu of sureties on bonds, with the exception that this section is amended to provide that the Secretary of Homeland Security is among those who may authorize the enforcement of bond laws and regulations and the Director, Revenue Division, and not the Port Director, is authorized to accept cash deposits in lieu of sureties on bonds.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.62(a)(1)(i) to include a reference to the “periodic monthly statement” inasmuch as this type of payment is made pursuant to a test program that has not been provided by regulation.

• Proposed changes to the title of the bond set forth in Appendix A to Part 113 from “Airport Customs Security Area” to “Airport CBP Security Area” in that the term “CBP” is improperly restrictive in this context. Here, CBP uses “Customs” in the generic sense of the word rather than as a continued reference to the legacy component of CBP, the U.S. Customs Service, previously referred to throughout title 19 CFR as “Customs.” It is noted, however, that CBP adopts in this final rule the proposal to convert this bond from a term bond to a continuous bond.

• Proposed changes to Appendices A and D to part 113 which would remove the witness requirements.

• Proposed changes to 19 CFR 133.21(d) and 19 CFR 133.42(e), as the proposed amendments to these intellectual property rights sample bond provisions are the subject of existing rulemakings which are in formal inter-departmental review.

Discussion of Comments

Eight commenters responded to CBP's solicitation of public comment in the proposed rule. A description of the comments received, together with CBP's analyses, is set forth below.

Comment:

One commenter requested confirmation that the proposed substitution of the reference to the Department of the Treasury in 19 CFR 113.1, with a reference to the

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), does not create a deficiency in authority for CBP to require bonds or other security.

CBP Response:

The proposed substitution does not create a deficiency in authority. First, in view of the authority transferred by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and delegated by Treasury Department Order No. 100-16 (May 23, 2003), Appendix to part 0 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 0), all of the Secretary of the Treasury's authority pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1623(a) was transferred and/or delegated to the DHS Secretary who then appropriately delegated it to the Commissioner of CBP, who may re-delegate it further within CBP. Second, any authority outside the scope of 19 U.S.C. 1623(a) is encompassed within the dependent clause of the sentence which begins 19 CFR 113.1.

Comment:

Six commenters provided submissions regarding various aspects of the bond application process as set forth in proposed § 113.11. The bond application comments are summarized as follows:

• The level of continuous bond application detail specified in proposed § 113.11(c) is much greater than the amount of information currently collected in bond applications and constitutes a new “collection of information” pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). This contradicts CBP's statement in the proposed rule that “[T]here are no new collections of information proposed in this document.”

• The requirement to submit an application for a STB, as set forth in proposed § 113.11(a), should be removed. The commenters noted that STBs are rarely, if ever, accompanied by bond applications and the transaction that the bond secures serves to provide CBP with the necessary information.

• In the alternative, if CBP elects to retain applications for STBs, as is required in proposed § 113.11(a), CBP should modify the provision to state that STB applications may be filed at either the Revenue Division or the port, and either of those locales may review and approve the bond.

• Requiring applications for any type of customs bonds is an outmoded concept as the preponderance of bond sufficiency decisions rendered by the Revenue Division are not based on the application, but on the Revenue Division's analysis of data that is readily and routinely extracted from CBP's own data systems. In this regard, it is noted that CBP's data processing and analysis capabilities are vastly more comprehensive today than those that were in existence in 1985 when the current bond application regulatory requirements were promulgated. CBP should handle its request for more specific information collection through utilization of CBP Directives.

• The detail set forth in the proposed bond application involves certain information which is pertinent only in the case of Activity Code 1 continuous bonds, even though the requirements of proposed § 113.11(c) purport to apply to all activity codes.

• Proposed § 113.11(d) requires updates to application information in the event of a “material change.” Commenters note CBP has not enforced this provision for 25 years. In addition, the term “material change” is undefined and therefore subjective, vague, and difficult to enforce. CBP has the ability to determine for itself whether any information has changed materially enough to warrant a new bond and, as the bond obligee, it is good risk management practice to continually review all bonds for adequacy.

• References in § 113.11 to CBP Form 301 should be deleted inasmuch as certain bonds filed with CBP (e.g., Importer Security Filing (ISF) “Appendix D” Bonds, Airport Customs Security Area “Appendix A” Bonds) are not filed on the CBP Form 301.

• Proposed § 113.11(c)(1)(v) requires that the bond applicant provide information relating to the nature of the relationship between principal, co-principals, or unincorporated divisions or trade names appearing on the bond. This new requirement does not have any relation to protection of revenue and/or setting bond amounts.

• Proposed § 113.11(c)(1)(viii) requires the applicant to report “anticipated” material changes to the nature of the merchandise that will be imported over the subsequent 12 months. This new requirement does not have any relation to protection of revenue.

• Proposed § 113.11(c)(1)(xii) and (xiii) duplicate the information requested in paragraph (e).

• It is not necessary that a bond application be executed under seal and this requirement should be removed from proposed § 113.11(e)(1). By waiving this requirement, proposed paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) can be combined and require the same certification language for everyone and every situation.

• As proposed, § 113.11 pertains to bond applications, paragraph (e)(1) should be amended by adding the word “applications” to clarify that the provision pertains to paper bond applications.

• The last sentence in the certification language set forth in proposed § 113.11(e)(2) presumes that every bond application submitted electronically will be submitted by a corporate applicant. Non-corporate applicants will not be able to make such a certification.

• The term “continuous transaction bond” in proposed § 113.11(c)(1) should read “continuous bonds.”

• In the proposed rule, CBP would permit certain documentation to be submitted to the Revenue Division in a non-paper format. As such submissions will not contain a written signature or seal, CBP proposes to add alternative certification language stating that the bonds are legally binding “to the same extent as if signed and under seal.” CBP should not permit certification in lieu of requiring a signature on non-paper bonds without developing appropriate safeguards to verify and authenticate the intent of the parties to be bound without the evidence of signatures. Part 113 should be limited to bonds submitted by mail, fax or other electronic imagery where the signature and seal will be visible (i.e., as a .pdf or .tif email attachment). CBP should engage the surety industry and trade in discussions to establish the proper regulatory language. Self-certification of one's own authority is susceptible to fraud. In a related submission, another commenter noted that if an electronic bond transmission to CBP is not pursuant to an “authorized electronic interchange system,” as required by 19 U.S.C. 1623(e), a signature is required. To remedy these problems, the commenters suggest amending proposed § 113.11 by: (1) Deleting the introductory paragraph and all references to CBP Form 301; (2) deleting the requirement to submit a bond application for STBs set forth in proposed paragraph (a); (3) removing the specific bond information set forth in proposed paragraph (c); (4) deleting the requirement to submit bond application updates in the event of material change; (5) stating that CBP may require a prospective or existing continuous or term bond principal to file a written bond application and, when required, the application must include the information specified by the Revenue Division in order to properly evaluate bond sufficiency; (6) changing the reference to “paper bond” in proposed § 113.11(e)(1) to read, “paper bond application”, and; (7) adding the words, “where applicable” to the certification language in § 113.11(e)(2) to reflect that not all non-paper bond applications will be from corporate applicants. The commenters maintain that such amendments to the bond application procedures will result in true paperwork reduction without sacrificing CBP's ability to obtain and review the information it needs to make sound bond sufficiency decisions.

CBP Response:

For reasons discussed elsewhere in this preamble, CBP has determined not to proceed with most of the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.11. It is noted, however, that this final rule amends the CBP regulations to reflect the proposal to set forth CBP's bond application procedures in § 113.11 (which are currently prescribed in § 113.12) and to set forth the bond approval regulations in § 113.12 (which are currently prescribed in § 113.11) as this non-substantive change reflects the proper chronological order of bond processing events. It is further noted that CBP is amending the STB bond application process set forth in § 113.11(a) to provide that the STB bond application may be in the form of a letter and filed with the Director, Revenue Division or the port director, or the STB may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. Similarly, CBP is amending § 113.11(b) to provide that continuous bonds must be submitted to the Director, Revenue Division and may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. Lastly, this final rule removes references to CBP Form 301 in § 113.11.

Comment:

Several commenters noted that a reference to term bonds should be added to proposed § 113.11 to encompass Airport Customs Security Area Bonds or, in the alternative, term bonds should be converted into a continuous bond format.

CBP Response:

CBP agrees with the commenters' suggestion that Airport Customs Security Area Bonds, which are currently term bonds that lapse at the end of a specified period,

should be converted to a continuous bond type. This change will allow CBP to avoid lapses in coverage and thereby enhance security. The conversion poses no economic burden on the public and is a logical outgrowth of the proposed rulemaking in that it serves to ensure a uniform approach to bond approval, maintenance, and periodic review. Accordingly, this document amends Appendix A to 19 CFR part 113 by removing the bond text pertaining to specific duration of the bond and to locality.

Comment:

Several commenters provided submissions regarding various aspects of the bond approval process as set forth in proposed § 113.12. The bond approval comments are summarized as follows:

• Paragraph (a) should reflect that the Revenue Division already accepts emailed STB versions of the ISF Bond (Appendix D to part 113).

• The last sentence of proposed § 113.12(b) should be changed to state that “only one continuous bond for a particular activity `code' will be authorized for each principal.” This is necessary because the unqualified reference to “a particular activity,” as is currently proposed, is too broad and susceptible to an unintended interpretation that would require a principal to obtain more continuous bonds than are needed to cover all of its activities.

CBP Response:

CBP agrees that additional clarification as to who may approve bonds is beneficial. Accordingly, this document amends § 113.12(a) to state that STBs may be approved by the Revenue Division or by the director of the port where the STB is filed, and amends § 113.12(b) to state that continuous bonds must be approved by the Revenue Division. As CBP has determined not to proceed with the remainder of the proposed amendments to § 113.12, it is not necessary to address other comments concerning this section.

Comment:

Several commenters noted that CBP has apparently launched a new electronic single transaction bond program (“e-STB”). The program appears to be unauthorized and violative of the NPRM which repeatedly indicates that STBs will continue to be filed and approved by port directors. The final rule should authorize, but not require, the centralization of e-STBs at the Revenue Division.

CBP Response:

This comment predates deployment of the eBond test on January 3, 2015, and prior to this date CBP had not launched a formal e-STB program; rather, based on individual program requirements, such as Importer Security Filing (ISF) and Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) entries, CBP has accepted and processed scanned images of bonds transmitted via email. Nevertheless, as noted above, CBP is in agreement with the commenters' suggestion to liberalize the manner by which STBs may be submitted to CBP. To that end, this final rule amends the CBP regulations to permit STBs to be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. For purposes of uniformity, this document also amends § 113.11(b) to clarify that continuous bonds may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax.

Comment:

Several commenters provided comments regarding the proposed amendments to § 113.13(c), which pertain to CBP's periodic review to determine bond sufficiency. The comments are summarized as follows:

• Six commenters objected to the proposed amendments to § 113.13(c) which state that CBP will periodically review each bond on file to determine whether the bond is adequate to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations, and that, if CBP determines a bond to be inadequate, the principal will be promptly notified in writing and additional security for any and all of the principal's transactions covered by the bond may be required until the deficiency is remedied. The commenters state that the proposed changes would permit CBP to deactivate a bond and/or require additional collateralization almost immediately, regardless of the reason for the insufficiency. Although 19 CFR 113.13(c), as it is currently proposed to be amended, suggests that a bond insufficiency is determined by whether “the bond is adequate to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with the law and regulations,” the commenters note that CBP finds insufficiency and deactivates bonds for a variety of reasons, not all of them involving threats to compliance or the revenue. The commenters request that CBP maintain the 30 days written notice to the principal as is currently provided in the regulations.

• Several commenters object to CBP's ability to render a bond insufficient in situations where a bond has been identified as “inadequate,” but the inadequacy is not significant enough to rise to the level of jeopardizing compliance or revenue.

• One commenter suggests replacing the word “immediate” in paragraph (d), with a word connoting a more reasonable period of time.

• The bond is an agreement between the principal, CBP, and the surety, and any notice given by CBP to the principal should also be given to the surety.

• Several commenters suggest the language in proposed paragraphs (c) and (d) pertaining to “additional securities” is duplicative and need only be stated once in paragraph (d).

CBP Response:

When circumstances require, CBP must be able to act quickly to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with law and regulation. There have been situations where the passage of time between CBP's decision finding a bond to be insufficient and the principal increasing the bond in response to such a finding has resulted in the agency having to write off millions of dollars in uncollectible revenue. It is noted that even in situations where the continuous bond is rendered insufficient “immediately,” the trade retains the ability to move cargo without excessive delay by using STBs. In an effort to alleviate concern that CBP will improperly render a bond insufficient in situations where the bond inadequacy is not significant enough to rise to the level of jeopardizing compliance or revenue, CBP will reinstate a prescribed time period within which a principal is given the opportunity to remedy the bond insufficiency. As noted above in this document, CBP views the existing 30-day response period as too lengthy to adequately protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations; therefore, § 113.13(c) is amended to prescribe a 15-day period within which a principal must remedy a deficiency and to state that where CBP has determined that a bond is insufficient to adequately protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations, CBP may provide written notice to the principal and surety that additional security in the form of cash deposit or STB may be required for any and all of the principal's transactions until the deficiency is remedied. CBP will provide notice of any insufficiency to both the principal and the surety.

Comment:

Several commenters expressed concern with the ISF implications of CBP's proposed amendments to § 113.13 which would allow CBP to deactivate a bond and/or require additional collateralization almost immediately. Before introduction of the ISF requirement, this action would cause delays in filing an entry for release as the cargo arrives at terminals in the U.S. Under ISF, the immediate inactivation of a bond for any insufficiency takes on troubling implications in that cargo will be held back from being sent to the U.S. by the carrier overseas. If the cargo is not laden aboard the vessel at the foreign port, it may cause significant shipping delays.

CBP response:

CBP disagrees and notes that even in situations where the continuous bond is rendered insufficient “immediately,” the trade retains the ability to move cargo without excessive delay by using STBs. This includes using a STB to satisfy the ISF bonding requirement.

Comment:

Seven commenters disagree that CBP is “entitled to presume, without verification, that submitted bond applications and related documentation, which include the bond, are properly executed, complete, accurate, and in full compliance with all applicable laws.” This language, or substantially similar variations thereof, was proposed to be added to various provisions throughout part 113. The commenters state that, as CBP is the obligee of the bond and a party to it, CBP has a duty to exercise due diligence to ensure that the bond meets the regulations and requirements CBP establishes. The explicit elimination of CBP's accountability indicates a radical, unnecessary and inappropriate change in CBP's approach to the bond process and protection of the revenue and such change was not adequately discussed in the proposed rule's preamble. It was also suggested that, as a matter of law, it is inconceivable that the courts would allow CBP to collect against sureties on bonds which were produced fraudulently, or are deficient on their face, or are inconsistent with CBP regulations and statutory requirements. One commenter noted that the presumption of validity, authority and accuracy may attach to the filer, but not to the surety unless the filer's authority is specifically verified. If a bond is submitted and accepted by CBP, then CBP must also take responsibility for the problems, errors or deficiencies in the bond which it has accepted.

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed regulatory provisions containing this language, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

One commenter suggests that the requirement to “line out” unused portions of the CBP Form 301 should be retained in § 113.21 as it helps reduce ambiguity or uncertainty as to the intent of the principal or the surety when completing the bond.

CBP response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.21, it is not necessary to address this comment.

Comment:

One commenter agrees with CBP's proposal to remove § 113.22, which pertains to bond witness requirements, and suggests that all references to witnesses should be removed from §§ 113.24(d), 113.40(b), and Appendices A, B, C, and D to part 113.

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.22, it is not necessary to address this comment.

Comment:

Four comments were received regarding § 113.23, which describes the types of changes that may be made to a bond and the process by which to effect such changes. The comments are summarized below:

• This section should be amended to read that changes may be made to the bond “filing” and not the actual bond because the bond has not been approved yet.

• One commenter suggests that the last sentence in § 113.23(c) be amended to read, “[W]hen a modification or interlineation is desired, the principal or surety will withdraw the bond filing if submitted to CBP and a new bond will be executed.”

CBP response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.23, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

Four commenters made submissions regarding the proposed amendments to riders in § 113.24. The comments are summarized as follows:

• Any future riders should be able to be submitted to the Revenue Division.

• Proposed § 113.24(e) requires that all riders submitted on paper be signed by both the principal and co-principals. This requirement deviates from the existing requirement to have a rider signed by only the affected principal and, as such, is overly burdensome and unnecessary. In the alternative, if this revision is retained in the final, the requirement should also apply to each surety and co-surety. Section 113.24(e) does not provide the format for all acceptable riders, and the final rule should either list all acceptable riders or refer the reader to the CBP Web site for a complete listing.

• As § 113.26 states that the riders in §§ 113.24(e)(2) and (3) are effective on the “date in the rider,” CBP needs to include an effective date in these riders.

• CBP should remove the requirement that the rider must be executed under seal inasmuch as the only approved riders are those intended to correct information that does not rise to the level of materially altering the bond itself (i.e., address change, name change, etc.).

• One commenter noted that the riders named in proposed § 113.24, which are to be filed at the Revenue Division, are for a change to the principal's name or address, as well as addition and deletion riders for unincorporated divisions on a bond. The commenter suggests that reconciliation riders, which are currently filed at CBP Headquarters, should also be filed at the Revenue Division to avoid situations where a bond is terminated, but the rider is not. If a new bond is filed with a new surety, the rider is deemed unavailable as it indicates the surety on the terminated bond. Any entry flagged for reconciliation under the new bond is not valid because there is no reconciliation rider for the new bond. This is a CBP system issue and it would be advisable for the Revenue Division to control the filing and termination of reconciliation riders.

CBP Response:

CBP is not proceeding with the finalization of most of the proposed amendments to § 113.24. One exception is the amendment that provides that riders must be filed with the Revenue Division and that they may be scanned and filed as an email attachment or by fax. Other exceptions are the amendment of paragraph (c) to clarify that riders must be attached to their related bond if submitted in a paper format and the amendment of § 113.24 to include a reference to the CBP Web site containing a listing of all acceptable riders. As CBP has determined not to proceed with the remainder of the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.24, it is not necessary to address the rest of the comments pertaining to this section. In response to the commenter's concern that there may be situations where a bond is terminated but the rider is not, CBP wishes to clarify that termination of the bond also terminates any and all riders to the bond.

Comment:

Five commenters noted the following regarding the seal requirements set forth in proposed § 113.25.

• CBP should add language to this provision stating that seal requirements apply only to bonds directly executed by principals (e.g., corporate officers), and that bonds executed by a duly empowered attorney-in-fact acting for the principal are exempt from seal requirements.

• As bonds are produced in a variety of ways, the regulations should specify whether the requirements imposed on the party executing the bond apply to the principal, surety or both.

• Paragraph (a), which requires that the party executing a bond submitted electronically to CBP “must retain a copy of the paper seal and make such seal available to CBP for inspection upon request,” should be amended to apply to the party “filing” the electronic bond inasmuch as this more accurately reflects the typical business practice and makes a necessary distinction.

• CBP should specify whether the requirement to retain a copy of the paper bond, and provide it to CBP upon request, is imposed upon the principal, the surety, or both.

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.25, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

Several commenters made recommendations pertaining to the effective dates of bonds and bond riders set forth in § 113.26. The comments follow:

• One commenter requested that CBP clarify, in paragraph (e), that the applicable time frame is 15 business days.

• CBP should make the rule more flexible with respect to the effective date of riders that are filed to correct an initial rejection.

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.26, with the exception that this document amends this section to allow the filing of riders up to 60 days prior to their effective dates, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

Several commenters submitted the following comments regarding bond termination procedures set forth in § 113.27:

• Proposed § 113.27 should be amended to provide CBP with the discretion to permit a withdrawal of a termination if it would be in the interest of CBP, the principal, and the surety.

• A commenter expressed dissatisfaction with the proposed amendments to § 113.27(b) which eliminate the current authority for sureties to terminate a bond in less than 30 days upon a showing “that a lesser time is reasonable under the circumstances,” and recommends that the authority be reinstated.

• The trade supports the proposed procedures set forth in paragraph (c) which avoid gaps in bond coverage.

• One commenter noted that pursuant to § 113.27(c)(1), a new bond must be filed after termination has taken effect and the bond must contain the conditions in Subpart G, regardless of whether the new bond is on CBP Form 301 or some other form in the regulations. As the conditions in Subpart G are only found on the CBP Form 301 and not on the other forms, the regulation should be amended accordingly.

• One commenter stated that the proposed language in § 113.27(c)(2) permits a termination to be conditioned on the approval of a new bond intended to replace the one being terminated. The commenter supports the concept, but not the way it is expressed (“. . . terminated pursuant to this section . . .”) as this could circumvent a surety's decision to terminate a bond when that surety does not desire any delay or extension as to when termination becomes effective. A surety does not need a principal's consent to terminate the bond, so the principal should not be able to delay that decision once the surety has given notice of termination under § 113.27(b). Further, this language should apply only when the principal has given notice of termination under § 113.27(a), and it should be moved there with some minor changes. A surety does not have a need to avail itself of the method outlined in proposed § 113.27(c)(2).

• Several commenters recommended removing the reference to “sureties” in § 113.27(c)(2) as this provision pertains to actions initiated by principals (usually importers), and by moving the regulatory text set forth in paragraph (c)(2) to paragraph (a). This restructuring will clarify that proposed paragraph (c)(2) does not apply to § 113.27(b).

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.27, with the exception that termination notices must be filed at the Revenue Division and they may be submitted to CBP via email or by fax, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

Several comments were submitted regarding corporations and Limited Liability Corporations (LLC) in § 113.33:

• One commenter suggested that CBP should amend proposed § 113.33 to include a definition of “corporation.”

• One commenter noted that proposed § 113.33(b) states that where the continuous bond of a corporate principal or LLC principal is submitted to CBP in an electronic format, the bond must contain the certification language set forth in § 113.11(e)(2). The commenter continued to note that the CBP Form 301 is subject to OMB approval and, as this certification is not required under the existing regulations, the addition of any language must be approved by OMB. The commenter also expresses concern that there is no physical room on the CBP Form 301 to place this certification.

CBP Response:

As CBP has determined not to proceed with most of the proposed changes to 19 CFR 113.33, with the exception that § 133.33(c) is amended to add a reference to the Revenue Division, it is not necessary to address these comments.

Comment:

One commenter stated that the use of individual sureties is outmoded and therefore § 113.35 should be removed from title 19 of the CFR. However, another commenter suggested that this section should be revised to set forth the specific types of property that can be posted by individual sureties (e.g., such assets should be liquid and be able to be readily valued).

CBP Response:

Although this provision is not commonly used, CBP opts to retain it and does not deem further specification as to the types of property that may be posted by individual sureties as necessary.

Comment:

One commenter noted that CBP should amend § 113.37(d) to remove the requirement that an agent or attorney on the bond must provide his or her social security number (SSN), as this requirement is counter to the protections afforded by the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a). The commenter noted that CBP no longer uses the importer number (i.e., Employee Identification Number, whether CBP-assigned or SSN) of the bond principal on the CBP Form 5955a. Additionally, the commenter noted that the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Census abolished the use of SSNs in its Automated Export System, citing 5 U.S.C. 552a, and suggested that CBP allow a surety attorney-in-fact to obtain and use a CBP-assigned importer number.

CBP Response:

In this final rule CBP is not adopting most of the proposed changes to § 113.37, with the following exceptions:

• Sections 113.37(d) and (g)(ii) are amended to allow an agent or attorney to place either his/her social security number or a surety-generated 9-digit alphanumeric identification number on the bond.

• Sections 113.37(a) and (f) are amended by removing the outdated reference to “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” and replacing it with a reference to “Bureau of the Fiscal Service” in order to conform to current administrative and legal authorities.

• Section 113.37(g)(1) is amended to allow corporate surety powers of attorney to be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment, or by fax or mail.

Comment:

Two commenters suggested that CBP should amend proposed § 113.37(g) to reflect that the ACE permits a surety to manage its powers of attorney without the need to prepare and submit CBP Form 5297 on paper to CBP. Another commenter stated that CBP should authorize the electronic filing of CBP Form 5297.

CBP Response:

As noted above, CBP is amending § 113.37(g) to allow for the corporate surety powers of attorney to be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment, or by fax or by mail.

Comment:

One commenter recommended that a change is needed to the language set forth in proposed § 113.38, which pertains to delinquent sureties, in order to harmonize the provision with the goal of bond centralization. Specifically, paragraph (c)(4) proposes to include a port director, along with the Commissioner of CBP and the Director, Revenue Division, as a person with the authority to determine that CBP will no longer accept the bonds of a particular surety. The commenter notes that this is troubling because the opinion of an individual port director may set policy based upon his or her criteria, instead of upon criteria developed and administered centrally. Further, such language is inconsistent with current § 113.38(c)(1) and (2) which distinguish between decisions as to non-acceptance of bonds by a port director and decisions as to non-acceptance of bonds by the Commissioner which are issued to port directors. It is also inconsistent with proposed § 113.39(a) which states that the role of any authorized CBP officer in determinations relating to the removal of a surety from Treasury Department Circular 570 status is that of fact gathering and reporting, with the ultimate determination as to whether to refer a matter to Treasury to be made by CBP Headquarters.

CBP Response:

We agree with the commenter. CBP will revert back to the existing language in § 113.38(c)(4) which states that “an appropriate CBP officer” will make these decisions. This final rule also amends § 113.38(c)(4) to no longer require that notice to the surety be provided in person or by certified mail.

Comment:

One commenter requested that CBP extend the effective date of the final rule to 180 days from date of publication in the Federal Register.

CBP Response:

CBP does not view an extension beyond the stated effective date to be necessary as the amendments to part 113 promulgated in this document do not require the trade to adopt different procedures.

Comment:

Several commenters noted that the substantive changes proposed in the notice were never the subject of a pre-publication dialogue with the trade, despite the fact that CBP meets regularly with the trade.

CBP Response:

CBP engaged in pre-publication dialogue of these issues with the trade on numerous occasions during the development of this rulemaking. CBP believes that the agency met its trade outreach obligations regarding the content and development of these regulations.

Comment:

Several commenters noted that the proposed changes to § 113.39 would allow an “authorized CBP officer” to initiate a procedure to remove a surety from Treasury Department Circular 570. The commenters note that this is an extremely serious action as the Treasury Department Circular 570 is the basis for the surety to secure all types of federal government obligations, not merely customs obligations. Accordingly, it is recommended that CBP delegate the authority to initiate this action to the Commissioner of CBP or the Director, Revenue Division (the same individuals authorized to refuse to accept bonds of significantly delinquent sureties).

CBP Response:

CBP shares the commenters' concern, and this document does not adopt the proposed amendments to 19 CFR 113.39 which would have had the effect of replacing the existing references to “port director or Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer” with a more generalized reference to “CBP.” However, in order to reflect the centralization of the continuous bond program at the Revenue Division, this provision is amended to include “authorized Revenue Division personnel,” in addition to port directors and Fine, Penalties and Forfeitures Officers, as among those who may recommend that a surety company be removed from Treasury Department Circular 570.

Comment:

Section 113.40 prescribes the terms by which cash deposits or other types of U.S. obligations may be accepted by CBP in lieu of sureties on bonds. Paragraph (a) of this section requires that the party execute CBP Form 301 with the appropriate activity designated. A commenter noted that, as CBP bonds exist in formats other than the CBP Form 301, this paragraph should be amended to reflect that fact. A commenter also inquired whether the proposed amendments to § 113.40 authorize port directors to accept cash deposits or other obligations to secure single transactions.

CBP Response:

As a completed CBP Form 301 is not required for every type of cash-in-lieu of surety bond, § 113.40 is amended accordingly. This document also reverts to the original procedure set forth in paragraph (a) which provides that a port director retains the authority to accept cash deposits or obligations of the United States in lieu of sureties on STBs.

Comment:

One commenter recommended that CBP make a technical change to current § 113.52, which requires that CBP report a bonded debt to the Department of Justice for prosecution if unpaid for 90 days. The commenter notes that as a party has 180 days to submit a protest to CBP, the 90-day period should be changed to 180 days to reflect that fact.

CBP Response:

CBP agrees. Section 2103 of the Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2004 amended 19 U.S.C. 1514 by extending the time to file and amend a protest from 90 days to 180 days after the date of liquidation or reliquidation, or date of the decision, order, or finding being protested for entries made on or after December 18, 2004. This document makes a technical correction to 19 CFR 113.52 to reflect the statutory amendment.

Comment:

One commenter requested that CBP clarify what is meant by the term “paper bond” as used in proposed §§ 113.11 and 113.25(a). Until CBP adopts the paperless eBond concept, every bond is a paper bond and every bond application is a paper bond application. It appears the defining element as to which rules for signatures and certification apply is to be determined by the means of delivery to CBP, and CBP should be more precise in its language. CBP should define the term “electronic bond” as that term is used in § 113.25(b) to mean a paper bond that is transmitted electronically.

CBP Response:

As discussed above, CBP has further clarified the text of §§ 113.11, and of other provisions within part 113 as appropriate, to reflect that bonds and related documents may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. Scanned or faxed documents will contain the requisite signatures and certifications.

Conclusion

After review of the comments and further consideration, CBP has decided to adopt as final, with the changes discussed above in the preamble and with additional non-substantive editorial changes, the proposed rule published in the Federal Register (75 FR 266) on January 5, 2010.

Executive Orders 13563 And 12866

Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule is not a “significant regulatory action,” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed this regulation.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This section examines the impact on small entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act); a small not-for-profit organization; or a small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000 people).

The entities affected by this rule are importers and various other parties who file bonds with CBP as required by the CBP regulations. “Importers” are not defined as a “major industry” by the Small Business Administration (SBA) and do not have a unique North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code; rather, virtually all industries classified by SBA include entities that import goods and services into the United States. Thus, entities affected by this rule would likely consist of a broad range of large, medium, and small businesses operating under the customs laws and other laws that CBP administers and enforces. These entities include, but are not limited to, importers, brokers, and freight forwarders, as well as other businesses that conduct various activities under continuous bonds.

The amendments set forth in this rule align the CBP regulations with current common practice and improve efficiency by requiring importers to file continuous bonds at the Revenue Division, requiring STBs to be filed at either the Revenue Division or with the port director, and permitting both continuous bonds and STBs to be scanned and submitted to CBP via email as an attachment or by fax.

Because these amendments affect such a wide-ranging group of entities involved in the importation of goods to the United States, the number of entities subject to this rule is considered “substantial.” It is not anticipated that there will be additional costs associated with filing continuous or single transaction bonds with the Revenue Division instead of the local port, and many importers already file these types of bonds directly with the Revenue Division. Additionally, these changes to the regulations confer a benefit to the entities as a result of increased efficiencies and harmonized standards in bond processing. The effects of these amendments, however, do not rise to the level of being considered a “significant” economic impact.

In the proposed rulemaking, CBP solicited comments on this conclusion. As we did not receive any comments contradicting our findings, CBP certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collections contained in this rule have been previously submitted and approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB control numbers 1651-0050 and 1515-0144. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.

Signing Authority

This document is being issued in accordance with 19 CFR 0.1(a)(1).

List of Subjects 19 CFR Part 101

Administrative practice and procedure, Customs duties and inspections, Organization and functions (Government agencies).

19 CFR Part 113

Bonds, Customs duties and inspection, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds.

19 CFR Part 133

Bonds, Copyrights, Counterfeit goods, Customs duties and inspection, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Restricted merchandise, Seizures and forfeitures.

Amendments to the CBP Regulations

For the reasons stated above, parts 101, 113 and 133 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR parts 101, 113 and 133) are amended as follows:

PART 101—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The general authority citation for part 101 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 101, et. seq.; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1623, 1624, 1646a.

2. Section 101.1 is amended by adding definitions for “CBP,” “Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs,” “Customs or U.S. Customs Service,” and “Customs regulations or CBP regulations” in alphabetical order to read as follows:
§ 101.1 Definitions.

CBP. The term “CBP” means U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs. The terms “Commissioner” or “Commissioner of Customs” mean Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Customs or U.S. Customs Service. The terms “Customs” or “U.S. Customs Service” mean U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Customs regulations or CBP regulations. The terms “Customs regulations” or “CBP regulations” mean Chapter 1 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR Chapter 1).

PART 113—CBP BONDS 3. The general authority citation for part 113 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

6 U.S.C. 101, et. seq.; 19 U.S.C. 66, 1623, 1624.

4. The part 113 heading is revised to read as set forth above.
§ 113.0 [Amended]
5. Section 113.0 is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”. 6. Section 113.1 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.1 Authority to require security or execution of bond.

Where a bond or other security is not specifically required by law or regulation, the Commissioner of CBP may by specific instruction require, or authorize the Director, Revenue Division or the port director to require, such bonds or other security considered necessary for the protection of the revenue or to assure compliance with any pertinent law, regulation, or instruction.

§ 113.2 [Amended]
7. In § 113.2: a. The heading is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; b. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; c. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”, and by adding the word “as” before the word “he”; and d. In paragraph (d), the first sentence is amended by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”, the second sentence is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”, and the third sentence is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
8. Section 113.4 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and amending paragraph (b) by removing the words “Customs laws or regulations” and adding in their place the words “customs laws or CBP regulations”.

The revision reads as follows:

§ 113.4 Bonds and carnets.

(a) Bonds. All bonds required to be given under the customs laws or CBP regulations will be known as CBP bonds.

9. Section 113.11 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.11 Bond application.

(a) Single transaction bond application. In order to insure that the revenue is adequately protected, the port director may require a person who will be engaged in a single customs transaction relating to the importation or entry of merchandise to file a bond application. The single transaction bond application may be in the form of a letter filed with the Director, Revenue Division or the port director, or the application may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by fax. The application must identify the value and nature of the merchandise involved in the transaction to be secured. When the proper bond in a sufficient amount is filed with the entry summary or with the entry, or when the entry summary is filed at the time of entry, an application will not be required.

(b) Continuous bond application. To secure multiple transactions relating to the importation or entry of merchandise or the operation of a bonded smelting or refining warehouse, a continuous bond application must be submitted to the Director, Revenue Division. The continuous bond application may be in the form of a letter or it may be scanned and submitted to CBP as an email attachment or by facsimile (fax).

(1) Information required. The application must contain the following information:

(i) The general character of the merchandise to be entered; and

(ii) The total amount of ordinary customs duties (including any taxes required by law to be treated as duties), plus the estimated amount of any other tax or taxes on the merchandise to be collected by CBP, accruing on all merchandise imported by the principal during the calendar year preceding the date of the application. The total amount of duties and taxes will be that which would have been required to be deposited had the merchandise been entered for consumption even though some or all of the merchandise may have been entered under bond. If the value or nature of the merchandise to be imported will change in any material respect during the next year the change must be identified. If no imports were made during the calendar year prior to the application, a statement of the duties and taxes it is estimated will accrue on all importations during the current year shall be submitted.

(2) Application updates. If the Director, Revenue Division approves a bond based upon the application, whenever there is a significant change in the information provided under this paragraph, the principal on the bond must submit a new application containing an update of the information required by paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The new application must be filed no later than 30 days after the new facts become known to the principal.

(c) Certification. Any application submitted under this section must be signed by the applicant and contain the following certification:

I certify that the factual information contained in this application is true and accurate and any information provided which is based upon estimates is based upon the best information available on the date of this application.

10. Section 113.12 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.12 Bond approval.

(a) Single transaction bonds. Single transaction bonds will be approved by the Revenue Division or the director of the port where filed.

(b) Continuous bonds. Continuous bonds must be approved by the Revenue Division. Only one continuous bond for a particular activity will be authorized for each principal.

11. In § 113.13: a. The first sentence in paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words “Customs bond shall” and adding in their place the words “CBP bond must”, and the second and third sentences in paragraph (a) are amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding the word “will”; b. Paragraph (b) introductory text is amended by removing the words “the port director or drawback office in the case of a bond relating to repayment of erroneous drawback payment (see § 113.11) should at least” and adding in their place the words “CBP will”; c. Paragraph (b)(2) is revised; d. Paragraph (b)(4) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; e. Paragraph (c) is revised; and f. Paragraph (d) is amended by removing the words “a port director or drawback office” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the words “all applicable”; and by removing the words “he shall” and adding in their place the words “CBP may immediately”.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.13 Amount of bond.

(b) * * *

(2) The prior record of the principal in complying with CBP demands for redelivery, the obligation to hold unexamined merchandise intact, and other requirements relating to enforcement and administration of customs and other laws and CBP regulations;

(c) Periodic review of bond sufficiency. CBP will periodically review each bond on file to determine whether the bond is adequate to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations. If CBP determines that a bond is inadequate, the principal and surety will be promptly notified in writing. The principal will have 15 days from the date of notification to remedy the deficiency. Notwithstanding the foregoing, where CBP determines that a bond is insufficient to adequately protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations, CBP may provide written notice to the principal and surety that, upon receipt thereof, additional security in the form of cash deposit or single transaction bond may be required for any and all of the principal's transactions until the deficiency is remedied.

12. Section 113.14 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.14 Approved form of bond inadequate.

If CBP determines that none of the conditions contained in subpart G of this part is applicable to a transaction sought to be secured, the Director, Revenue Division, or the port director, as CBP deems appropriate, will draft conditions that cover the transaction. Before execution of the bond, the conditions must be submitted to Headquarters, Attention: Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, for approval.

13. Section 113.15 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.15 Retention of approved bonds.

Except for bonds containing an agreement to pay court costs (condemned goods) (see § 113.72), and except as may otherwise be deemed appropriate by CBP, bonds that are approved by the port director will be retained at the port office and bonds that are approved by the Revenue Division (including bonds relating to repayment of erroneous drawback payments containing the conditions set forth in § 113.65) will be retained at the Revenue Division. The bond containing the agreement to pay court costs (condemned goods), will be transmitted to the United States attorney, as required by section 608, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1608).

§ 113.21 [Amended]
14. In § 113.21: a. Paragraphs (a)(1), (b), (c), and (e) are amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; and b. Paragraph (d) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “may”.
§ 113.22 [Amended]
15. Section 113.22 is amended in paragraphs (a) and (b) by removing the word “shall” each place it appears and adding in its place the word “must”.
§ 113.23 [Amended]
16. In § 113.23: a. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”; b. Paragraph (c) is amended, in the first sentence, by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP” and by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must” and, in the second sentence, by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “may”; and c. Paragraph (d) is amended: by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; by removing, in the first sentence, the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “may”, and; in the second sentence, be removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”.
17. In § 113.24: a. Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) are revised; and b. Paragraph (d) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”, and by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.24 Riders.

(a) Types of riders. The Revenue Division will accept all types of authorized bond riders. For a comprehensive listing, see the CBP Web site located at www.cbp.gov.

(b) Location and method of filing. A bond rider must be filed at the Revenue Division, and may be submitted in paper or scanned and submitted to the Revenue Division as an email attachment or by facsimile (fax).

(c) Attachment of rider to paper bond. A rider submitted to CBP in paper format must be securely attached to the related bond to prevent their loss or misplacement.

§ 113.25 [Amended]
18. Section 113.25 is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”.
19. In § 113.26: a. Paragraph (a) is revised; b. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the words “the Customs Bond, Customs” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; and c. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the words “the Customs Bond, Customs” and adding in their place the term “CBP”.

The revision reads as follows:

§ 113.26 Effective dates of bonds and riders.

(a) General. A continuous bond, and any associated application required by § 113.11 or a rider, must be filed at least 60 days prior to the effective date requested for the continuous bond or rider.

20. Section 113.27 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.27 Effective dates of termination of bond.

(a) Termination by principal/co-principal. A written request by a principal or co-principal to terminate a bond must be mailed, faxed, or emailed to the Revenue Division or, in the case of a bond relating to repayment of erroneous drawback payment, to the drawback office where the bond was approved. The termination will take effect on the date requested if that date is at least 10 business days after the date CBP receives the request. If no termination date is requested, the termination will take effect on the tenth business day following the date CBP receives the request.

(b) Termination by surety. A surety may not disavow already incurred obligations but may, with or without the consent of the principal, terminate its agreement to accept future obligations on a bond. The surety must provide reasonable notice of termination, made pursuant to the methods set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, to both the Revenue Division or a drawback office, as appropriate, and to the principal. The notice must state the date on which the termination will be effective. Thirty days will constitute reasonable notice unless the surety can show to the satisfaction of CBP that a shorter time frame is reasonable under the facts and circumstances.

(c) Effect of termination. If a bond is terminated, no new customs transactions may be charged against the bond. A new bond in an appropriate amount on CBP Form 301, containing the appropriate bond conditions set forth in subpart G of this part, must be filed before further customs activity may be transacted.

21. In § 113.32: a. Introductory text is added; b. Paragraph (a) is removed; c. Paragraph (b) is redesignated as paragraph (a) and is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”; and d. Paragraph (c) is redesignated as paragraph (b) and is amended, in the first sentence, by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”, and by removing the second sentence.

The addition reads as follows:

§ 113.32 Partnerships as principals.

A partnership, including a limited partnership, means any business association recognized as such under the laws of the State where the association is organized.

22. Section 113.33 is amended: a. In paragraph (a), by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; b. In paragraph (b), be removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; c. By revising paragraph (c); d. In paragraph (d), by removing the words “port director” and adding in their place the words “Revenue Division”, and removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; and e. In paragraph (e), removing the words “shall be” and adding in their place the word “are”.

The revision reads as follows:

§ 113.33 Corporations (including Limited Liability Corporations) as principals.

(c) Bond executed by an officer of corporation. When a bond is executed by an officer of a corporation, a power of attorney will not be required if the person signing the bond on behalf of the corporation is known to the Revenue Division, port director, or drawback office to be the president, vice president, treasurer, or secretary of the corporation. The officer's signature is prima facie evidence of that officer's authority to bind the corporation. When a power of attorney is required, it must conform to the requirements of subpart C, part 141, of this chapter.

§ 113.34 [Amended]
23. Section 113.34 is amended by removing the word “shall” in the second sentence and adding in its place the word “may”.
24. Section 113.35 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.35 Individual sureties.

(a) Number required. If individuals sign as sureties, there must be two sureties on the bond unless CBP is satisfied that one surety is sufficient to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with the law and regulations.

(b) Qualifications to act as surety—(1) Residency and citizenship. Each individual surety on a CBP bond must be both a resident and citizen of the United States.

(2) Granting of power of attorney. Any individual, unless prohibited by law, may grant a power of attorney to sign as surety on CBP bonds. Unless the power is unlimited, all persons to whom the power relates must be named.

(3) Property requirements. For both single transaction and continuous bonds, each individual surety must have property available as security within the customs territory of the United States. The current market value of the property, less any encumbrance, must be equal to or greater than the amount of the bond. If one individual surety is accepted, the individual surety must have property the value of which, less any encumbrance, is equal to or greater than twice the amount of the bond.

(c) Oath and evidence of solvency. Before being accepted as a surety, the individual must:

(1) Take an oath on CBP Form 3579, setting forth:

(i) The amount of assets over and above all debts and liabilities and such exemptions as may be allowed by law; and

(ii) The general description and location of one or more pieces of real estate owned within the customs territory of the United States, and the value thereof, less any encumbrance.

(2) Produce such evidence of solvency and financial responsibility as CBP may require.

(d) Determination of financial responsibility. An individual will not be accepted as surety on a bond until CBP is satisfied as to the financial responsibility of the individual. CBP may request Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to conduct an immediate investigation to verify a surety's financial responsibility.

(e) Continuancy of financial responsibility. In order to ascertain the continued solvency and financial responsibility of individual sureties, CBP will require a new oath and determine the financial responsibility of each individual surety as prescribed in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section at least once every six months, and more often if deemed advisable.

§ 113.36 [Amended]
25. Section 113.36 is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”.
26. In § 113.37: a. The second sentence in paragraph (a) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; removing the word “shall” where it appears after the word “corporation” and adding in its place the word “will”; removing the words “shall be for a greater amount than” and adding in their place the words “may exceed”, and; removing the phrase “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” and adding in its place the phrase, “Bureau of the Fiscal Service”. b. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; c. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”; d. Paragraph (d) is revised; e. Paragraph (e) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; f. Paragraph (f) is amended by removing the words “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” and adding in their place the words, “Bureau of the Fiscal Service”; removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”; removing, in the last paragraph of the “Corporate Sureties Agreement for Limitation of Liability” set forth under paragraph (f), the number “19__” and adding in its place “20__”; and removing in the signature block the words “Port Director (Drawback Office)” and adding in their place the words “Authorized CBP officer”; g. Paragraph (g)(1) introductory text and (g)(1)(ii) are revised; h. Paragraph (g)(2) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; i. Paragraph (g)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; in the first, second and third sentences by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must', and; in the fourth sentence, by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”; j. Paragraph (g)(4) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “will” and by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and k. Paragraph (g)(5) is revised.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.37 Corporate sureties.

(d) Social security or other surety-generated identification number of agent or attorney on the bond. In the appropriate place on each bond executed by the agent or attorney acting for a corporate surety, the agent or attorney must place his/her social security number or other surety-generated 9-digit alphanumeric identification number, as it appears on the corporate surety power of attorney.

(g) * * *

(1) Execution and contents. Corporate surety powers of attorney may be submitted to CBP on the CBP Form 5297 and may be scanned and submitted as an email attachment, or submitted by facsimile (fax) or mail.

(ii) Name and address of agent or attorney, and social security number or other surety-generated 9-digit alphanumeric identification number for the agent or attorney.

(5) Change on the power of attorney. (i) No change may be made on the CBP Form 5297 after it has been approved by CBP except the following:

(A) Grantee name change;

(B) Grantee address change; and

(C) The addition of port(s) to the corporate surety power of attorney on file.

(ii) To make any other change to the power of attorney two separate CBP Forms 5297 must be submitted, one revoking the previous power of attorney, and one containing a new grant of authority.

27. In § 113.38: a. The heading and text of paragraph (a) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place it appears and adding the term “CBP” in its place; and the text of paragraph (a) is further amended by removing the word, “shall” and adding in its place the word, “will”; b. The heading and text of paragraph (b) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place it appears and adding the term “CBP” in its place; c. Paragraph (c)(1) is amended in the heading and first sentence by adding the words “single transaction” before the word “bond” each place that it appears and, in the second sentence, by removing the language, “Director, Border Security and Trade Compliance Division” and adding in its place, “Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade,”; d. Paragraph (c)(2) is revised; e. Paragraph (c)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and f. Paragraph (c)(4) is revised.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.38 Delinquent sureties.

(c) * * *

(2) Non-acceptance of bond upon instruction by Commissioner of CBP or Director, Revenue Division. The Commissioner of CBP, or the Director, Revenue Division, may issue instructions to CBP officers not to accept a bond secured by an individual or corporate surety who, without just cause, is significantly delinquent with respect to either the number or dollar amounts of outstanding bills.

(4) Review and final decision. After a review of any submission made by a surety under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, if an appropriate CBP officer is still of the opinion that bonds secured by the surety should not be accepted, written notice of the decision will be provided to the surety at least five days before the date that CBP will no longer accept the bonds of the surety. Copies of the notice will also be provided to the Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade and, if the notice does not originate from the Revenue Director, to the Director, Revenue Director. Notice will be given to the public by publishing the decision in the Customs Bulletin.

28. In § 113.39: a. The introductory text is revised; b. Paragraph (a) introductory text is revised; c. Paragraph (a)(5) is amended by removing the words the “port director or Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer” and adding in their place the words “port director, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer, or authorized Revenue Director personnel”; and d. Paragraph (b) is amended in the first sentence, by removing the words “The Director, Border Security and Trade Compliance Division, shall” and adding in their place the words “CBP Headquarters will”; in the second sentence, by removing the words “Bureau of Government Financial Operations” and adding in their place the words, “Bureau of the Fiscal Service”; and, in the last sentence, by removing the words “port director and Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer” and adding in their place the words “port director, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer, and Director, Revenue Division”.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.39 Procedure to remove a surety from Treasury Department Circular 570.

If a port director, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer, or authorized Revenue Division officer is dissatisfied with a surety company because the company has neglected or refused to pay a valid demand made on the surety company's bond or otherwise has failed to honor an obligation on that bond, the port director, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer, or authorized Revenue Division personnel may take the following steps to recommend that the surety company be removed from Treasury Department Circular 570.

(a) Report to Headquarters. A port director, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer, or authorized Revenue Division officer will send the following evidence to CBP Headquarters, Attention: Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade:

29. In § 113.40: a. Paragraph (a) is revised; b. Paragraph (b) introductory text is revised and the “Power of Attorney and Agreement (For Corporation)” form is amended by removing the designation “19__” each place that it appears and adding “20__” in its place; and c. Paragraph (c) is revised.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.40 Acceptance of cash deposits or obligations of the United States in lieu of sureties on bonds.

(a) General provisions. In lieu of sureties on any bond required or authorized by any law, regulation, or instruction which the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Commissioner of CBP are authorized to enforce, the Director, Revenue Division or, in the case of single transaction bonds, a port director, may accept United States money, United States bonds (except for savings bonds), United States certificates of indebtedness, Treasury notes, or Treasury bills in an amount equal to the face amount of the bond that would be required. The option to deposit cash or U.S. obligations in lieu of sureties is at the option of the importer, and a CBP Form 301 or other CBP-approved bond designating the appropriate activity for the cash deposits or U.S. obligations in lieu of surety must be filed. When cash or obligations in lieu of surety are accepted, it must be for a term of no more than one year. Additional cash deposits or obligations in lieu of surety may be required.

(b) Authority to sell United States obligations on default. At the time of deposit with the Director, Revenue Division, of any U.S. obligation (other than U.S. money), the obligor must deliver a duly executed power of attorney and agreement authorizing the Director, Revenue Division, in the case of any default in the performance of any of the conditions of the bond, to sell the obligation so deposited and to apply the proceeds of the sale, in whole or in part, to the satisfaction of any damages, demands, or deficiency arising by reason of default. The format of the power of attorney and agreement, when the obligor is a corporation, is set forth below and must be appropriately modified when the obligor is either an individual or a partnership:

(c) Application of United States money or obligations on default. If United States cash or obligations are deposited in lieu of surety on any bond, the appropriate CBP officer is authorized to apply the cash or money received from the deposited obligation to satisfy any damages, demand, or deficiency arising from a default under the bond.

§ 113.41 [Amended]
30. Section 113.41 is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”, and removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
§ 113.42 [Amended]
31. Section 113.42 is amended by removing from the first sentence the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”; removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and removing in the second sentence the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”.
32. In § 113.43: a. Paragraph (a) is revised; b. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “will” and removing the words “2 months” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “60 days”; and c. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “will”.

The revision reads as follows:

§ 113.43 Extension of time period.

(a) Application received within time period. If a document referred to in § 113.42 is not produced within 120 days from the date of the transaction in connection with which the bond was given, the port director or an appropriate CBP officer, in his or her discretion, and upon written application of the importer, may extend the period for one further period not to exceed 60 days.

§ 113.44 [Amended]
33. In § 113.44, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must”.
§ 113.45 [Amended]
34. Section 113.45 is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must” and removing the word “entry” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “transaction”.
§ 113.51 [Amended]
35. Section 113.51 is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
36. Section 113.52 is revised to read as follows:
§ 113.52 Failure to satisfy the bond.

If any CBP bond, except one given only for the production of free-entry or reduced-duty documents (see § 113.43(c) of this chapter) has not been satisfied upon the expiration of 180 days after liability has accrued under the bond, the matter will be reported to the Department of Justice for prosecution unless measures have been taken to file an application for relief or protest in accordance with the provisions of this chapter or to satisfactorily settle this matter.

§ 113.53 [Amended]
37. In § 113.53: a. The section heading is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; b. Paragraph (a) introductory text is amended by removing in the paragraph heading the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP” and removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; c. Paragraph (a)(3) is amended by adding after the word “Commissioner” the words “of CBP”; and d. Paragraph (b) is amended by adding in the paragraph heading, after the word “director”, the words “or other authorized CBP officer”; removing, in the text, the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; adding after the word “director” the words “or other authorized CBP officer”; and removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”.
§ 113.55 [Amended]
38. In § 113.55: a. Paragraph (c) introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the word “customs”; b. Paragraph (c)(1) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”; c. Paragraph (c)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and d. Paragraph (d) is removed.
Subpart G—CBP Bond Conditions 39. The subpart G heading is revised to read as set forth above.
§ 113.61 [Amended]
40. Section 113.61 is amended in the first sentence by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the word “customs” and in the second sentence by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
41. In § 113.62: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the words “single entry” and adding in their place the words “single transaction”; b. Paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text, (a)(1)(ii), and (a)(2) introductory text are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; c. Paragraph (a)(3) is amended by removing the words “the port director” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; d. Paragraph (b) introductory text and paragraph (b)(1) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; e. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; f. Paragraph (d) introductory text is amended by removing the word “Customs” wherever it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; g. Paragraph (f) introductory text and paragraph (f)(2) are amended by removing the word “Customs” wherever it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; h. Paragraph (f)(3) is revised; i. Paragraph (g)(1) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; j. Paragraph (h)(2) is revised; k. Paragraphs (h)(3) and (4) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; l. The heading and text of paragraph (i) are amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; and by removing the words “Customs security” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “customs security”; m. Paragraph (j) is amended by removing the words “Customs and Border Protection” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; n. Paragraph (k)(2) is amended by removing the words “Customs and Border Protection (CBP)” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; and o. Paragraphs (m)(2) and (4) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP” and removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “will”.

The revisions to § 113.62 read as follows:

§ 113.62 Basic importation and entry bond conditions.

(f) * * *

(3) Keep any customs seal or cording on the merchandise intact until the merchandise is examined by CBP.

(h) * * *

(2) If a fishing vessel, to present the original approved application to CBP within 24 hours on each arrival of the vessel in the customs territory of the United States from a fishing voyage;

§ 113.63 [Amended]
42. In § 113.63: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; b. Paragraph (a)(2) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; c. Paragraph (a)(3) is amended by adding the term “CBP” before the word “regulations” and removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; d. Paragraph (a)(5) is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP” and removing the word “Regulations” and adding in its place the word “regulations”; e. Paragraph (b)(2) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; f. Paragraph (b)(3) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; g. Paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; h. Paragraph (c)(3) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in its place the words “CBP regulations”; i. Paragraph (c)(4) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP” and removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; j. Paragraph (d) is amended by removing in the paragraph heading and text the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in their place the term “CBP”; k. Paragraph (e) is amended by removing the words “Customs laws and regulations” and adding in their place the words “customs laws and CBP regulations”; l. The heading and text of paragraph (f) are amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations” and by removing the words “Customs security” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “customs security”; m. Paragraph (g) is amended by removing the words “Customs and Border Protection” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; n. Paragraph (h)(1) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; o. Paragraph (h)(2) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; p. Paragraph (h)(5) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; q. Paragraph (i)(2) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will” and by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and r. Paragraph (i)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
43. In § 113.64: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”; b. Paragraph (a) is amended by removing the words “Customs and Border Protection (CBP)” and adding in their place the term “CBP” and by removing the second sentence; c. Paragraphs (b) through (k) are redesignated as paragraphs (c) through (l); d. A new paragraph (b) is added; e. Newly redesignated paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; by removing the word “Regulations” each place it appears and adding in its place the word “regulations”, and; in the third sentence, by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”; f. The heading and text of newly redesignated (j) are amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” each place they appear and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; and by removing the words “Customs security” each place that they appear and adding in their place the words “customs security”; and g. Newly redesignated paragraphs (l)(1) and (2) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”.

The addition reads as follows:

§ 113.64 International carrier bond conditions.

(b) Agreement to pay liquidated damages—(1) Passenger processing fees: If the principal (carrier) fails to pay passenger processing fees to CBP within 31 calendar days after the close of the calendar quarter in which they were required to be collected pursuant to § 24.22(g) of this chapter, the obligors (principal and surety, jointly and severally) agree to pay liquidated damages equal to two times the passenger processing fees that were required to be collected but not timely remitted to CBP, regardless of whether such fees were in fact collected from passengers, as prescribed by regulation.

(2) Railroad car processing fees: If the principal (carrier) fails to pay railroad car processing fees to CBP within 60 calendar days after the close of the calendar month in which they were collected pursuant to § 24.22(d) of this chapter, the obligors (principal and surety, jointly and severally) agree to pay liquidated damages equal to two times the railroad car processing fees which have not been timely paid to CBP as prescribed by regulation.

(3) Reimbursement fees payable by express consignment carrier and centralized hub facilities. If the principal (carrier) fails to timely pay the reimbursement fees payable to CBP by express consignment carrier facilities and centralized carrier facilities pursuant to the terms set forth in § 24.23(b)(4) of this chapter, the obligors (principal and surety, jointly and severally) agree to pay liquidated damages equal to two times the fees which have not been timely paid to CBP as prescribed by that section.

§ 113.65 [Amended]
44. In § 113.65: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”; and b. Paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
45. In § 113.66: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; b. Paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (a)(1) are revised; c. Paragraph (b)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; d. Paragraph (c)(2) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; e. Paragraph (d)(2) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will” and by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and f. Paragraph (d)(3) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 113.66 Control of containers and instruments of international traffic bond conditions.

(a) Agreement to Enter Any Diverted Instrument of International Traffic. If a principal brings in and takes out of the customs territory of the United States an instrument of international traffic without entry and without payment of duty, as provided by the CBP regulations and section 322(a), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1322(a)) the principal agrees to:

(1) Report promptly to CBP when the instrument is diverted to point-to-point local traffic in the customs territory of the United States or when the instrument is otherwise withdrawn in the customs territory of the United States from its use as an instrument of international traffic.

§ 113.67 [Amended]
46. In § 113.67: a. Paragraph (a) introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; b. Paragraph (a)(1) introductory text is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; c. Paragraph (a)(1)(i) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; d. Paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; e. Paragraph (a)(2)(iii) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”; and by removing the word “Customs” each place it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”; f. Paragraph (b) introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; g. Paragraph (b)(1) introductory text is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; h. Paragraph (b)(1)(i) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; and i. Paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii) are amended by removing the word “Customs” each place it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
§ 113.68 [Amended]
47. In § 113.68: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”; b. Paragraph (a) is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; and c. The second sentence of paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will”; and by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
§ 113.69 [Amended]
48. In § 113.69: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”; and b. The introductory text of the “Production of Bill of Lading Bond Conditions” is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
§ 113.70 [Amended]
49. In § 113.70: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”; and b. The first sentence in the “Bond Condition to Indemnify United States for Detention of Copyrighted Material” is amended by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”.
§ 113.71 [Amended]
50. In § 113.71, the introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”.
§ 113.72 [Amended]
51. In § 113.72, the introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must” and by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”.
§ 113.73 [Amended]
52. In § 113.73: a. The introductory text is amended by removing the word “shall” each place that it appears and adding in its place the word “must”; b. Paragraph (a)(1) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”; c. Paragraph (a)(2) is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP” by removing the word “Regulations” and adding in its place the word “regulations” and by removing the word “shall” in the third sentence and adding in its place the word “will”; d. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word “shall” and adding in its place the word “will” and by removing the word “Customs” and adding in its place the term “CBP”; e. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the words “Customs and Border Protection (CBP)” and adding in their place the term “CBP”; f. Paragraph (d)(2) is amended by removing the words “Customs officer” and adding in its place the words “CBP Officer”; and g. Paragraph (e) is amended by removing the words “Customs Regulations” and adding in their place the words “CBP regulations”.
§ 113.74 [Amended]
53. Section 113.74 is amended by removing the word “entry” and adding in its place the word “transaction”.
54. Appendix A to Part 113 is revised to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 113—Airport Customs Security Area Bond AIRPORT CUSTOMS SECURITY AREA BOND

___(name of principal) of ___(address) and ___(name of surety) of ___(address) are held and firmly bound unto the United States of America in the sum of __dollars ($__), for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, by these conditions.

WITNESS our hands and seals this __day of __, 20__. WHEREAS, the principal (including the principal's employees, agents, and contractors) desires access to airport customs security areas;

Now, Therefore, the Condition of this Obligation is Such That—

The principal agrees to comply with the CBP regulations applicable to customs security areas at airports. If the principal defaults on the condition of this obligation, the principal and surety, jointly and severally, agree to pay liquidated damages of $1,000 for each default; or such other amount as may be authorized by law or regulation. This bond is effective ___, 20__, and remains in force for one year beginning with the effective date and for each succeeding annual period, or until terminated. This bond constitutes a separate bond for each annual period in the amount listed above for liabilities that accrue in each annual period.

Signed, Sealed, and Delivered in the Presence of —

Name Address

Name Address Principal (SEAL)

Name Address

Name Address

Name Address Surety (SEAL)

Name Address Appendix B to Part 113 [Amended] 55. Appendix B to Part 113 is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”. Appendix C to Part 113 [Amended] 56. Appendix C to Part 113 is amended by removing the word “Customs” each place that it appears and adding in its place the term “CBP”. PART 133—TRADEMARKS, TRADE NAMES, AND COPYRIGHTS 57. The general and specific authority citations for part 133 continue to read as follows: Authority:

15 U.S.C. 1124, 1125, 1127; 17 U.S.C. 101, 601, 602, 603; 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202, 1499, 1526, 1624; 31 U.S.C. 9701;

Sections 133.21 through 133.25 also issued under 18 U.S.C. 1905; Sec. 818(g), Pub. L. 112-81.

58. In § 133.25, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
§ 133.25 Procedure on detention of articles subject to restriction.

(c) Disclosure to the trademark or trade name owner. At any time following presentation of the merchandise for CBP's examination, but prior to seizure, CBP may release a sample of the suspect merchandise to the owner of the trademark or trade name for examination or testing to assist in determining whether the article imported bears an infringing trademark or trade name. To obtain a sample under this paragraph, the owner of the mark must furnish to CBP a bond in the form and amount specified by CBP, conditioned to indemnify the importer or owner of the imported article against any loss or damage resulting from the furnishing of the sample by CBP to the owner of the mark. CBP may demand the return of the sample at any time. The owner must return the sample to CBP upon demand or at the conclusion of the examination or testing, whichever occurs sooner. In the event that the sample is damaged, destroyed, or lost while in the possession of the trademark or trade name owner, the owner must, in lieu of returning the sample, certify to CBP that: “The sample described as [insert description] and provided pursuant to 19 CFR 133.25(c) was (damaged/destroyed/lost) during examination or testing for trademark infringement.”

R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner. Approved: November 4, 2015. Timothy E. Skud, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2015-28503 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Part 4022 Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying Benefits AGENCY:

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule amends the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's regulation on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans to prescribe interest assumptions under the regulation for valuation dates in December 2015. The interest assumptions are used for paying benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by the pension insurance system administered by PBGC.

DATES:

Effective December 1, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine B. Klion ([email protected]), Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4024.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

PBGC's regulation on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4022) prescribes actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for paying plan benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The interest assumptions in the regulation are also published on PBGC's Web site (http://www.pbgc.gov).

PBGC uses the interest assumptions in Appendix B to Part 4022 to determine whether a benefit is payable as a lump sum and to determine the amount to pay. Appendix C to Part 4022 contains interest assumptions for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using PBGC's historical methodology. Currently, the rates in Appendices B and C of the benefit payment regulation are the same.

The interest assumptions are intended to reflect current conditions in the financial and annuity markets. Assumptions under the benefit payments regulation are updated monthly. This final rule updates the benefit payments interest assumptions for December 2015.1

1 Appendix B to PBGC's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044) prescribes interest assumptions for valuing benefits under terminating covered single-employer plans for purposes of allocation of assets under ERISA section 4044. Those assumptions are updated quarterly.

The December 2015 interest assumptions under the benefit payments regulation will be 1.25 percent for the period during which a benefit is in pay status and 4.00 percent during any years preceding the benefit's placement in pay status. In comparison with the interest assumptions in effect for November 2015, these interest assumptions are unchanged.

PBGC has determined that notice and public comment on this amendment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This finding is based on the need to determine and issue new interest assumptions promptly so that the assumptions can reflect current market conditions as accurately as possible.

Because of the need to provide immediate guidance for the payment of benefits under plans with valuation dates during December 2015, PBGC finds that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication.

PBGC has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866.

Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2).

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4022

Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR part 4022 is amended as follows:

PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 4022 continues to read as follows: Authority:

29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344.

2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 266, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for PBGC Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate
  • (percent)
  • Deferred annuities
  • (percent)
  • i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 266 12-1-15 1-1-16 1.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 266, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for Private-Sector Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate
  • (percent)
  • Deferred annuities
  • (percent)
  • i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 266 12-1-15 1-1-16 1.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    Issued in Washington, DC, on this 6th day of November 2015. Judith Starr, General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28763 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 721 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0649; FRL-9935-43] RIN 2070-AB27 Modification of Significant New Uses of Certain Chemical Substances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is amending the significant new use rules (SNURs) under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for five chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). This action amends the SNURs to allow certain uses without requiring a significant new use notice (SNUN), and extends SNUN requirements to certain additional uses. EPA is amending these SNURs based on review of new data for each chemical substance. This action requires persons who intend to manufacture (including import) or process any of these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. The required notification would provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0649, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information contact: Jim Alwood, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-8974; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

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

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this rule. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

    • Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing and petroleum refineries.

    This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127 and 19 CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders under TSCA. Importers of chemicals subject to a modified SNUR must certify their compliance with the SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In addition, any persons who export or intend to export the chemical substance that is the subject of a final rule are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see 40 CFR 721.20), and must comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

    II. Background A. What action is the agency taking?

    In the Federal Register of April 9, 2015 (80 FR 19307) (FRL-9924-10), EPA proposed amendments to the SNURs for 24 chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721 subpart E. This action would require persons who intend to manufacture or process these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by these amended rules to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. Receipt of such notices allows EPA to assess risks that may be presented by the intended uses and, if appropriate, to regulate the proposed use before it occurs. The proposed rule included 23 chemical substances where EPA determined, based on new information, there is no need to require additional notice from persons who propose to engage in identical or similar activities, or a rational basis no longer exists for the findings that activities involving the substance may present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment required under section 5(e)(1)(A) of the Act. The proposed rule also included a chemical substance, P-01-781, where EPA is modifying the chemical identity information. In the Federal Register of June 30, 2015 (80 FR 37161) (FRL-9928-93), EPA issued amendments to the SNURs for 19 of those chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721 subpart E. EPA is now issuing a final SNUR amendment for the other five chemical substances. EPA received public comments for the proposed SNUR amendments for the remaining five chemical substances of the 24 included in the proposed rule subject to SNURs at 40 CFR 721.5575, 721.9675, and 721.10515. As described in Unit III., EPA is finalizing the SNURs as proposed for the SNURs at 40 CFR 721.9675, and 721.10515 and is finalizing the SNUR at 40 CFR 721.5575 with one change. EPA is now amending the SNURs of these five chemical substances pursuant to 40 CFR 721.185.

    B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    Upon conclusion of the review of the five chemical substances in this SNUR amendment, EPA designated certain activities as significant new uses. Under § 721.185, EPA may at any time amend a SNUR for a chemical substance which has been added to subpart E of 40 CFR part 721 if EPA makes one of the determinations set forth in § 721.185. Amendments may occur on EPA's initiative or in response to a written request. Under § 721.185(b)(3), if EPA concludes that a SNUR should be amended, the Agency will propose the changes in the Federal Register, briefly describe the grounds for the action, and provide interested parties an opportunity to comment. Pursuant to § 721.185 and as described in Unit IV. of the proposed rule for the five chemical substances, EPA determined, based on new information, that there is no need to require additional notice from persons who propose to engage in identical or similar activities, or a rational basis no longer exists for the findings that activities involving the substance may present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment required under section 5(e)(1)(A) of the Act.

    III. Response to Comments on Proposed SNURs

    Comment 1: One commenter stated that for the chemical substance subject to 40 CFR 721.5575 SNUR requirements should be excluded when the substance is incorporated or encapsulated in plastic as there would no longer be exposure.

    Response: EPA reviewed uses of the chemical substance during PMN/SNUN reviews where it was incorporated or encapsulated into plastic. EPA estimated limited human and environmental exposures that were not expected to cause an unreasonable risk. Therefore, the final SNUR will remove from the scope of the SNUR any use where the chemical substance is incorporated or encapsulated into plastic.

    Comment 2: One commenter stated that, for the chemical substance subject to 40 CFR 721.9675, one of the SNUN submitters cited in the proposed rule was actually manufacturing a different chemical substance, which was instead the subject of P-06-0149 and a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10553.

    Response: Each of the SNUNs cited in the proposed SNUR modification were submitted to EPA pertained to the chemical substance titanate [Ti6O13 (2-)], dipotassium, which is the chemical substance subject to 40 CFR 721.9675. But regardless of whether any of the SNUN submitters are manufacturing or processing a different chemical substance, any manufacturer and processor who is manufacturing potassium titanium oxide (which was the chemical substance submitted for P-06-149 and subject to the SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10553) is subject to the requirements of the SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10553.

    Comment 3: EPA proposed to modify the SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10515 to include P-10-184, because P-10-184 pertains to the same chemical substance as P-10-60, which is already the subject of 40 CFR 721.10515. A commenter asked EPA to clarify if the SNUR would require the PMN submitter of P-10-184 to conduct the same triggered testing required in the consent order for P-10-60.

    Response: The consent order for P-10-60 requires certain fate and physical property testing to be conducted at five different aggregate production volume limits. The consent order for P-10-184 does not require any testing to be conducted by production volume limits. The SNUR, however, requires notification before exceeding the manufacture of the five aggregate production volume limits. While the SNUR does not require the submitter of P-10-184, or any other manufacturer, to conduct testing, the SNUR does require that a SNUN be submitted before exceeding the aggregate production volume limit. If EPA receives a SNUN from the submitter of P-10-184, or any other manufacturer, EPA will then determine what testing, if any, would be required. This could be the testing required in the consent order for P-10-60 or other appropriate testing. This is the same procedure EPA uses for SNURs of consent orders with testing requirements at certain production volume or time limits.

    IV. Applicability of the Rule to Uses Occurring Before Effective Date of the Final Rule

    To establish a significant “new” use, EPA must determine that the use is not ongoing. As discussed in the Federal Register issue of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376) (FRL-3658-5), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the date of publication of the proposed SNUR rather than as of the effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication were considered ongoing rather than new, it would be difficult for EPA to establish SNUR notice requirements, because a person could defeat the SNUR by initiating the proposed significant new use before the rule became effective, and then argue that the use was ongoing as of the effective date of the final rule.

    Thus, any persons who begin commercial manufacture or processing activities with the chemical substances that are not currently a significant new use under the current rule but which would be regulated as a “significant new use” when this rule is finalized, must cease any such activity as of the effective date of the rule if and when finalized. To resume their activities, these persons would have to comply with all applicable SNUR notice requirements and wait until the notice review period, including all extensions, expires.

    EPA has promulgated provisions to allow persons to comply with this SNUR before the effective date. If a person were to meet the conditions of advance compliance under § 721.45(h), the person would be considered to have met the requirements of the final SNUR for those activities.

    V. Test Data and Other Information

    EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require the development of any particular test data before submission of a SNUN. The two exceptions are:

    1. Development of test data is required where the chemical substance subject to the SNUR is also subject to a test rule under TSCA section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)).

    2. Development of test data may be necessary where the chemical substance has been listed under TSCA section 5(b)(4) (see TSCA section 5(b)(2)).

    In the absence of a TSCA section 4 test rule or a TSCA section 5(b)(4) listing covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to submit test data in their possession or control and to describe any other data known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see 40 CFR 720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the authority to require appropriate testing. In this case, EPA recommends persons, before performing any testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol selection. To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select “Test Methods and Guidelines.” The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test guidelines are available from the OECD Bookshop at http://www.oecdbookshop.org or SourceOECD at http://www.sourceoecd.org. ASTM International standards are available at http://www.astm.org/Standard/index.shtml.

    The recommended testing specified in Unit IV. of the proposed rule may not be the only means of addressing the potential risks of the chemical substance. However, SNUNs submitted without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA section 5(e), particularly if satisfactory test results have not been obtained from a prior PMN or SNUN submitter. EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.

    SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:

    • Human exposure and environmental release that may result from the significant new use of the chemical substances.

    • Potential benefits of the chemical substances.

    • Information on risks posed by the chemical substances compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.

    VI. SNUN Submissions

    According to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in §§ 721.25 and 720.40. E-PMN software is available electronically at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.

    VII. Economic Analysis

    EPA evaluated the potential costs of SNUN requirements for potential manufacturers and processors of the chemical substances in the rule. The Agency's complete Economic Analysis is available in the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0649.

    VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866

    This action will modify SNURs for five chemical substances that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    According to PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB approval under PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. EPA is amending the table in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval number for the information collection requirements contained in this rule. This listing of the OMB control numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR satisfies the display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. This Information Collection Request (ICR) was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB approval, and given the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA finds that there is “good cause” under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to amend this table without further notice and comment.

    The information collection requirements related to this action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number 2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and 170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required SNUN.

    Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information (2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to this address.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    On February 18, 2012, EPA certified pursuant to RFA section 605(b) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that promulgation of a SNUR does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities where the following are true:

    1. A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small entities in response to the SNUR.

    2. The SNUN submitted by any small entity would not cost significantly more than $8,300.

    A copy of that certification is available in the docket for this rule.

    This rule is within the scope of the February 18, 2012 certification. Based on the Economic Analysis discussed in Unit VI and EPA's experience promulgating SNURs (discussed in the certification), EPA believes that the following are true:

    • A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small entities in response to the SNUR.

    • Submission of the SNUN would not cost any small entity significantly more than $8,300.

    Therefore, the promulgation of the SNUR would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this final rule. As such, EPA has determined that this rule would not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the UMRA sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

    E. Executive Order 13132

    This action would not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

    F. Executive Order 13175

    This rule would not have Tribal implications because it is not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This rule would not significantly nor uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal governments, nor does it involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this rule.

    G. Executive Order 13045

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and this action does not address environmental health or safety risks disproportionately affecting children.

    H. Executive Order 13211

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    In addition, since this action does not involve any technical standards, NTTAA section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

    J. Executive Order 12898

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    IX. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 2, 2015. Maria J. Doa, Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

    PART 721—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

    2. Amend § 721.5575 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
    § 721.5575 Oxirane, 2,2′-(1,6-hexanediylbis (oxymethylene)) bis-.

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as oxirane, 2,2′-(1,6-hexanediylbis(oxymethylene))bis- (PMN P-88-2179; PMN P-89-539; and SNUN S-08-3; CAS No. 16096-31-4) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section. The reporting requirements of this rule do not apply once the chemical substance has been incorporated or encapsulated into plastic.

    (2) * * *

    (iii) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in § 721.80(q). A significant new use of the chemical substance is any commercial use other than the commercial use described in S-08-3.

    3. Amend § 721.9675 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)(i), remove and reserve paragraph (a)(2)(ii), and revise paragraph (b)(1).

    The revisionso read as follows:

    § 721.9675 Titanate [Ti6O13 (2-)], dipotassium.

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as titanate [Ti6O13 (2-)], dipotassium (PMN P-90-226; SNUNs P-96-1408, S-08-6, S-09-4, and S-13-49; CAS No. 12056-51-8)) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

    (2) * * *

    (i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in § 721.80 (f) and (l). In addition, a significant new use of the substance is importation of the chemical substance if:

    (A) Manufactured by other than the method described in premanufacture notice P-90-226 and significant new use notices P-96-1408, S-08-6, S-09-4, and S-13-49.

    (B) Manufactured producing respirable, acicular fibers with an average aspect ratio of greater than 5. The average aspect ratio is defined as the ratio of average length to average diameter.

    (b) * * *

    (1) Recordkeeping. The following recordkeeping requirements are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance as specified in § 721.125 (a), (b), (c) and (i).

    4. Amend § 721.10515 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)(i) to read as follows:
    § 721.10515 Partially fluorinated alcohol substituted glycols (generic).

    (a) * * *

    (1) The chemical substances identified generically as partially fluorinated alcohol substituted glycols (PMNs P-10-58, P-10-59, P-10-60, and P-10-184) are subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

    (2) * * *

    (i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in § 721.80(k) (manufacture of the PMN substances according to the chemical synthesis and composition section of the TSCA section 5(e) consent order, including analysis, reporting, and limitations of maximum impurity levels of certain fluorinated impurities; manufacture and import of P-10-60 and P-10-184 other than when the mean number of moles of the ethoxy group is between 3 and 11 or the average number molecular weight is between 496 and 848 daltons based on the amounts of raw materials charged to the reactor; manufacture and import of P-10-58 and P-10-59 only as intermediates for the manufacture of P-10-60), and (q).

    [FR Doc. 2015-28844 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    80 219 Friday, November 13, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-3674; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-18] Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Boise, ID AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to modify Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to Class C airspace, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, formerly Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), Boise, ID. After reviewing the airspace, the FAA found standard instrument approach procedures are not fully contained in controlled airspace, thereby necessitating airspace redesign for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This proposal also would update the name of the airport to match the FAAs aeronautical database.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2015-3674; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-18, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.

    FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and ATC Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Haga, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4500.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, Boise, ID.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2015-3674; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-18.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057.

    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure.

    Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class C airspace at Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, Boise, ID. Two segments would be expanded from the 5-mile radius of the airport and extend to 12.8 miles southeast, and 11 miles northwest of the airport. Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport would be amended to accommodate standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport. A review of the airspace found modification of the airspace necessary for the safety and management of standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport. Also, the name of the airport would be updated from Boise Air Terminal (Gowen Field), to Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be modified to within an 8.6-mile radius north of Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, extending to 11.4 miles to the south, 17 miles to the east and 30 miles to the west.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6003 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015 and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6003 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension. ANM ID E3 Boise, ID [Modified] Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, ID (Lat. 43°33′52″ N., long. 116°13′22″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 5 miles each side of the Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport 114° bearing extending from the 5-mile radius of the airport to 12.8 miles southeast of the airport; and within 5 miles each side of the Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport 295° bearing extending from the 5-mile radius of the airport to 11 miles northwest of the airport.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ANM ID E5 Boise, ID [Modified] Boise Air Terminal/Gowen Field Airport, ID (Lat. 43°33′52″ N., long. 116°13′22″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat. 43°44′51″ N., long. 116°52′05″ W.; to lat. 43°52′31″ N., long. 116°38′57″ W.; to lat. 43°51′24″ N., long. 116°24′16″ W.; to lat. 43°31′33″ N., long. 115°50′14″ W.; to lat. 43°19′45″ N., long. 115°56′41″ W.; to lat. 43°25′11″ N., long. 116°32′39″ W.; to lat. 43°35′39″ N., long. 116°47′51″ W., thence to the point of beginning. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within the 30.5-mile radius of the airport beginning at the 122° bearing of the airport, thence via a line to the intersection of the 34.8-mile radius of the airport and the 224° bearing of the airport, thence clockwise along the 34.8-mile radius of the airport to that airspace 7 miles each side of the 269° bearing of the airport extending from the 34.8-mile radius to 49.6 miles west of the airport, and within 7 miles northeast and 9.6 miles southwest of the 295° bearing of the airport extending from the 34.8-mile radius to 65.3 miles northwest of the airport, to lat. 44°00′27″ N., long. 117°10′58″ W., thence along the 042° bearing to V-253, thence south along V-253, thence along the 30.5-mile radius of the airport to the point of beginning. That airspace southeast of the airport extending upward from 9,000 feet MSL bounded on the north by V-444, on the east by V-293, on the south by V-330 and on the southwest by V-4. That airspace northeast of the airport extending upward from 11,500 feet MSL, bounded on the northeast by V-293, on the south by V-444, on the southwest by the 30.5-mile radius of the airport and on the west by V-253.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 3, 2015. Christopher Ramirez, Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28784 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-3899; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-14] Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, Revocation of Class E Airspace; Chico, CA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to modify Class D airspace, Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and remove Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension at Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA. After reviewing the airspace, the FAA found it necessary to amend the airspace area by increasing the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for arriving and departing aircraft at the airport. The FAA found no standard instrument approach procedures requiring Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to Class D airspace. This action would also change from navigation aid to geographic coordinate references in the legal description, in anticipation of the FAA's future navigation aid discontinuance plan. The geographic coordinates of Chico Municipal and Ranchaero Airports also would be updated for the Class D and E airspace areas noted above.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2015-3899; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-14, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.

    FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and ATC Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Haga, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4563.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code, Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class D and Class E airspace at Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2015-3899; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-14.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057.

    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure.

    Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by Reference

    This document would amend FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class D airspace, Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and removing Class E surface area airspace as an extension as this airspace is no longer needed, at Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA. Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be modified to within a 4.1-mile radius east of Chico Municipal, extending to 6 miles from the southeast to the north, excluding that airspace within 1 NM of Ranchaero Airport, CA. Also, this action would remove reference to navigation aids and use instead geographic coordinate references in the legal descriptions. The geographic coordinates of the Chico Municipal and Ranchaero Airports would be amended for the Class D and E airspace areas to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AWP CA D Chico, CA [Modified] Chico Municipal Airport, CA (Lat. 39°47′43″ N., long. 121°51′30″ W.) Ranchaero Airport, Chico, CA (Lat. 39°43′10″ N., long. 121°52′14″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,700 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of Chico Municipal Airport, excluding the portion within a 1-mile radius of Ranchaero Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to a Class D or Class E Surface Area. AWP CA E4 Chico, CA [Removed] Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth AWP CA E5 Chico, CA [Modified] Chico Municipal Airport, CA (Lat. 39°47′43″ N., long. 121°51′30″ W.) Ranchaero Airport, Chico, CA (Lat. 39°43′10″ N., long. 121°52′14″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat. 39°43′57″ N., long. 121°45′28″ W. clockwise along the Chico Municipal Airport 6-mile radius to lat. 39°41′45″ N., long. 121°50′42″ W.; thence along the 174° bearing from the Chico Municipal Airport to intersect the 1-mile radius of the Ranchaero Airport, thence counter-clockwise along the Ranchaero Airport 1-mile radius to intersect the 200° bearing from the Chico Municipal Airport, thence along the 200° bearing to the Chico Municipal Airport 6-mile radius, thence clockwise to lat. 39°53′31″ N., long. 121°53′31″ W.; thence to lat. 39°51′48″ N., long. 121°52′04″ W. clockwise along the Chico Municipal Airport 4.1-mile radius to lat. 39°45′40″ N., long. 121°46′54″ W.; thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 5, 2015. Christopher Ramirez, Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28793 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 49, 51, 52, 60, 70, and 71 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0685; EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505; EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0606; EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0216; FRL-9937-01-OAR] Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector; Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources; Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions From True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in Indian Country AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 18, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed three rules titled, “Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector,” “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources,” and “Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions from True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in Indian Country.” The EPA is extending the comment period on the three proposed rules that was scheduled to close on November 17, 2015. The EPA has received several letters from trade and business organizations, states and tribes requesting additional time to review and comment on the three proposed rule revisions.

    DATES:

    The public comment period for the three proposed rules published in the Federal Register on September 18, 2015 (80 FR 56579, 80 FR 56593, and 80 FR 56553), is being extended. Written comments must be received on or before December 4, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established separate dockets for each of the three proposed rulemakings (available at http://www.regulations.gov). For the proposed rulemaking titled, “Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector,” the Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0685. For the proposed rulemaking titled, “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources,” the Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505. For the proposed rulemaking titled, “Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions from True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in Indian Country,” the Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0606. Information on all of these actions is posted at http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/actions.html. Submit your comments, identified by the appropriate Docket ID, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part of your comment, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html for instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make.

    For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information on this action, contact Cheryl Vetter, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency (C504-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number (919) 541-4391; fax number (919) 541-5509; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    After considering the requests to extend the public comment period received from various trade and business organizations, states and tribes, the EPA has decided to extend the public comment period until December 4, 2015. This extension will ensure that the public has additional time to review the three proposed rules.

    Dated: November 3, 2015. Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28764 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 258 [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126; FRL-9936-10-OSWER] RIN-2050-AG75 Revision to the Research, Development and Demonstration Permits Rule for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise the maximum permit term for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF) units operating under Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) permits. The RD&D permit program, which began in 2004, allows landfill facilities to utilize innovative and new methods that vary from the prescribed run-on control systems, liquids restrictions, and final cover criteria if these systems are determined by the Director of states with EPA-approved RD&D programs, as defined in 40 CFR 258.2, to meet the criteria in 40 CFR 258.4. The current rule limits permits for these units to 3 years each, renewable 3 times for a total permit term of 12 years. If finalized, this rule will allow the Director of an approved State to increase the number of permit renewals to 6, for a total permit term of up to 21 years. The EPA is not proposing any other changes to the existing MSWLF RD&D permit program at this time.

    DATES:

    Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126 to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division of the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (mail code 5304P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: 703-308-9037; email: [email protected]

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

    Entities potentially affected by this proposal are public or private owners or operators of MSWLFs. These entities include:

    Category Example of affected entities State Governments Regulatory agencies and agencies operating landfills. Industry Owners or operators of municipal solid waste landfills. Municipalities, including Tribal Governments Owners or operators of municipal solid waste landfills.

    The affected entities may also fall under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 924110, Sanitation engineering agencies, government; or 562212, Solid Waste Landfill. This list of sectors is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA believes could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your entity is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 258 and the Research, Development, and Demonstration Permits for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills final rule published in the Federal Register at 69 FR 13242, March 22, 2004, (“2004 RD&D rule”). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    B. What action is the agency taking?

    The EPA is proposing to revise the maximum permit term for MSWLF units operating under RD&D permits. In effect, this proposed rule, if finalized, would allow the Directors of a states with EPA-approved RD&D programs to increase the number of 3-year permit renewals from 3 to 6, for a total permit term of 21 years.

    The basis for the proposed extension of the permit period to up to 21 years is to provide more time to support research into the performance of bioreactors, alternative covers and run-on systems. The EPA believes the period of 21 years strikes a balance between providing more time for projects to continue operations as research facilities, while providing enough time for the EPA to consider making permanent changes to the Part 258 MSWLF regulations.

    C. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    The authority for this proposal is sections 1008, 2002(a), 4004, 4005(c), 4010 and 8001(a) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6907, 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c), 6949a, 6981(a).

    D. What are the anticipated effects and benefits of this action?

    The anticipated effect of this proposed action, when final, is to provide the Director of an approved State the ability to issue renewals to existing RD&D permits, as well as new RD&D permits, for up to 21 years instead of 12 years. During this time, the EPA will continue to evaluate data from these facilities. The universe of facilities presently covered by this action is approximately 30 facilities currently operating with RD&D permits, and one on tribal lands. Additional facilities may also continue to seek an RD&D permit after this action is finalized. The EPA has no information with which to estimate whether or not, nor how many, new facilities will seek RD&D permits. Owners/operators operating under existing RD&D permits are not expected to incur any new costs as a result of this proposed rule. The annual costs for ongoing recordkeeping and annual reporting requirements are estimated at $2,410 per facility.

    It is important to note that applying for a RD&D permit is voluntary. This proposed action would merely allow the Director of an approved State to increase the number of extensions of the permit period for existing facilities, or offer more extensions of the permit term for new facilities, for those owners and operators who choose to participate in this research program; it would not impose any new regulatory burden. Increasing the possible number of extensions of the RD&D permit term may benefit current owners and operators of RD&D units by providing additional time to recover their costs, if the Director of an approved State chooses to extend existing permits. For example, data from one RD&D permitted facility shows a projected increase of 3% in the rate of return for 20 years compared to 12 years.1

    1 See docket # EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126 for supporting documentation.

    Increasing the possible number of extensions of RD&D permit terms will provide more time for the EPA to collect additional data on the potential benefits of the approaches being taken under these RD&D permits. These potential benefits include: Decreased costs for leachate treatment due to leachate recirculation in bioreactors; increased revenue from the sale of landfill gas for use as a renewable source of fuel; decreased risk due to a reduction in the transportation of leachate for treatment; accelerated production and capture of landfill gas for use as a renewable fuel; and, accelerated stabilization, and corresponding decreased post-closure care activities, for facilities as a result of the accelerated decomposition of waste.

    II. Background

    Under Subchapter IV of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6941-6949a, the EPA has promulgated minimum national standards for MSWLFs at 40 CFR part 258. See 56 FR 50978 (October 9, 1991). RCRA also directs the EPA to encourage research and development for, among other things, the development and application of new and improved methods of collecting and disposing of solid waste. 42 U.S.C. 6981(a).

    The initial MSWLF regulations addressed seven basic areas: Location restrictions; operation; design; groundwater monitoring; corrective action; closure and post-closure care; and financial assurance. These MSWLF landfill regulations focused on dry-tomb landfills to minimize the possibility of groundwater contamination from the production and subsequent leakage of leachate. After the promulgation of those standards, the EPA became aware that landfill technology had advanced sufficiently that some alternative designs and operations could benefit from further study through research and demonstration projects. For example, some of these methods, particularly the addition of liquids and leachate recirculation, could accelerate biodegradation and provide additional potential benefits. These include:

    —Acceleration of landfill gas generation which can be collected as a source of renewable fuel. —Minimization of leachate treatment requirements during the operational life of the landfill. —More rapid reduction in concentration of leachate constituents of concern, thereby limiting the corresponding post-closure activities for leachate control. —An increase in the rate of landfill settlement resulting in the more efficient use of permitted landfill capacity.

    As a means to advance innovation in landfill design, in 2000 the EPA selected four landfills to participate in its Project XL program. The landfills are located in Buncombe County, North Carolina; Yolo County, California; King George County, Virginia; and the Maplewood facility in Amelia Country, Virginia.

    In addition to Project XL, in 2001 the EPA began using Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) to promote collaborative research between federal and non-federal scientists as an additional means to explore the addition of liquids to landfills to promote faster biodegradation and stabilization. Bioreactor landfill sites operating with CRADAs include the Outer Loop landfill in Louisville, Kentucky; and the Polk County landfill in Florida.

    Subsequently, in 2004, the EPA amended 40 CFR part 258 MSWLF regulations to create a broader RD&D research program. The 2004 RD&D rule, which amended § 258.4 enabled the Director of an approved State to allow RD&D projects with variances to specific provisions of the MSWLF criteria, including variances from operating criteria in part 258 subpart C with respect to run-on controls (§ 258.26(a)(1)) and the liquids restrictions in § 258.28(a). In addition, the rule allows an additional variance for the final cover requirements set forth in the closure criteria in §§ 258.60(a)(1), (a)(2) and (b)(1). The 2004 RD&D rule limits the duration of the initial permit to 3 years. The permit can be renewed for up to three additional 3-year terms, for a total of 12 years. More information on the RD&D rule can be found in the final rule preamble. See 69 FR 13242, March 22, 2004.

    As of March 2014, there were 30 active RD&D projects in 11 approved states and one project on tribal lands.2 The maximum permit period for the first of these bioreactors is coming to an end, and the EPA proposes to allow the Director of an approved State to continue to extend the permit period for up to a total of 21 years to allow for continued research.

    2 Permitting of Landfill Bioreactor Operations: Ten years After the RD&D Rule, EPA document number EPA/600/R-14/335.

    A. What the EPA Is Proposing

    The EPA is proposing to allow Directors of states with EPA-approved RD&D programs to increase the maximum term for RD&D permits from 12 to 21 years at 40 CFR 258.4(e)(1), to provide more time to support research into the performance of bioreactors, alternative covers and run-on systems. In effect, this proposed rule, if finalized, would allow the Director of an approved State to increase the number of permit renewals from three to six. The EPA is not proposing any other changes to the RD&D permit program at this time. The EPA is not reopening, nor will it respond to comments on, any other provision of the existing RD&D rule or MSWLF criteria in 40 CFR part 258.

    Separately from this proposal, the EPA expects to publish an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) seeking comment on revising other sections of the MSWLF (40 CFR part 258) criteria to authorize bioreactor operation (and other changes to the national criteria) on a permanent basis. Interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on broader issues relating to bioreactor operation during the public comment period on that ANPRM.

    B. Basis for This Proposal

    In the 2004 RD&D final rule, the EPA made clear its intention that MSWLF RD&D permits be of limited duration, yet also provide data to support future rulemaking. This proposal is intended to further these dual goals. Although the EPA does not expect that all RD&D permits will necessarily extend to the full permit term, the EPA has since learned that the 12-year time limit may not be sufficient to realize potential benefits in all cases. Thus, extending the permit period for up to 21 years will provide more time to collect data on potential benefits and any problems without making the permit period so long as to be open-ended.

    Extending the maximum permit term will help continuing efforts to collect data at existing RD&D units. If the EPA does not take this action, owners and operators using existing RD&D permits would need to make significant modifications to their disposal units or cease operation altogether, before reaching the end of their normal operations or closure. Because of the potential environmental benefits that may be derived from bioreactors, alternative cover designs, and run-on systems, the EPA believes that it is important to extend the maximum permit period to 21 years to provide more time to characterize the performance of RD&D projects without making the permit period so long as to be open-ended.

    The EPA also wishes to enhance the economic feasibility to build and operate bioreactors or final cover variances in the future, and to thereby provide additional sources of data. In addition, the EPA has heard from stakeholders that the current 12-year maximum permit period is an insufficient length of time for potential owners and operators of bioreactors to recoup their initial investment. These stakeholders have indicated limiting the permit period to 12 years has the unintended consequence of discouraging the development of bioreactors.

    C. Implementation of This Proposal

    This proposal does not require states with EPA-approved RD&D programs to modify their solid waste permit programs. Since this proposed change to the RD&D rule provides more flexibility than existing federal criteria, states are not required to amend existing solid waste permit programs that have been determined by the EPA to be adequate under 40 CFR part 239. States will have the option to amend their programs once this proposal is finalized. At the same time, the RD&D rule (including this proposed revision of the maximum permit term) is not self-implementing and states are required to adopt the RD&D rule and obtain EPA approval for their RD&D program in order to issue a RD&D permit. States previously approved to issue RD&D permits that wish to increase the total length of time for which RD&D permits can be issued will need to notify the EPA in accordance with 40 CFR part 239. States with EPA-approved solid waste permit programs that have not previously sought approval for an RD&D program and now wish to do so will need to apply to EPA for approval of an RD&D program, including approval of the longer time period allowed by this proposal. Any state without an EPA-approved solid waste permit program may submit an application to the EPA for a determination of adequacy under 40 CFR part 239 and may include a request for approval of the RD&D permit provisions reflecting the longer time period allowed by this proposal. For municipal solid waste landfill units located in Indian Country, the EPA intends to consider the longer maximum permit term in this proposal when issuing or modifying any site-specific RD&D rule. The EPA has previously issued draft guidance on the site-specific flexibility request process in Indian Country. See Site-specific Flexibility Requests for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills in Indian Country, EPA 530-R-97-016, August 1997.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new Information Collection Request (ICR) burden under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB control numbers 2050-0152 and 2050-0122. The purpose of this action is to extend the maximum allowable permit period for this program and this change to the RD&D program itself does not impose any additional reporting requirements. The OMB has previously approved the information collection activities contained in the existing regulations in two different, applicable ICRs. The ICRs affected by this proposal are for 40 CFR part 239, Requirements for State Permit Program Determination of Adequacy and part 258, MSWLF Criteria. The OMB has reviewed the ICR for part 239 (ICR# 1608.07, OMB# 2050-0152.) The EPA will request comments under the ICR review process from states that plan to make these revisions so that the EPA can better understand the expected burden that would be incurred by states who wish to make these changes. In addition, the EPA will also be requesting information from MSWLF owners/operators on the reporting burden that they would incur under an extended permit term provided in accordance with this proposal under the part 258, MSWLF criteria ICR (ICR# 1381.09, OMB# 2050-0122) when that review process begins. This process is scheduled to be completed in June 2016.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This proposed rule will not create any additional burden for small entities. Small entities are not required to take any action as a consequence of this proposed rule, and this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector. The costs involved in this action are imposed only by voluntary participation in a federal program.

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Although Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposal, the EPA has consulted with states through the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials during the development of this proposal.

    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. The EPA has concluded that this proposal will have no new tribal implications, nor would it present any additional burden on the tribes. It will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Accordingly, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations.

    The underlying RD&D rule requires any RD&D permit to include such terms and conditions at least as protective as the criteria for municipal solid waste landfills to assure protection of human health and the environment, and this proposal does not reopen or otherwise change that requirement. Therefore, the EPA finds that the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 258

    Environmental protection, Municipal landfills, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: October 30, 2015. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 258 as follows:

    PART 258—CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS 1. The authority citation for part 258 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e); 42 U.S.C. 6902(a), 6907, 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c) and 6949a(c), 6981(a).

    Subpart A—General 2. Revise § 258.4(e)(1) to read as follows:
    § 258.4 Research, development, and demonstration permits.

    (e) * * *

    (1) The total term for a permit for a project including renewals may not exceed twenty-one (21) years; and

    [FR Doc. 2015-28666 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    80 219 Friday, November 13, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Media Outlets for Publication of Legal and Action Notices in the Southern Region AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice lists the newspapers that will be used by all U.S. Forest Service Ranger Districts, Forests, and the Regional Office of the Southern Region to publish legal notices required under 36 CFR 214, 218, and 219. The intended effect of this action is to inform interested members of the public which newspapers the Forest Service will use to publish notices of proposed actions, notices of decision, and notices of opportunity to file an appeal/objection. This will provide the public with constructive notice of Forest Service proposals and decisions, provide information on the procedures to comment, appeal, or object and establish the date that the Forest Service will use to determine if comments, appeals, or objections were timely.

    DATES:

    Publication of legal notices in the listed newspapers will begin on the date of this publication and remain in effect until another notice is published in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    USDA Forest Service, Southern Region; ATTN: Regional Administrative Review Coordinator; 1720 Peachtree Road NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30309.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Harris, Regional Environmental Coordinator, Southern Region, 1720 Peachtree Road NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30309, Phone: 404/347-5292.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In addition to the primary newspaper listed for each unit, some Forest Supervisors and District Rangers have listed newspapers providing additional notice of their decisions. The timeframe for filing comment, appeal or an objection shall be based on the date of publication of the notice in the first (primary) newspaper listed for each unit.

    Southern Region Regional Forester Decisions

    Affecting National Forest System lands in more than one Administrative unit of the 15 in the Southern Region, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, published daily in Atlanta, GA.

    Affecting National Forest System lands in only one Administrative unit or only one Ranger District will appear in the newspaper of record elected by the National Forest, National Grassland, National Recreation Area, or Ranger District as listed below.

    National Forests in Alabama, Alabama Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Affecting National Forest System lands in more than one Ranger District of the 6 in the National Forests in Alabama, Montgomery Advertiser, published daily in Montgomery, AL. Affecting National Forest System lands in only one Ranger District will appear in the newspaper of record elected by the Ranger District as listed below.

    District Ranger Decisions

    Bankhead Ranger District: Northwest Alabamian, published bi-weekly (Wednesday & Saturday) in Haleyville, AL

    Conecuh Ranger District: The Andalusia Star News, published daily (Tuesday through Saturday) in Andalusia, AL

    Oakmulgee Ranger District: The Tuscaloosa News, published daily in Tuscaloosa, AL

    Shoal Creek Ranger District: The Anniston Star, published daily in Anniston, AL

    Talladega Division: The Anniston Star, published daily in Anniston, AL

    Talladega Ranger District: The Daily Home, published daily in Talladega, AL

    Tuskegee Ranger District: Tuskegee News, published weekly (Thursday) in Tuskegee, AL

    Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest, Georgia Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Times, published daily in Gainesville, GA

    District Ranger Decisions

    Blue Ridge Ranger District: The News Observer (newspaper of record) published bi-weekly (Tuesday & Friday) in Blue Ridge, GA

    North Georgia News, (newspaper of record) published weekly (Wednesday) in Blairsville, GA

    Conasauga Ranger District: Daily Citizen, published daily in Dalton, GA

    Chattooga River Ranger District: The Northeast Georgian, (newspaper of record) published bi-weekly (Wednesday & Friday) in Cornelia, GA

    Clayton Tribune, (newspaper of record) published weekly (Thursday) in Clayton, GA

    The Toccoa Record, (secondary) published weekly (Thursday) in Toccoa, GA

    White County News, (secondary) published weekly (Thursday) in Cleveland, GA

    Oconee Ranger District: Eatonton Messenger, published weekly (Thursday) in Eatonton, GA

    Cherokee National Forest, Tennessee Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Knoxville News Sentinel, published daily in Knoxville, TN

    District Ranger Decisions

    Unaka Ranger District: Greeneville Sun, published daily (except Sunday) in Greeneville, TN

    Ocoee-Hiwassee Ranger District: Polk County News, published weekly (Wednesday) in Benton, TN

    Tellico Ranger District: Monroe County Advocate & Democrat, published tri-weekly (Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday) in Sweetwater, TN

    Watauga Ranger District: Johnson City Press, published daily in Johnson City, TN

    Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Lexington Herald-Leader, published daily in Lexington, KY

    District Ranger Decisions

    Cumberland Ranger District: The Morehead News, published bi-weekly (Tuesday and Friday) in Morehead, KY

    London Ranger District: The Sentinel-Echo, published tri-weekly (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) in London, KY

    Redbird Ranger District: Manchester Enterprise, published weekly (Thursday) in Manchester, KY

    Stearns Ranger District: The McCreary Voice, published weekly (Thursday) in Whitley City, KY

    El Yunque National Forest, Puerto Rico Forest Supervisor Decisions

    El Nuevo Dia, published daily in Spanish in San Juan, PR

    Puerto Rico Daily Sun, published daily in English in San Juan, PR

    National Forests in Florida, Florida Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Tallahassee Democrat, published daily in Tallahassee, FL

    District Ranger Decisions

    Apalachicola Ranger District: Calhoun-Liberty Journal, published weekly (Wednesday) in Bristol, FL

    Lake George Ranger District: The Ocala Star Banner, published daily in Ocala, FL

    Osceola Ranger District: The Lake City Reporter, published daily (Monday-Saturday) in Lake City, FL

    Seminole Ranger District: The Daily Commercial, published daily in Leesburg, FL

    Wakulla Ranger District: The Tallahassee Democrat, published daily in Tallahassee, FL

    Francis Marion & Sumter National Forests, South Carolina Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The State, published daily in Columbia, SC

    District Ranger Decisions

    Andrew Pickens Ranger District: The Daily Journal, published daily (Tuesday through Saturday) in Seneca, SC

    Enoree Ranger District: Newberry Observer, published tri-weekly (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) in Newberry, SC

    Long Cane Ranger District: Index-Journal, published daily in Greenwood, SC

    Wambaw Ranger District: Post and Courier, published daily in Charleston, SC

    Witherbee Ranger District: Post and Courier, published daily in Charleston, SC

    George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Virginia and West Virginia Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Roanoke Times, published daily in Roanoke, VA

    District Ranger Decisions

    Clinch Ranger District: Coalfield Progress, published bi-weekly (Tuesday and Friday) in Norton, VA

    North River Ranger District: Daily News Record, published daily (except Sunday) in Harrisonburg, VA

    Glenwood-Pedlar Ranger District: Roanoke Times, published daily in Roanoke, VA

    James River Ranger District: Virginian Review, published on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday in Covington, VA

    Lee Ranger District: Shenandoah Valley Herald, published weekly (Wednesday) in Woodstock, VA

    Mount Rogers National Recreation Area: Bristol Herald Courier, published daily in Bristol, VA

    Eastern Divide Ranger District: Roanoke Times, published daily in Roanoke, VA

    Warm Springs Ranger District: The Recorder, published weekly (Thursday) in Monterey, VA

    Kisatchie National Forest, Louisiana Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Town Talk, published daily in Alexandria, LA

    District Ranger Decisions

    Calcasieu Ranger District: The Town Talk, (newspaper of record) published daily in Alexandria, LA

    The Leesville Daily Leader, (secondary) published daily in Leesville, LA

    Caney Ranger District: Minden Press Herald, (newspaper of record) published daily in Minden, LA

    Homer Guardian Journal, (secondary) published weekly (Wednesday) in Homer, LA

    Catahoula Ranger District: The Town Talk, published daily in Alexandria, LA

    Kisatchie Ranger District: Natchitoches Times, published daily (Tuesday thru Friday and on Sunday) in Natchitoches, LA

    Winn Ranger District: Winn Parish Enterprise, published weekly (Wednesday) in Winnfield, LA

    Land Between The Lakes National Recreation Area, Kentucky and Tennessee Area Supervisor Decisions

    The Paducah Sun, published daily in Paducah, KY

    National Forests in Mississippi, Mississippi Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    District Ranger Decisions

    Bienville Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    Chickasawhay Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    Delta Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    De Soto Ranger District: Clarion Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    Holly Springs Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    Homochitto Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    Tombigbee Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger, published daily in Jackson, MS

    National Forests in North Carolina, North Carolina Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Asheville Citizen-Times, published Wednesday thru Sunday, in Asheville, NC

    District Ranger Decisions

    Appalachian Ranger District: The Asheville Citizen-Times, published Wednesday thru Sunday, in Asheville, NC

    Cheoah Ranger District: Graham Star, published weekly (Thursday) in Robbinsville, NC

    Croatan Ranger District: The Sun Journal, published daily in New Bern, NC

    Grandfather Ranger District: McDowell News, published daily in Marion, NC

    Nantahala Ranger District: The Franklin Press, published bi-weekly (Tuesday and Friday) in Franklin, NC

    Pisgah Ranger District: The Asheville Citizen-Times, published Wednesday thru Sunday, in Asheville, NC

    Tusquitee Ranger District: Cherokee Scout, published weekly (Wednesday) in Murphy, NC

    Uwharrie Ranger District: Montgomery Herald, published weekly (Wednesday) in Troy, NC

    Ouachita National Forest, Arkansas and Oklahoma Forest Supervisor Decisions

    Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, published daily in Little Rock, AR

    District Ranger Decisions

    Caddo-Womble Ranger District: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, published daily in Little Rock, AR

    Jessieville-Winona-Fourche Ranger District: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette,published daily in Little Rock, AR

    Mena-Oden Ranger District: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, published daily in Little Rock, AR

    Oklahoma Ranger District (Choctaw; Kiamichi; and Tiak): McCurtain Daily Gazette, published daily in Idabel, OK

    Poteau-Cold Springs Ranger District: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, published daily in Little Rock, AR

    Ozark-St. Francis National Forests, Arkansas Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Courier, published daily (Tuesday through Sunday) in Russellville, AR

    District Ranger Decisions

    Bayou Ranger District: The Courier, published daily (Tuesday through Sunday) in Russellville, AR

    Boston Mountain Ranger District: Southwest Times Record, published daily in Fort Smith, AR

    Buffalo Ranger District: The Courier, published daily (Tuesday through Sunday) in Russellville, AR

    Magazine Ranger District: Southwest Times Record, published daily in Fort Smith, AR

    Pleasant Hill Ranger District: Johnson County Graphic, published weekly (Wednesday) in Clarksville, AR

    St. Francis National Forest: The Daily World, published daily (Sunday through Friday) in Helena, AR

    Sylamore Ranger District: Stone County Leader, published weekly (Wednesday) in Mountain View, AR

    National Forests and Grasslands in Texas, Texas Forest Supervisor Decisions

    The Lufkin Daily News, published daily in Lufkin, TX

    District Ranger Decisions

    Angelina National Forest: The Lufkin Daily News, published daily in Lufkin, TX

    Caddo & LBJ National Grasslands: Denton Record-Chronicle, published daily in Denton, TX

    Davy Crockett National Forest: The Lufkin Daily News, published daily in Lufkin, TX

    Sabine National Forest: The Lufkin Daily News, published daily in Lufkin, TX

    Sam Houston National Forest: The Courier, published daily in Conroe, TX

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Jerome Thomas, Deputy Regional Forester.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28900 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-PA13NO3.
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-489-502] Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Turkey: Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2013 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“Department”) is amending the Final Results1 of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube from Turkey to correct ministerial errors. The period of review (“POR”) is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.

    1See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Turkey: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Calendar Year 2013 and Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, in Part, 80 FR 61361 (Dep't Commerce Oct. 13, 2015) (“Final Results”), and accompanying Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Turkey (Oct. 5, 2015).

    DATES:

    Effective date: November 13, 2015

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jolanta Lawska, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone 202-482-8362.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On October 9, 2015, the Department disclosed to interested parties its calculations for the Final Results.2 On October 13, 2015, we received a timely filed ministerial error allegation from Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (BMB), Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (Istikbal), and Borusan Lojistik Dagitim Pepolama Tasimacilik ve Tic A.S. (Borusan Lojistik) (collectively, the Borusan Companies) regarding the Department's final margin calculations.3

    2See Memorandum to Eric Greynolds, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office III from Jolanta Lawska, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, “Final Calculations for the Borusan Group, Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (BMB), and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (Istikbal), (collectively, the Borusan Companies),” dated October 5, 2015 (“Final Results Calculations”).

    3See Letter from Borusan Companies, dated October 13, 2015.

    Period of Review

    The POR covered by this review is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.

    Scope of Order

    The products covered by this order are certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube with an outside diameter of 0.375 inch or more, but not over 16 inches, of any wall thickness (pipe and tube) from Turkey. These products are currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings as 7306.30.10, 7306.30.50, and 7306.90.10. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

    Ministerial Errors

    Section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and 19 CFR 351.224(f) define a “ministerial error” as an error “in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.” We analyzed the Borusan Companies' ministerial error comments and determined, in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), that there was a ministerial error in our calculation of the Borusan Companies net subsidy rate for the Final Results. For a complete discussion of the alleged error, see the Department's Ministerial Error Memorandum.4

    4See “2013 Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Turkey: Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2013: Final Results Ministerial Error Allegation” dated concurrently with this notice (“Ministerial Error Memorandum”).

    In accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), we are amending the Final Results. Specifically, we are amending the net subsidy rate for the Borusan Companies as well as the net subsidy rate for those companies that were not selected for individual examination, who were assigned the rate determined for the Borusan Companies.5 The revised net subsidy rates are detailed below.

    5See Final Results, 80 FR at 61362.

    Amended Final Results

    As a result of correcting for the ministerial error, we determine the following amended net subsidy rates for the period January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013:

    Company Net subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • Borusan Group, Borusan Holding, A.S. (Borusan Holding), Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Borusan), Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (Istikbal), and Borusan Lojistik Dagitim Pepolama Tasimacilik ve Tic A.S. (Borusan Lojistik) (collectively, the Borusan Companies) 0.88 ad valorem. Umran Celik Born Sanayii A.S. (also known as Umran Steel Pipe Inc.) (Umran) 0.88 ad valorem. Guven Steel Pipe (also known as Guven Celik Born San. Ve Tic. Ltd.) (Guven) 0.88 ad valorem. Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. (Toscelik Profil), Toscelik Metal Ticaret AS., and Tosyali Dis Ticaret AS. (Tosyali) (collectively, the Toscelik Companies) 0.88 ad valorem.
    Assessment Rates/Cash Deposits

    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these amended final results to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by respondents listed above entered, or withdrawn form warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013.

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 13, 2015, the date of publication of the Final Results. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Administrative Protective Order

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

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed for these amended final results to interested parties within five business days of the date of the publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(h) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e).

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28887 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE273 Pacific Whiting; Advisory Panel AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; call for nominations.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is soliciting nominations for appointments to the United States Advisory Panel (AP) established in the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada on Pacific Hake/Whiting (Pacific Whiting Treaty). Nominations are being sought to fill two positions on the AP for terms that begin on January 23, 2016 and end September 15, 2019.

    DATES:

    Nominations must be received by December 18, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit nominations by any of the following methods:

    • Email: [email protected].

    • Fax: 206-526-6736, Attn: Frank Lockhart.

    • Mail: William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-0070.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Frank Lockhart, (206) 526-6142 or Miako Ushio, (206) 526-4644.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pacific Whiting Treaty Committees Background

    The Pacific Whiting Act of 2006 (Pacific Whiting Act), 16 U.S.C. 7001-10, implements the 2003 Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada on Pacific Hake/Whiting. Among other provisions, the Pacific Whiting Act provides for the establishment of an Advisory Panel (AP). The AP advises the Joint Management Committee on bilateral Pacific whiting management issues. AP members must be knowledgeable or experienced in the harvesting, processing, marketing, management, conservation, or research of the offshore Pacific whiting resource. Eight individuals represent the United States on the AP, and nominations for two of those positions (id. at § 7005) are solicited through this notice.

    Members appointed to the U.S. sections of the AP will be reimbursed for necessary travel expenses in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations and sections 5701, 5702, 5704 through 5708, and 5731 of Title 5. (Id. at § 7008). NMFS anticipates that 1-2 meetings of the AP will be held annually, and these meetings will be held in the United States or Canada. AP members will need a valid U.S. passport.

    The Pacific Whiting Act also states that while performing their appointed duties, members “other than officers or employees of the United States Government, shall not be considered to be Federal employees while performing such service, except for purposes of injury compensation or tort claims liability as provided in chapter 81 of title 5 and chapter 171 of title 28.” (Id.)

    Information on the Pacific Whiting Treaty, including current committee members can be found at: www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/management/whiting/pacific_whiting_treaty.html.

    Advisory Panel Qualifications

    AP member nominees must be knowledgeable or experienced in the harvesting, processing, marketing, management, conservation, or research of the offshore Pacific whiting resource; and must not be employees of the United States government. Nomination packages for appointments should include:

    1. The name of the applicant or nominee, position they are being nominated for and a description of his/her interest in Pacific whiting; and

    2. A statement of background and/or description of how the nominee is knowledgeable or experienced in the harvesting, processing, marketing, management, conservation, or research of the offshore Pacific whiting resource. Letters of support for nominees will also be considered.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.

    Dated: November 6, 2015. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28775 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE311 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council will hold a one-day meeting of its Coastal Migratory Pelagics (CMP) Advisory Panel (AP).

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Monday, November 30, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hilton Tampa Airport Westshore hotel, located at 2225 N. Lois Avenue, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: (813) 877-6688.

    Council address: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ryan Rindone, Fishery Biologist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; [email protected], telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda Monday, November 30, 2015

    The Chairman will begin the meeting with introductions, adoption of the agenda, and review and approval of the CMP Advisory Panel (AP) minutes from the March 3-4, 2015 meeting; followed by an election of a new chair and vice-chair. The Committee will then review the CMP Amendment 26 Public Hearing Draft—Gulf and Atlantic King Mackerel reallocation, stock boundary, and sale provisions; including the review of the CMP 26 Decision Document and the AP's recommendations. The AP will discuss Other Business; Modifications to Electronic Seafood Dealer Report, and additional items, if any.

    Meeting Adjourns

    The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on the Council's file server. To access the file server, go to the Council's Web site (http://www.gulfcouncil.org) and click on the “File Server” link at the lower left corner of the Web site. The username and password are both “gulfguest”. Click on the “Library Folder”, then scroll down to “Mackerel AP Meeting—November 30, 2015”.

    The meeting will be webcast over the internet. A link to the webcast will be available on the Council's Web site, http://www.gulfcouncil.org.

    Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before this group for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions of the Scientific and Statistical Committee will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agenda 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 Council's intent to take action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Pereira at the Gulf Council Office (see ADDRESSES), at least 5 working days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28816 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE313 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The New England Fishery Management Council (Council, NEFMC) will hold a three-day meeting to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, December 1-3, 2015, starting at 9 a.m. on December 1, and at 8:30 a.m. on both December 2-3.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn by the Bay, 88 Spring Street, Portland, ME 04101; telephone: (207) 775.2311, fax: (207) 761.8224, or online at www.innbythebay.com/.

    Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950; telephone 978-465-0492.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492, ext. 113.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda Tuesday, December 1, 2015

    After introductions and any announcements, the Council meeting will open with brief reports from the NEFMC Chairman and Executive Director, the NOAA Regional Administrator for the Greater Atlantic Region, Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council liaisons, NOAA General Counsel and Office of Law Enforcement representatives, and staff from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the U.S Coast Guard, and the Northeast Regional Ocean Council. These reports will be followed by a Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) staff overview on proposed 2016-17 spiny dogfish fishery specifications. Because it is a joint plan with the MAFMC, the NEFMC is scheduled to vote on the specifications at this meeting.

    Following a lunch break, the public will have an opportunity to make brief comments on items that are relevant to Council business but otherwise not listed on the published agenda. The Northeast Fisheries Science Center director will then provide the Council with a briefing on the Center's Strategic Plan. The Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) will present its recommendations for an overfishing limit (OFL) and an acceptable biological catch (ABC) for the following: Atlantic sea scallops for fishing years 2016-17; red hake for 2016-17; and most of the 20 groundfish stocks in the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for fishing years 2016-18. The Council also will receive the SSC's comments on NOAA's Ecosystem-based Fishery Management (EBFM) Policy. The EBFM Committee will present a progress report on the development of a pilot EBFM Plan and ask for approval of its draft comments on the agency's EBFM policy.

    Wednesday, December 2, 2015

    Wednesday's session will begin with a report from the Council's Skate Committee. It will recommend final action (approval) of Framework Adjustment 3 to the Northeast Skate Complex Fishery Management Plan (FMP). It will contain next year's fishery specifications, in addition to measures that address possession limits and possible modifications to the seasonal management of the skate wing fishery. This will be followed by an update on NOAA Fisheries' activities concerning a petition to list thorny skates as threatened or endangered. Next, the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office staff will brief the Council on its Recreational Fishery Implementation Plan and solicit public comments. During the Groundfish Committee's report to follow, the Council will consider recommendations for recreational management measures for stocks of Gulf of Maine haddock and Gulf of Maine cod for fishing year 2016. They will be further considered by NOAA Fisheries and announced prior to the beginning of the upcoming fishing year. The Council also plans to approve Framework 55 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP, including specifications for its groundfish stocks for fishing years 2016-18, plus three U.S./Canada stocks for 2016 only. At-sea monitoring alternatives and other management measures are being proposed for inclusion in the framework.

    Thursday, December 3, 2015

    The final meeting day will begin with consideration and approval of the NEFMC's management priorities for 2016, followed by a briefing about the collection of fisheries data through the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program, and a report by the Council's Research Steering Committee regarding work on sea scallops and monkfish. The Scallop Committee will ask the Council to approve final action on Amendment 19 to the Sea Scallop FMP. The action is intended to expedite the implementation date of the sea scallop fishery specifications each year. Final approval is also expected on Framework Adjustment 29 to the Scallop FMP, which includes fishing year 2016 fishery specifications and default measures for fishing year 2017.

    Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    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 (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28817 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a public meeting of the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee (Committee). The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on spectrum management policy matters.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on December 2, 2015, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Eastern Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at Wilkinson Barker and Knauer, LLP, 1800 M Street NW., Suite 800N, Washington, DC 20036. Public comments may be mailed to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4099, Washington, DC 20230 or emailed to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bruce M. Washington, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 482-6415 or [email protected]; and/or visit NTIA's Web site at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information on needed reforms to domestic spectrum policies and management in order to: License radio frequencies in a way that maximizes their public benefits; keep wireless networks as open to innovation as possible; and make wireless services available to all Americans. See Charter at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/csmac_2015_charter_renewal_2-26-15.pdf.

    This Committee is subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and is consistent with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Act, 47 U.S.C. 904(b). The Committee functions solely as an advisory body in compliance with the FACA. For more information about the Committee visit: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Matters To Be Considered: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary to assist in developing and maintaining spectrum management policies that enable the United States to maintain or strengthen its global leadership role in the introduction of communications technology and services and innovation. This helps in expanding the economy, adding jobs, and increasing international trade, while at the same time providing for the expansion of existing technologies and supporting the country's homeland security, national defense, and other critical government needs. The Committee will hear reports of the following Subcommittees:

    1. Federal Access to Non-Federal Bands (Bi-directional Sharing) 2. Government and Industry Collaboration 3. Measurement and Sensing in 5 GHz 4. Spectrum Access System (SAS)/Spectrum Database International Extension 5. Fifth Generation (5G) Wireless

    NTIA will post a detailed agenda on its Web site, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac, prior to the meeting. To the extent that the meeting time and agenda permit, any member of the public may speak to or otherwise address the Committee regarding the agenda items. See Open Meeting and Public Participation Policy, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Time and Date: The meeting will be held on December 2, 2015, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Eastern Standard Time. The times and the agenda topics are subject to change. The meeting will be available via two-way audio link and may be webcast. Please refer to NTIA's Web site, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac, for the most up-to-date meeting agenda and access information.

    Place: The meeting will be held at Wilkinson Barker and Knauer, LLP, 1800 M Street NW., Suite 800N, Washington, DC 20036. Public comments may be mailed to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4099, Washington, DC 20230. The meeting will be open to the public and press on a first-come, first-served basis. Space is limited. The public meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify Mr. Washington at (202) 482-6415 or [email protected] at least ten (10) business days before the meeting.

    Status: Interested parties are invited to attend and to submit written comments to the Committee at any time before or after the meeting. Parties wishing to submit written comments for consideration by the Committee in advance of a meeting must send them to NTIA's Washington, DC office at the above-listed address and comments must be received five (5) business days before the scheduled meeting date, to provide sufficient time for review. Comments received after this date will be distributed to the Committee, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting. It would be helpful if paper submissions also include a compact disc (CD) in Word or PDF format. CDs should be labeled with the name and organizational affiliation of the filer. Alternatively, comments may be submitted electronically to [email protected] Comments provided via electronic mail also may be submitted in one or more of the formats specified above.

    Records: NTIA maintains records of all Committee proceedings. Committee records are available for public inspection at NTIA's Washington, DC office at the address above. Documents including the Committee's charter, member list, agendas, minutes, and any reports are available on NTIA's Committee Web page at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28878 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID DoD-2014-HA-0025] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Defense Health Agency (DHA), Defense Health Clinical Systems, Data Sharing Program Office, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Defense Health Agency, Defense Health Clinical Systems, Data Sharing Program Office, announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory and Audit Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-9010.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    Any associated form(s) for this collection may be located within this same electronic docket and downloaded for review/testing. Follow the instructions at http://www.regulations.gov for submitting comments. Please submit comments on any given form identified by docket number, form number, and title.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the Defense Health Information Management System (DHIMS), ATTN: Alvaro Rodriguez, 5109 Leesburg Pike, Skyline 6, Suite 508, Falls Church, VA 22041, or call DHIMS, at 703-882-3867.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Health Artifact and Image Management Solution (HAIMS); 0720-TBD.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary for HAIMS to provide the departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs health care providers with global visibility and access to artifacts (documents) and images generated during the health care delivery process. HAIMS will provide a single enterprise-wide data sharing capability for all types of artifacts and images (also known as A&I), including radiographs, clinical photographs, electrocardiographs, waveforms, audio files, video and scanned documents.

    Affected Public: Individuals and Households; specifically, beneficiaries with access to the Military Healthcare system.

    Annual Burden Hours: 500,000.

    Number of Respondents: 8,333,333.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.2.

    Annual Responses: 10,000,000.

    Average Burden per Response: 3 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    The Health Artifact and Image Management Solution (HAIMS) will provide the departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs health care providers with global visibility and access to artifacts (documents) and images generated during the health care delivery process. HAIMS, a Wounded Warrior strategic project, will provide a single enterprise-wide data sharing capability for all types of artifacts and images (also known as A&I), including radiographs, clinical photographs, electrocardiographs, waveforms, audio files, video and scanned documents.

    HAIMS will provide an enterprise solution utilizing a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) based application with a federated infrastructure. The required solution to satisfy the scope of HAIMS will consist of industry standard COTS, as well as government off the shelf (GOTS). The expected business outcomes have been defined and constraints/dependencies have been identified in satisfying the functional, technical and system requirements to develop, field and support HAIMS throughout the life cycle.

    HAIMS interfaces with external repositories to register and access patient A&I. Patient demographic information from the Clinical Data Repository (CDR) is used to associate A&I with the patient. Another method of collecting data is through bulk scanning of patient artifacts into HAIMS. The user will first select the patient for which the artifact is associated with, and then enters in relevant metadata of the artifacts.

    The information in HAIMS is sensitive; therefore, it contains built-in safeguards to limit access and visibility of this information. HAIMS uses role-based security so a user sees only the information for which permission has been granted. It uses encryption security for transactions. It is DIACAP certified having been subjected to and passed thorough security testing and evaluation by independent parties. It meets safeguards specified by the Privacy Act of 1974 in that it maintains a published Department of Defense (DoD) Privacy Impact Assessment and System of Record covering Active Duty Military, Reserve, National Guard, and government civilian employees, to include non-appropriated fund employees and foreign nationals, DoD contractors, and volunteers. HAIMS servers are hosted at Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) and physically secured by the Services and within the MHS enclave, Enterprise Infrastructure maintains information security.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28829 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION Notice of Public Hearing and Business Meeting November 10 and December 9, 2015 Correction

    In notice document 2015-26837 appearing on pages 63973 through 63974 in the issue of Thursday, October 22, 2015 make the following correction:

    1. Beginning page 63973, in the third column, in the final paragraph and continuing on page 63974 in the first paragraph, “The public business meeting on December 9, 2015 will begin at 1:30 p.m.” should read “The public business meeting on December 9, 2015 will begin at 10:30 a.m.”

    In notice document C1-2015-26837 appearing on page 66524 in the issue of Thursday, October 29, 2015 make the following correction:

    2. On page 66524, in the second column, in lines four through six, “The public hearing on November 10, 2015 will begin at 10:30 a.m.” should read “The public hearing on November 10, 2015 will begin at 1:30 p.m.”

    [FR Doc. C2-2015-26837 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2015-ICCD-0085] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and approval; Comment Request; Recent Graduates Employment and Earnings Survey (RGEES) Standards and Survey Form AGENCY:

    Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et se.), ED is proposing a new information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2015-ICCD-0085 Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E105 Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Beth Grebeldinger, 202-377-4018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Title of Collection: Recent Graduates Employment and Earnings Survey (RGEES) Standards and Survey Form.

    OMB Control Number: 1845-NEW.

    Type of Review: A new information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 22,123.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 7,374.

    Abstract: The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) of the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is required by regulation to develop an earnings survey to support gainful employment (GE) program evaluations. The regulations specify that the Secretary of Education will publish in the Federal Register the survey and the standards required for its administration. NCES has developed the Recent Graduates Employment and Earnings Survey (RGEES) Standards and Survey Form. The RGEES can be used in a debt-to-earnings (D/E) ratio appeal under the GE regulations as an alternative to the Social Security administration earnings data.

    Institutions that choose to submit alternate earnings appeal information will survey all Title IV funded students who graduated from GE programs during the same period that the Department used to calculate the D/E ratios, or a comparable period as defined in 668.406(b)(3) of the regulations. The survey will provide an additional source of earnings data for the Department to consider before determining final D/E ratios for programs subject to the gainful employment regulations. Programs with final D/E ratios that fail to meet the minimum threshold may face sanctions, including the possible loss of Title IV federal student financial aid program funds.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Stephanie Valentine, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28839 Filed 11-10-15; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Public Meeting to Provide Comments on Draft Materials to Improve FERC-USACE Coordinated Regulatory Processes for Non-Federal Development of Hydropower at USACE Non-Hydropower Dams AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting to obtain individual public input on new ideas developed collaboratively by the Department of Energy (DOE), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) aimed at improving coordination of FERC and USACE regulatory processes regarding non-federal development of hydropower at USACE non-powered dams. DOE estimates that there is a potential for 12 gigawatts of new hydropower capacity in the U.S. by adding power at non-powered dams.1 Adding power at USACE non-powered dams requires federal authorizations, potentially including authorizations via: The FERC licensing process 2 , the USACE 408 process 3 , and the USACE regulatory 404 process 4 (impacts to waters of the U.S. pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act). All three of these processes require project proposal identification, information gathering, and environmental and engineering analyses to support licensing, permitting, or agency decisions.

    1 National Hydropower Asset Assessment Program, Non-Powered Dam Resource Assessment can be found at http://nhaap.ornl.gov/content/non-powered-dam-potential.

    2 18 U.S.C. 4, 5, and 16.

    3 Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 408).

    4 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, December 10th, 2015, from 1:00-5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), 888 First Street NE., Hearing Room 1, Washington, DC 20426.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Gilman, Department of Energy at (720) 356-1420 or [email protected], or Hoyt Battey, Department of Energy, at (202) 586-0143 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DOE with the assistance of Oak Ridge National Laboratory convened a collaborative process with FERC and USACE staff to develop ideas on how FERC and USACE permitting efforts can be more efficiently coordinated to decrease overall process time and avoid duplication of efforts.

    The focus of the public meeting will be for agencies to receive public input, questions, and recommendations for areas of potential improvement in the coordination of FERC and USACE regulatory processes regarding non-federal development of hydropower at USACE non-powered dams and provide a forum to exchange information. Attendees will be asked to provide these recommendations and information based on their personal experience, individual advice, information, or facts regarding this topic. The object of the meeting is not to obtain any group position or consensus; rather, the agencies are seeking as many recommendations as possible from all individuals at this meeting. Draft documents outlining preliminary ideas for improving processes can be viewed at the meeting Web site: http://hydropower.ornl.gov/npd-public-workshop/. The meeting is open to the public; project developers, those involved in adding power at non-power dams, environmental non-governmental organizations, tribes, and all interested members of the public are encouraged to attend. Pre-registration is required as space is limited. Register at http://hydropower.ornl.gov/npd-public-workshop/; or contact Kelsey Rugani at Kearns & West ([email protected], (415) 391-7900) to RSVP.

    If you are unable to attend and want to provide written comments, please do so by 11:59 p.m. EST on December 18th. Please send all comments to [email protected]

    Jim Ahlgrimm, Supervisory General Engineer, Wind and Water Power Program, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28875 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Availability of the Plains & Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project Final Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability of the Plains & Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0486; Final EIS), prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This Final EIS considered public comments on the Draft EIS, which was issued in December 2014, reports on the status of consultations under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and identifies DOE's preferred alternative. DOE has not made a decision whether to participate in the proposed Plains & Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project.

    DATES:

    DOE will publish a Record of Decision no sooner than 30 days after publication of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Final EIS is available on the DOE NEPA Web site at http://energy.gov/nepa and on the Plains & Eastern EIS Web site at http://www.plainsandeasterneis.com/. Copies of the Final EIS also are available in the public reading rooms listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    A printed summary and CD of the complete Final EIS or a complete printed copy of the Final EIS (approximately 5,500 pages) may be requested by sending an email to [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the Plains & Eastern EIS or the Section 106 process, contact Jane Summerson, Ph.D., DOE NEPA Document Manager on behalf of the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, U.S. Department of Energy, DOE NNSA, Post Office Box 5400 Building 391, Kirtland Air Force Base East, Albuquerque, NM 87185; email at [email protected]; or telephone at (505) 845-4091.

    For general information regarding the DOE NEPA process, contact Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585; or phone at (202) 586-4600; voicemail at (800) 472-2756; or email at [email protected] Additional information regarding DOE's NEPA activities is available on the DOE NEPA Web site at http://energy.gov/nepa.

    Additional information on the Final EIS is also available through the EIS Web site at http://www.plainsandeasternEIS.com/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    In June 2010, DOE, acting through the Southwestern Power Administration and the Western Area Power Administration, both power marketing administrations within DOE, issued Request for Proposals for New or Upgraded Transmission Line Projects Under Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct; 42 United States Code [U.S.C.] 16421; 75 FR 32940; June 10, 2010). In response to the request for proposals, Clean Line Energy Partners LLC of Houston, Texas, the parent company of Plains and Eastern Clean Line LLC and Plains and Eastern Clean Line Oklahoma LLC (collectively referred to as Clean Line or the Applicant) submitted a proposal to DOE in July 2010 for the Plains & Eastern Clean Line Project. In August 2011, Clean Line modified the proposal and subsequently submitted additional information (referred to as the Part 2 Application) in January 2015 at DOE's request.

    DOE is the lead federal agency for the preparation of the Plains & Eastern EIS, which examines the potential environmental impacts from Clean Line's proposed Project (also referred to as the Applicant Proposed Project) and the range of reasonable alternatives. DOE has prepared the EIS pursuant to NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] parts 1500 through 1508), and the DOE NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE's purpose and need for agency action is to implement section 1222 of the EPAct. To that end, the Plains & Eastern EIS will inform DOE as it decides whether and under what conditions it would participate in the Project.

    The Applicant Proposed Project would include an overhead ± 600-kilovolt (kV) high voltage direct current (HVDC) electric transmission system and associated facilities with the capacity to deliver approximately 3,500 megawatts (MW) primarily from renewable energy generation facilities in the Oklahoma and Texas Panhandle regions to load-serving entities in the Mid-South and Southeast United States via an interconnection with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in Tennessee. Major facilities associated with the Applicant Proposed Project consist of converter stations in Oklahoma and Tennessee; an approximately 720-mile, ± 600kV HVDC transmission line; an alternating current (AC) collection system; and access roads. Pursuant to NEPA, DOE has identified and analyzed potential environmental impacts for the range of reasonable alternatives to the Applicant Proposed Project. These alternatives include an Arkansas converter station and alternative routes for the HVDC transmission line. The Arkansas Converter Station alternative would increase the capacity of the proposed transmission system and facilities by 500MW (to 4,000MW) to facilitate delivery of electricity to the grid in Arkansas.

    DOE has prepared this Final EIS in consultation with the following cooperating agencies: Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), TVA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), EPA, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

    BIA, NRCS, TVA, USACE, and USFWS can, to the extent permitted by law, rely on the Plains & Eastern EIS to fulfill their obligations under NEPA for any action, permit, or approval by these agencies for the Project. Upgrades to TVA's transmission system would be necessary to interconnect with the Project while maintaining reliable service to its customers. Additionally, TVA would need to construct a new 500kV transmission line to enable the injection of 3,500MW of power from the Project. TVA would complete its own NEPA review, tiering from this EIS, to assess the impact of the upgrades and the new 500kV line. The USACE may consider the routing alternatives in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, and Tennessee as presented in the Final EIS when making its permit decisions and can use the analysis contained in the Final EIS to inform all of its permit decisions for the Project.

    DOE is the lead agency for consultation required under section 106 of the NHPA (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.) for the Project. DOE is using the NEPA process and documentation required for the Plains & Eastern EIS to comply with section 106 of the NHPA in lieu of the procedures set forth in 36 CFR 800.3 through 800.6. This approach is consistent with the recommendations set forth in the NHPA implementing regulations that section 106 compliance should be coordinated with actions taken to meet NEPA requirements (36 CFR 800.8(a)(1)). Appendix P of the Final EIS includes the draft Programmatic Agreement developed pursuant to 36 CFR 800.14(b). This draft Programmatic Agreement was developed consistent with DOE's obligations under NHPA section 106, including government-to-government consultation with Indian Tribes and Nations on whose tribal lands the undertaking may occur or that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, and consultation with the Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas State Historic Preservation Officers. DOE intends to execute the Programmatic Agreement prior to issuance of the Record of Decision or otherwise comply with procedures set forth in 36 CFR part 800.

    DOE and the Applicant have prepared a Biological Assessment of potential impacts on special status species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as part of the section 7 consultation between DOE and the USFWS. The section 7 consultation review is a parallel, but separate, process to the NEPA process, conducted pursuant to the requirements of ESA and the applicable implementing regulations. The Biological Assessment and associated addendum are included as Appendix O to the Final EIS. The Biological Opinion, to be issued by the USFWS, may identify additional protective measures to avoid or minimize impacts to special status species.

    In the Final EIS, DOE analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the Applicant Proposed Project, the range of reasonable alternatives, and a No Action Alternative. The potential environmental impacts resulting from connected actions (wind energy generation and substation and transmission upgrades related to the Project) were also analyzed in the Final EIS. The Final EIS considers comments submitted on the Draft EIS, including those submitted during the public comment period that began on December 19, 2014, and ended on April 20, 2015. Late comments have been considered to the extent practicable. During the comment period, DOE held 15 public hearings in Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, and Tennessee. Approximately 950 comment documents were received from individuals, interested groups, tribal governments, and federal, state, and local agencies during the public comment period on the Draft EIS. This total includes a single copy of documents that were received as part of 50 email and letter campaigns (i.e., identical letters signed and submitted by more than one commenter). The total number of campaign documents was approximately 1,700 emails or letters. In addition to numerous comments that provided a statement of general opposition or support, the primary topics raised include, but are not limited to concern about electric and magnetic fields from the transmission line; concern about reductions in property value; concern about impacts to agricultural resources such as crop production, irrigation, and aerial spraying; concern about the use of eminent domain; and concern about visual impacts from the transmission line.

    As indicated above, DOE's purpose and need for agency action is to implement section 1222 of the EPAct. While developing the Final EIS, DOE considered the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS, the comparison of potential impacts for each resource area, and input received on the Draft EIS. Based on the information presented in the Final EIS, DOE has identified participation in the Project as its preferred alternative in the Final EIS. The Project would include the Oklahoma converter station and AC interconnection, the AC collection system, the Applicant Proposed Route for the majority of the HVDC transmission line (with the exception of route variation Region 4, Applicant Proposed Route Link 3, Variation 2), and the Arkansas converter station and AC interconnection.

    Consistent with section 1222 of the EPAct, DOE's participation would be limited to states in which Southwestern operates, namely, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and, possibly, Texas, but not Tennessee. Consequently, DOE would not participate in the portions of the Project that would be sited in Tennessee.

    Other Regulations

    Parallel with the NEPA process, DOE is evaluating Clean Line's application under section 1222 of the EPAct. This non-NEPA evaluation includes, but is not limited to, reviewing the application against statutory criteria and other factors listed in the 2010 request for proposals (75 FR 32940). An outcome of this evaluation could be a Participation Agreement between Clean Line and DOE, which would define under what conditions DOE would participate with Clean Line and, if applicable, would include any stipulations or requirements that resulted from this environmental review under NEPA. The DOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Web site (http://www.energy.gov/oe/services/electricity-policy-coordination-and-implementation/transmission-planning/section-1222-0) provides more information about the section 1222 evaluation.

    Public Reading Rooms

    Copies of the Final EIS and supporting documents are available for inspection at the following locations:

    Oklahoma • Guymon Public Library—1718 N. Oklahoma St., Guymon, OK 73942 • Beaver County Pioneer Library—201 Douglas Ave., Beaver, OK 73932 • Woodward Public Library—1500 W. Main St., Woodward, OK 73801 • Muskogee Public Library—801 W. Okmulgee Ave., Muskogee, OK 74401 • Enid & Garfield County Public Library—120 W. Maine St., Enid, OK 73701 • Buffalo Public Library—11 E. Turner St., Buffalo, OK 73834 • Fairview City Library—115 S. 6th St., Fairview, OK 73737 • Guthrie Public Library—201 N. Division St., Guthrie, OK 73044 • Stillwater Public Library—1107 S. Duck St., Stillwater, OK 74074 • Chandler Public Library—1021 Manvel Ave., Chandler, OK 74834 • Montfort and Allie B. Jones Memorial Library—111 W. 7th Ave., Bristow, OK 74010 • Bartlett-Carnegie Sapulpa Public Library—27 W. Dewey Ave., Sapulpa, OK 74066 • Cushing Public Library—215 North Steele Ave., Cushing, OK 74023 • Okmulgee Public Library—218 S. Okmulgee Ave., Okmulgee, OK 74447 • Stanley Tubbs Memorial Library—101 E. Cherokee Ave., Sallisaw, OK 74955 Arkansas • Van Buren Public Library—1409 Main St., Van Buren, AR 72956 • Pope County Library—116 E. 3rd St., Russellville, AR 72801 • Jackson County/W.A. Billingsley Memorial Library—213 Walnut St., Newport, AR 72112 • Searcy Public Library—113 E. Pleasure Ave., Searcy, AR 72143 • Marked Tree Public Library—102 Locust St., Marked Tree, AR 72365 • Franklin County Library—407 W. Market St., Ozark, AR 72949 • Johnson County Library—2 Taylor Cir., Clarksville, AR 72830 • Conway County Library—101 W. Church St., Morrilton, AR 72110 • Conway Public Library—1900 W. Tyler St., Conway, AR 72034 • Mary I. Wold Cleburne County Library—1009 W. Main St., Heber Springs, AR 72543 • Poinsett County Library—200 N. East St., Harrisburg, AR 72432 • Blytheville Public Library—200 N. 5th St., Blytheville, AR 72315 • Osceola Public Library—320 W. Hale Ave., Osceola, AR 72370 • Cross County Library—410 E. Merriman Ave., Wynne, AR 72396 Tennessee • Munford Memorial Library—1476 Munford Ave., Munford, TN 38058 Texas • Hansford County Library—122 Main St., Spearman, TX 79081 Issued in Washington, DC, on November 2, 2015. Patricia A. Hoffman, Assistant Secretary, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28574 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 5891-009] Deschutes Valley Water District; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Fishway Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Application Type: Settlement Agreement, Amendment Application, and Fish Passage Operation Plan.

    b. Project No.: 5891-009.

    c. Date Filed: October 8, 2015.

    d. Applicant: Deschutes Valley Water District (licensee).

    e. Name of Project: Opal Springs Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The project is located on the Crooked River in Jefferson County, Oregon.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r) and Rule 602 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.602.

    h. Applicant Contact: Edson Pugh, General Manager, Deschutes Valley Water District, 881 SW Culver Highway, Madras, Oregon 97741; telephone (541) 475-3849; email [email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Jennifer Ambler; telephone: (202) 502-8586; email address: [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and fishway prescriptions is 60 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. Reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission.

    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, terms and conditions and fishway prescriptions using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-5891-009.

    k. Description of Request: The licensee filed a settlement agreement, amendment application, and a fish passage operation plan for Commission approval. All three documents address the need for fish passage at the Opal Springs Project. The licensee proposes to construct upstream fish passage facilities on the east bank of the diversion dam and to modify the existing spillway to improve downstream passage. To accommodate the proposed modifications, the licensee would raise the project's normal maximum reservoir elevation by 6 feet and would replace the current flashboard system with a series of five inflatable weirs to attain the proposed higher reservoir elevation. The licensee states that the proposed changes are necessary to facilitate the reintroduction of steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents:All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “PROTEST”, “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” ” TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS;” (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions should relate to the settlement agreement, proposed amendment application, and fish passage operation plan. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28773 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC CP16-9-000 Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. PF15-12-000] Notice of Application

    Take notice that on October 22, 2015, Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin) and Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. (Maritimes) (together, the Applicants), 5400 Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas 77056-5310, jointly filed in the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to construct and operate the Atlantic Bridge Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Berk Donaldson, General Manager, Rates and Certificates, Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC and Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C., P.O. Box 1642, Houston, Texas 77251-1642 at (713) 627-4488.

    Specifically the applicants propose to: (i) Construct 6.3 miles pipeline facilities and related facilities in New York and Connecticut; (ii) modify three existing compressor stations in Connecticut resulting in the addition of 18,800 horsepower (hp) of compression; (iii) construct and operate a new compressor station in Massachusetts resulting in the addition of 7,700 hp of compression; (iv) modify six existing metering, and regulator stations (M&R) and construct a new M&R Station; and (v) to abandon certain existing facilities. The Atlantic Bridge Project will allow both Algonquin and Maritimes to provide additional firm transportation. The applicants request authorization to charge an initial incremental Atlantic Bridge Project recourse rate and related incremental fuel, and also requested a pre-determination of rolled-in rates treatment for the Project. The cost of the project will be approximately $449.8 million.

    On February 20, 2015 the Commission staff granted Columbia's request to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF15-12-000 to staff activities involved in the Project. Now, as of the filing of the October 22, 2015 application, the Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP16-9-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9), within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: November 27, 2015.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28770 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP16-10-000; Docket No. PF15-3-000; Docket No. CP16-13-000; Docket No. PF15-22-000] Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC; Equitrans, LP; Notice of Applications

    On October 23, 2015, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (Mountain Valley), having its principal place of business at 625 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1700, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-3111, filed an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations seeking: (1) A certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing Mountain Valley to construct, own, and operate the Mountain Valley Pipeline Project; (2) a blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing Mountain Valley to provide open-access interstate transportation services, with pre-granted abandonment approval; (3) a blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity under Part 157, Subpart F of the Commission's regulations for Mountain Valley to construct, operate, acquire, and abandon certain eligible facilities, and services related thereto; (4) approval for its proposed interim period rates and initial recourse rates for transportation service and for its pro forma tariff; and (5) such other authorizations or waivers as may be deemed necessary to allow for the construction to commence as proposed.

    On October 27, 2015, Equitrans, LP (Equitrans), having its principal place of business at 625 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1700, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222-3111, filed an application pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations seeking a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Equitrans Expansion Project. Equitrans also seeks authority to abandon an existing compressor station located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

    The proposals of both applicants are more fully described in the applications, which are on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filings may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding the Mountain Valley or Equitrans applications should be directed to Matthew Eggerding, Counsel, 625 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1700, Pittsburgh, PA 15222, or call (412) 553-5786, or fax (412) 553-7781, or by email [email protected]

    Mountain Valley requests authorization to construct facilities that will allow it to provide up to 2.0 million dekatherms per day of firm transportation service. Specifically, Mountain Valley proposes to construct and operate: (1) Approximately 301 miles of 42-inch diameter pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia; (2) three new compressor stations providing approximately 171,600 nominal horsepower (hp) of compression; and (3) other minor facilities.

    Equitrans requests authorization to construct, own, and operate: (1) Approximately 7.87 miles of pipeline in Allegheny, Washington, and Greene Counties, Pennsylvania and Wetzel County, West Virginia; (2) a new 31,300 nominal hp compressor station (Redhook Compressor Station) in Greene County, Pennsylvania; (3) a new interconnect in Wetzel County, West Virginia with Mountain Valley's planned pipeline system (Webster Interconnect); and (4) ancillary facilities. Equitrans also seeks authority to abandon an existing 4,800 hp compressor station in Greene County, Pennsylvania (Pratt Compressor Station) following the construction of the new Redhook Compressor Station.

    On October 31, 2014, Commission staff granted Mountain Valley's request to use the pre-filing process and assigned Docket No. PF15-3-000 to staff activities involving the Projects. Now, as of the filing of this application on October 23, 2015, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP16-10-000 as noted in the caption of this Notice. Additionally, Equitrans, LP (Equitrans) filed a related application under CP16-13-000. On April 9, 2015, Commission staff granted Equitrans request to use the pre-filing process and assigned Docket No. PF15-22-000 to staff activities involving the Projects. Now, as of the filing of Equitrans' application on October 27, 2015, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, Equitrans' proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP16-13-000.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 7 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 26, 2015.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28771 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2246-074] Yuba County Water Agency; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: Application for Temporary Variance of Minimum Flow Requirement.

    b. Project No.: 2246-074.

    c. Date Filed: October 30, 2015.

    d. Applicant: Yuba County Water Agency (licensee).

    e. Name of Project: Yuba River Project.

    f. Location: North Yuba River, Middle Yuba River, and Oregon Creek in Yuba, Nevada, and Sierra counties, CA.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Curt Aikens, General Manager, Yuba County Water Agency, 1200 F Street, Marysville, CA 95901-4740, (530) 741-5015.

    i. FERC Contact: Mr. John Aedo, (415) 369-3335, or [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests, and recommendations is December 7, 2015. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests, comments, or recommendations using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-2246-074) on any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or recommendations filed.

    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests a temporary variance of the minimum flow requirements in the lower Yuba River below Englebright Dam from December 1, 2015 through March 31, 2016, due to low reservoir storage and dry watershed conditions. License Article 33 requires that the licensee provide a minimum flow of: 600 cubic feet per second (cfs) from October 16 through December 31; 1,000 cfs from January 1-15; and 600 cfs from January 16 through March 31. In order to conserve water resources during the current drought, the licensee proposes to instead, release 550 cfs from December 1, 2015 through March 31, 2016. In addition, the licensee requests that the minimum flow compliance criteria during this period be based on a 5-day running average of average daily streamflows, with instantaneous flows never less than 90 percent of the specified 550 cfs minimum flow and never less than 550 cfs for more than 48 hours.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208- 3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which are the subject of the license surrender. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28772 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC09-104-002.

    Applicants: Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC.

    Description: Request for Reauthorization and Extension of Blanket Authorization to Acquire and Dispose of Securities Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request for Shortened Comment Period.

    Filed Date: 11/4/15.

    Accession Number: 20151104-5254.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: EC16-27-000.

    Applicants: Carousel Wind Farm, LLC.

    Description: Amendment to November 3, 2015 Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of Carousel Wind Farm, LLC.

    Filed Date: 11/4/15.

    Accession Number: 20151104-5257.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2579-003.

    Applicants: NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.

    Description: Notification of Non-Material Change in Status of NorthPoint Energy Solutions, Inc.

    Filed Date: 11/4/15.

    Accession Number: 20151104-5225.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2615-006; ER11-2335-007

    Applicants: Plum Point Energy Associates, LLC, Plum Point Services Company, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 29, 2015 Triennial MBR Filing of Plum Point Energy Associates, LLC and Plum Point Services Company, LLC.

    Filed Date: 10/23/15.

    Accession Number: 20151023-5196.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/16/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-263-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: GIA and Distribution Service Agmt Yavi Energy LLC Eastwind Project to be effective 11/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5000.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-264-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 3480, Queue No. W1-107 to be effective 10/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5050.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-265-000.

    Applicants: Exelon Generation Company, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Rate Schedule to be effective 11/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5051.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-266-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 3186, Queue No. W4-072 to be effective 12/28/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5052.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-267-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Haywood Amendment to PPA RS No. 335 to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5113.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-268-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Haywood 2nd Amended RS No. 180 to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5114.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-269-000.

    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Vista Energy Storage EP, Service Agreement No. 53, Volume 11 to be effective 11/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5147.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-270-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-11-05_SA 2863 ATC Construction Management Agreement to be effective 10/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/5/15.

    Accession Number: 20151105-5192.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28769 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9937-05-Region 2] Proposed CERCLA Section 122(h) Cost Recovery Settlements for the Power City Superfund Site, Niagara Falls, Niagara County, New York AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Region II, of two separate proposed cost recovery settlement agreements pursuant to Section 122(h) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(h), with Honeywell International Inc. and RR Donnelley and Sons Company (the “Settling Parties”), respectively, for the Power City Superfund Site (“Site”), located in Niagara Falls, Niagara County, New York. Honeywell International Inc. agrees to pay EPA $825,000 and RR Donnelley and Sons Company agrees to pay $103,200, plus interest, respectively, in reimbursement of their respective shares of EPA's past response costs paid at or in connection with the Site.

    Each settlement includes a covenant by EPA not to sue or to take administrative action against each respective Settling Party pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), with regard to the response costs related to the work at the Site enumerated in each settlement agreement. For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, EPA will receive written comments relating to the settlement. EPA will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to either or both settlements if comments received disclose facts or considerations that indicate that one or both of the proposed settlements is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. EPA's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The proposed settlements are available for public inspection at EPA Region II offices at 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. Comments should reference the Power City Superfund Site, Niagara Falls, Niagara County, New York, Index No. CERCLA-02-2015-2007 for the Honeywell International Inc. settlement agreement, and CERCLA-02-2015-2022 for the RR Donnelley and Sons Company settlement agreement. To request a copy of either or both proposed settlement agreements, please contact the EPA employee identified below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Praschak, Assistant Regional Counsel, New York/Caribbean Superfund Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway—17th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. Email: [email protected] Telephone: 212-637-3172.

    Dated: October 15, 2015. Walter Mugdan, Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28837 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0479; FRL-9937-10-Region 8] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Federal Implementation Plan for Oil and Natural Gas Well Production Facilities; Fort Berthold Indian Reservation (Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation), North Dakota AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Federal Implementation Plan for Oil and Natural Gas Well Production Facilities; Fort Berthold Indian Reservation (Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation), North Dakota” (EPA ICR No. 2478.02 OMB Control No. 2008-0001) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et se.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through April 2016. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0479 online using www.regulations.gov or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Deirdre Rothery, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Air Program, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129; telephone number: (303) 312-6431; fax number: (303) 312-6064; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding federal holidays. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: This ICR covers information collection requirements in the final Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Oil and Natural Gas Well Production Facilities; Fort Berthold Indian Reservation (Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation), North Dakota (40 CFR part 49, subpart K, §§ 49.4161 through 49.4168), herein referred to as the FBIR FIP. In general, owners or operators are required to: (1) Conduct certain monitoring; (2) keep specific records to be made available at the EPA's request; and (3) to prepare and submit an annual report (40 CFR part 49, subpart K, §§ 49.4166 through 49.4168). These records and reports are necessary for the EPA Administrator (or the tribal agency if delegated), for example, to: (1) Confirm compliance status of stationary sources; (2) identify any stationary sources not subject to the requirements and identify stationary sources subject to the regulations; and (3) ensure that the stationary source control requirements are being achieved. All information submitted to us pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to the agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of oil and natural gas facilities.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (42 U.S.C. 7414).

    Estimated number of respondents: 780 (total).

    Frequency of response: On occasion, annually.

    Total estimated burden: 29,655 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $6,503,000 (per year), includes $5,121,000 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: There is likely an increase in burden in this ICR compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB due to an anticipated adjustment in the estimated number of respondents to account for industry growth. In addition, there is likely an increase in cost in this ICR to take into account current labor rates.

    Dated: November 3, 2015. Darcy O'Connor, Acting Assistant Regional Administrator, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance, Region 8.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28836 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0504; FRL-9936-40] Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and Status Information for September 2015 AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is required under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to publish in the Federal Register a notice of receipt of a premanufacture notice (PMN); an application for a test marketing exemption (TME), both pending and/or expired; and a periodic status report on any new chemicals under EPA review and the receipt of notices of commencement (NOC) to manufacture those chemicals. This document covers the period from September 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015.

    DATES:

    Comments identified by the specific case number provided in this document, must be received on or before December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0504, and the specific PMN number or TME number for the chemical related to your comment, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information contact: Jim Rahai, IMD 7407M, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-8593; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave. Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    This action is directed to the public in general. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe the specific entities that this action may apply. Although others may be affected, this action applies directly to the submitters of the actions addressed in this document.

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

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

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

    II. What action is the agency taking?

    This document provides receipt and status reports, which cover the period from September 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and consists of the PMNs and TMEs both pending and/or expired, and the NOCs to manufacture a new chemical that the Agency has received under TSCA section 5 during this time period.

    III. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    Under TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., EPA classifies a chemical substance as either an “existing” chemical or a “new” chemical. Any chemical substance that is not on EPA's TSCA Inventory is classified as a “new chemical,” while those that are on the TSCA Inventory are classified as an “existing chemical.” For more information about the TSCA Inventory go to: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/inventory.htm.

    Anyone who plans to manufacture or import a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose is required by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with a PMN, before initiating the activity. Section 5(h)(1) of TSCA authorizes EPA to allow persons, upon application, to manufacture (includes import) or process a new chemical substance, or a chemical substance subject to a significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under TSCA section 5(a), for “test marketing” purposes, which is referred to as a test marketing exemption, or TME. For more information about the requirements applicable to a new chemical go to: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems.

    Under TSCA sections 5(d)(2) and 5(d)(3), EPA is required to publish in the Federal Register a notice of receipt of a PMN or an application for a TME and to publish in the Federal Register periodic reports on the status of new chemicals under review and the receipt of NOCs to manufacture those chemicals.

    IV. Receipt and Status Reports

    As used in each of the tables in this unit, (S) indicates that the information in the table is the specific information provided by the submitter, and (G) indicates that the information in the table is generic information because the specific information provided by the submitter was claimed as CBI.

    For the 55 PMNs received by EPA during this period, Table 1 provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI): The EPA case number assigned to the PMN; The date the PMN was received by EPA; the projected end date for EPA's review of the PMN; the submitting manufacturer/importer; the potential uses identified by the manufacturer/importer in the PMN; and the chemical identity.

    Table 1—PMNs Received From September 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015 Case No. Date
  • received
  • Projected
  • end date for
  • EPA review
  • Manufacturer/
  • importer
  • Use(s) Chemical identity
    P-15-0703 8/26/2015 11/24/2015 CBI (G) Additive in toner (G) Alkyl alkenoic acid, substituted alkyl ester, polymer with alkyl alkenoate and substituted alkyl alkenoate compd. with alkyl alkyl carbomonocyclic salt. P-15-0713 9/1/2015 11/30/2015 CBI (G) Contained use (G) Cellulose, polymer with substituted oxirane, 2-(diethylamino) ethyl ether. P-15-0714 9/1/2015 11/30/2015 Kemira (G) Paper strength additive (G) Modified polyacrylamide. P-15-0715 9/3/2015 12/2/2015 CBI (G) Additive for inks (G) Oxirane, 2-ethyl-, homopolymer, 3-(5-carboxy-1,3-dihydro-,1,3-dioxo-2H-isoindol-2-yl) alkyl ethers. P-15-0717 9/3/2015 12/2/2015 CBI (G) Adhesive additive (G) Triethoxysilylalkoxy polyalkylene glycol urethane. P-15-0718 9/3/2015 12/2/2015 CBI (G) Adhesive additive (G) Triethoxysilylalkoxy polyalkylene glycol urethane. P-15-0719 9/3/2015 12/2/2015 CBI (G) Flame retardant synergist (S) Poly (1,4-diisopropyl benzene). P-15-0720 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0721 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0722 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0723 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0724 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0725 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Polyurethane prepolymer (G) Aliphatic polyester polyol. P-15-0726 9/4/2015 12/3/2015 CBI (S) Co-polymer for use in adhesives and sealant formulations (G) Triethoxysilylalkoxy polyalkylene glycol. P-15-0728 9/9/2015 12/8/2015 TAKASAGO (S) Fragrance in household products (S) Benzenemethanol, 3-ethoxy-4-hydroxy-. P-15-0728 9/9/2015 12/8/2015 TAKASAGO (S) Fragrance in a fine fragrance (S) Benzenemethanol, 3-ethoxy-4-hydroxy-. P-15-0728 9/9/2015 12/8/2015 TAKASAGO (S) Fragrance in consumer products (S) Benzenemethanol, 3-ethoxy-4-hydroxy-. P-15-0728 9/9/2015 12/8/2015 TAKASAGO (S) Fragrance in other products (S) Benzenemethanol, 3-ethoxy-4-hydroxy-. P-15-0730 9/10/2015 12/9/2015 CBI (G) Additive for paper and paperboard (G) Amphoteric polyacrylamide. P-15-0731 9/10/2015 12/9/2015 CBI (G) Additive for paper and paperboard (G) Amphoteric polyacrylamide. P-15-0733 9/10/2015 12/9/2015 Cadence Chemical Corporation (S) Coating for glass (G) Alkane carboxylic acid, hydroxy, hydroxyalkyl-alkyl, polymer with .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-hydroxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) ether with alkyl-(hydroxyalkyl)-alkanediol (X:1), .alpha.-hydro-.omega.-hydroxypoly[oxy(alkyl-alkyldiyl)] and alkylenebis [isocyanatoalkane],-blocked. P-15-0734 9/11/2015 12/10/2015 CBI (S) Wastewater Heavy Metals Removal (G) Polymeric Sulfide. P-15-0735 9/15/2015 12/14/2015 Cray Valley USA, LLC (S) Adhesive Formulation (S) Hydrocarbons, C5-rich, polymers with (6E)-7, 11-dimethyl-3-methylene-1,6,10-dodecatriene, 2-methylbutene and methylstyrene. P-15-0735 9/15/2015 12/14/2015 Cray Valley USA, LLC (S) Rubber Formulation (S) Hydrocarbons, C5-rich, polymers with (6E)-7, 11-dimethyl-3-methylene-1,6,10-dodecatriene, 2-methylbutene and methylstyrene. P-15-0736 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 CBI (S) Industrial coating resin for wood substances (G) Castor oil, polymer with substituted alkanoic acid, substituted carbomonocycle, dialkyl substituted alkanediol and TDI, substituted alkanone-blocked. P-15-0737 9/16/2015 12/15/2015 CBI (G) Intermediate (G) Ammonium salts of phosphate methacrylate. P-15-0738 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 CBI (S) Injection molding additive to improve the physical properties of plastic parts (G) Polysiloxane-polycarbonate copolymer. P-15-0739 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 CBI (S) Component of Flexible Foam (G) Epoxy Terminated Polymer. P-15-0740 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 Allnex USA, Inc (S) Digital printing applications (G) Disubstituted alkanedioic acid, polymer with substituted carbomonocycle, dialkyl carbonate, alkanediol and (alkylimino) bis [alkanol], acetate (salt). P-15-0741 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 CBI (S) Mixture of modified urethane polymers used as a deflocculating and dispersing additive in industrial coatings (G) Mixture of Modified urethane polymers. P-15-0742 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 CBI (G) Component for tire (G) Modified Copolymer of Buta-1,3-diene and Styrene. P-15-0743 9/17/2015 12/16/2015 Eden Innovations (G) The liquid solution is an admixture that is used by the concrete industry to enhance product performance. It is mainly used to increase the concrete's abrasion resistance, and increase the compressive and split tensile strengths; see internal comments (G) Nano particle liquid concrete admixture. P-15-0744 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with boron sodium oxide (b4na2o7), hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0745 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with boron sodium oxide (b4na2o7), hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0746 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with boron sodium oxide (b4na2o7), hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0747 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with boron sodium oxide (b4na2o7), hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0748 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0749 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0750 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0751 9/18/2015 12/17/2015 3 M Company (G) Construction material (G) Naturally-occurring minerals, reaction products with hetero substituted alkyl acrylate polymer, kaolin and sodium silicate. P-15-0752 9/22/2015 12/21/2015 CBI (G) Additive, open, non-dispersive use (G) Polysiloxane, di-Me, epoxyfunctional. P-15-0753 9/22/2015 12/21/2015 CBI (G) Additive, open, non-dispersive use (G) Polyester amine adduct. P-15-0754 9/22/2015 12/21/2015 CBI (G) Additive, open, non-dispersive use (G) Polyester amine adduct. P-15-0755 9/22/2015 12/21/2015 CBI (G) Additive, open, non-dispersive use (G) Polyester amine adduct. P-15-0759 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated urethane prepolymer. P-15-0760 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated urethane prepolymer. P-15-0761 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated polyester-based urethane prepolymer. P-15-0762 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated polyester-based urethane prepolymer. P-15-0763 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated polyester-based urethane prepolymer. P-15-0764 9/24/2015 12/23/2015 CBI (G) Polyurethane prepolymer for use in cast polyurethane elastomer parts: Open, non-dispersive use (G) Isocyanate-terminated polybutadiene-based urethane polymer. P-15-0765 9/25/2015 12/24/2015 ANGUS Chemical Company (G) Chemical Absorbant (G) Tertiary Amino Polyol. P-15-0766 9/28/2015 12/27/2015 Reichhold (S) Resin for flame retardant polyesters (G) Halogenated epoxy polymer with alkeneoic acid. P-15-0767 9/29/2015 12/28/2015 Reichhold (S) Resin used for flame retardant polyester applications (G) Halogenated bisphenol a, polymer with epoxy resin and phenolic epoxy, alkeneoic acids. P-15-0768 9/29/2015 12/28/2015 Allnex USA, Inc (S) Crosslinker in the construction of an in-site encapsulation product (G) Alkanedial, polymer with alkyleneurea and alkyl-alkanediol. P-15-0769 9/30/2015 12/29/2015 LUNA, Inc (S) Component of protective coating (G) Polyurethane Silane.

    For the one TME received by EPA during this period, Table 2 provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI): The EPA case number assigned to the TME, the date the TME was received by EPA, the projected end date for EPA's review of the TME, the submitting manufacturer/importer, the potential uses identified by the manufacturer/importer in the TME, and the chemical identity.

    Table 2—TME Received From September 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015 Case No. Date
  • received
  • Projected
  • end date for
  • EPA review
  • Manufacturer/
  • importer
  • Use Chemical identity
    T-15-0017 9/21/2015 11/5/2015 NON-CBI Resin for coating formulation (S) EHTM.

    For the 25 NOCs received by EPA during this period, Table 3 provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI): The EPA case number assigned to the NOC; the date the NOC was received by EPA; the projected date of commencement provided by the submitter in the NOC; and the chemical identity.

    Table 3—NOCs Received From September 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015 Case No. Received
  • date
  • Projected
  • date of
  • commencement
  • Chemical identity
    J-15-0017 9/11/2015 8/14/2015 (G) Modified organism. P-12-0078 9/15/2015 8/26/2015 (S) 1-Octanesulfonic acid, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8-tridecafluoro-, barium salt (2:1). P-12-0437 9/3/2015 8/13/2015 (S) Quaternary ammonium compounds, bis (hydrogenated tallow alkyl) dimethyl, salts with tannins. P-13-0246 9/9/2015 8/12/2015 (G) Cobalt based polymer with fatty acids, and polyol. P-13-0309 9/24/2015 9/15/2015 (S) Alcohols, c9-11-branched, ethoxylated propoxylated. P-14-0142 9/24/2015 9/22/2015 (G) Ethoxylated Resin. P-14-0605 9/10/2015 9/10/2015 (G) Substituted cyclosiloxane. P-14-0738 9/3/2015 8/31/2015 (G) Polyalkylene ether alkyl phosphate polyurethane prepolymer. P-14-0809 9/29/2015 9/2/2015 (G) Depolymerized waste plastics. P-15-0036 9/1/2015 8/28/2015 (S) 2-Pyridinecarboxylic acid, 4,5,6-trichloro-. P-15-0152 9/24/2015 9/2/2015 (G) Urethane acrylate. P-15-0308 9/14/2015 8/31/2015 (G) Dicarboxylic acid, cycloaliphatic anhydride polymer with alkyldiol, hydroxy-[(oxoalkyl)oxy]alkyl ester. P-15-0311 9/18/2015 9/3/2015 (G) Triarylsulfonium salt with haloalkyl phosphate. P-15-0364 9/23/2015 9/13/2015 (G) Reaction mixture of copper, [29h,31h-phthalocyaninato(2-)-.kappa.n29,.kappa.n30,.kappa.n31,.kappa.n32]-, (sp-4-1)- and metal, [substituted 29h,31h-phthalocyanine-.kappa.n29,.kappa.n30,.kappa.n31,lkappa.n32]-. P-15-0365 9/2/2015 8/21/2015 (G) Alkyl alkenoic acid polymers with alkyl acrylate, alkyl methacrylate, polyether methacrylate alkyl ethers and substituted heteromonocycle, compds. with substituted alkyl alkanol. P-15-0390 9/10/2015 9/3/2015 (G) Substituted carbopolycyclic dicarboxylic acid dialkyl ester, polymer with dialkyl carbopolycyclic ester, alkanediol and carbopolycyclic bis (substituted carbomonocycle). P-15-0396 9/24/2015 9/4/2015 (G) Alkylmethacrylate, polymer with alkenylbenzene, branched alkylmethacrylate, hydroxyalkylmethacrylate and acrylic acid, t-butyl alkaneperoxoic acid ester-initiated. P-15-0410 9/18/2015 8/18/2015 (S) 1,3-Butadiene, homopolymer, hydrogenated, 2-hydroxyethyl-terminated, bis[n-[4-[(4-isocyanatophenyl)methyl]phenyl]carbamates]. P-15-0411 9/7/2015 9/3/2015 (G) Fatty acid esters with polyols polyalkyl ethers. P-15-0427 9/24/2015 8/9/2015 (G) Substituted alkylene carbomonocycle, homopolymer, substituted polyol and mono alkyl ether-blocked polyol. P-15-0456 9/4/2015 8/21/2015 (G) Amine functional epoxy, organic acid salt. P-15-0466 9/16/2015 9/11/2015 (G) Acrylic acid polymer. P-15-0467 9/18/2015 9/14/2015 (S) 2-Oxepanone, polymer with 5-amino-1,3,3-trimethylcyclohexanemethanamine, 1,2-ethanediol and 5-isocyanato-1-(isocyanatomethyl)-1,3,3-trimethylcyclohexane. P-15-0495 9/9/2015 8/30/2015 (G) Aromatic anhydride, polymer with alkane diol and alkane triol, 2-propenoate. P-15-0497 9/9/2015 8/30/2015 (G) Bisphenol an epoxy polymer with aromatic anhydride, mixed caprolactone acrylate and hydroxyethyl acrylate esters.
    Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Pamela Myrick, Acting Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28842 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9023-9] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) Filed 11/02/2015 Through 11/06/2015 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at: https://www.cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-nepa-public/action/eis/search.

    EIS No. 20150312, Draft, FRA, 00, Northeast Corridor (NEC) FUTURE Program Tier 1, Comment Period Ends: 01/30/2016, Contact: Rebecca Reyes-Alicea 212-668-2282 EIS No. 20150313, Draft, NRC, MI, Generic—License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplement 56 Regarding Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Comment Period Ends: 12/28/2015, Contact: Elaine M. Keegan 301-415-8517 EIS No. 20150314, Draft, NOAA, WA, Analyze Impacts of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Proposed 4(d) Determination under Limit 6 for Five Early Winter Steelhead Hatchery Programs in Puget Sound, Comment Period Ends: 12/28/2015, Contact: Steve Leider 360-753-4650 EIS No. 20150315, Final, BLM, CA, Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment, Review Period Ends: 12/14/2015, Contact: Vicki Campbell 916-978-4401 EIS No. 20150316, Final, DOE, OK, Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Line Project, Review Period Ends: 12/14/2015, Contact: Dr. Jane Summerson 505-845-4091 EIS No. 20150317, Final, USACE, USFS, MN, NorthMet Mining Project and Land Exchange, Review Period Ends: 12/14/2015, Contact: Douglas Bruner 651-290-5378

    The U.S. Department of Army's Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service are joint lead agencies for the above project.

    EIS No. 20150318, Final, USFS, ID, Salmon-Challis National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment, Review Period Ends: 01/04/2016, Contact: Jennifer Purvine 208-879-4162

    Amended Notices:

    EIS No. 20150278, Draft, USACE, GA, Update of the Water Control Manual for the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia and Water Supply Storage Assessment, Comment Period Ends: 01/15/2016, Contact: Lewis C. Sumner 251-694-3857

    Revision to FR Notice Published 10/09/2015; Extending Comment Period from 12/01/2015 to 01/15/2016

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Dawn Roberts, Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28890 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0634; FRL-9934-46] Cancellation of Pesticides for Non-Payment of Year 2015 Registration Maintenance Fees; Summary of Orders Issued AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the payment of an annual maintenance fee is required to keep pesticide registrations in effect. The fee due last January 15, 2015, has gone unpaid for the 236 registrations identified in this document. If the fee is not paid, the EPA Administrator may cancel these registrations by order and without a hearing; orders to cancel these registrations have been issued.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mick Yanchulis, Information Technology and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 347-0237; email address: [email protected]

    Product-specific status inquiries may be made by calling toll-free, 1-800-444-7255.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this action may be of particular interest to persons who produce or use pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0634, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Complete lists of registrations canceled for non-payment of the maintenance fee are also available for reference in the OPP Docket.

    II. Background

    Section 4(i)(5) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136a-1(i)(5)) requires that all pesticide registrants pay an annual registration maintenance fee, due by January 15 of each year, to keep their registrations in effect. This requirement applies to all registrations granted under FIFRA section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a) as well as those granted under FIFRA section 24(c) (7 U.S.C. 136v(c)) to meet special local needs. Registrations for which the fee is not paid are subject to cancellation by order and without a hearing.

    Under FIFRA, the EPA Administrator may reduce or waive maintenance fees for minor agricultural use pesticides when it is determined that the fee would be likely to cause significant impact on the availability of the pesticide for the use.

    In fiscal year 2015, maintenance fees were collected in one billing cycle. In late October of 2014, all holders of either FIFRA section 3 registrations or FIFRA section 24(c) registrations were sent lists of their active registrations, along with forms and instructions for responding. They were asked to identify which of their registrations they wished to maintain in effect, and to calculate and remit the appropriate maintenance fees. Most responses were received by the statutory deadline of January 15. A notice of intent to cancel was sent in April of 2015 to companies who did not respond and to companies who responded, but paid for less than all of their registrations. Since mailing the notices of intent to cancel, EPA has maintained a toll-free inquiry number through which the questions of affected registrants have been answered.

    In fiscal year 2015, the Agency has waived the fee for 286 minor agricultural use registrations at the request of the registrants. Maintenance fees have been paid for about 16,032 FIFRA section 3 registrations, or about 97% of the registrations on file in October 2014. Fees have been paid for about 1,912 FIFRA section 24(c) registrations, or about 86% of the total on file in October 2014. Cancellations for non-payment of the maintenance fee affect about 216 FIFRA section 3 registrations and about 20 FIFRA section 24(c) registrations.

    The cancellation orders generally permit registrants to continue to sell and distribute existing stocks of the canceled products until January 15, 2016, 1 year after the date on which the fee was due. Existing stocks already in the hands of dealers or users, however, can generally be distributed, sold, or used legally until they are exhausted. Existing stocks are defined as those stocks of a registered pesticide product which are currently in the United States and which have been packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation order.

    The exceptions to these general rules are cases where more stringent restrictions on sale, distribution, or use of the products have already been imposed, through special reviews or other Agency actions. These general provisions for disposition of stocks should serve in most cases to cushion the impact of these cancellations while the market adjusts.

    III. Listing of Registrations Canceled for Non-Payment

    Table 1 of this unit lists all of the FIFRA section 24(c) registrations, and Table 2 of this unit lists all of the FIFRA section 3 registrations which were canceled for non-payment of the 2015 maintenance fee. These registrations have been canceled by order and without hearing. Cancellation orders were sent to affected registrants via certified mail in the past several days. The Agency is unlikely to rescind cancellation of any particular registration unless the cancellation resulted from Agency error.

    Table 1—FIFRA Section 24(c) Registrations Cancelled for Non-Payment of 2015 Maintenance Fee SLN No. Product name AR-08-0012 Strada WG. CA-76-0166 Ortho Malathion 25 Wettable. CA-83-0007 Sevin Brand 80s Carbaryl Insecticide. CA-98-0015 Affirm Fire Ant Insecticide. ID-01-0015 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. LA-08-0007 IR5878 WG. MI-08-0004 Ro-Neet 6-E. MO-08-0002 Strada WG. NC-07-0004 8.5% Ethylene Oxide & Carbon Dioxide Sterilizing Gas. NE-03-0004 Echo 720 Agricultural Fungicide. NE-03-0005 Echo Zn Agricultural Fungicide. NV-13-0002 Avitrol Double Strength Whole Corn. OR-01-0022 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. OR-01-0023 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. TX-08-0007 Strada WG. TX-08-0019 Paraquat SL Herbicide. WA-01-0021 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. WA-01-0023 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. WA-02-0003 Ro-Neet 6-E Selective Herbicide. WY-08-0006 Paraquat SL Herbicide. Table 2—FIFRA Section 3 Registrations Cancelled for Non-Payment of 2015 Maintenance Fee Registration No. Product name 000003-00013 Harris Deltamax Concentrate Insecticide. 000178-00017 Stera-Sheen Sanitizer. 000178-00018 Stera-Sheen Advantage. 000322-00001 Fort Dodge Gopher Bait. 000358-00165 Nott Mole-Nots. 000577-00571 Seaguard 1083 Ablative Antifouling Paint. 000814-00004 Force's Ro-Dex. 000875-00099 Diversey Wyandotte Liquid Bacteriostatic Softener F-501. 000875-00147 Fybrfluf G+. 000875-00189 HLC-18 Quaternary Germicidal Cleaner. 001020-00001 Oakite Sanitizer No. 1. 001022-00540 IPBC RTU. 001022-00551 Chapman DCD Copper Complex. 001022-00562 Chap-Fume. 001022-00564 Sta Brite C. 001022-00580 Tuffgard 404. 001022-00581 Tuffgard 5 RTU. 001130-00019 Weiman Disinfecting Wipes. 001672-00014 Austin's Pine Oil Cleaner. 003276-20002 Al-Clor 10. 003573-00046 Mild Abrasive Formula Comet Liquid Disinfectant Cleanser. 003573-00051 Comet Cleanser with Chlorinol. 003573-00062 Cleaning Magic II. 003573-00089 Snipe. 004313-00009 Pure Pine Oil Disinfectant. 005741-00006 PD-64 Phenolic Base Cleaner & Disinfectant. 006186-00051 Ster-O-Kem No. 15. 007152-00005 Algi-Sea. 007152-00021 Seaboard Granular Stabilized Chlorine. 007152-00032 Algi-Cide. 007152-00065 Super Algi-Sea. 007152-00087 Day Tabs. 007152-00089 Slo-Tab Technical Trichloro-S-Triazinetrone. 008177-00072 Natural Wood Preservative. 008177-00073 Enterprise Clear Wood Preservative. 008281-00005 Hormex Rooting Powder No. 45. 008383-00011 Sporicidin Pro AD. 008622-00012 98-2. 008622-00013 67-33 Preplant Soil Fumigant. 008622-00015 75-25 Preplant Soil Fumigant. 008622-00039 50-50 Preplant Soil Fumigant. 008730-00065 Hercon Disrupt Micro-Flake CM. 008730-00074 Hercon Disrupt Bio-Flake CM. 008730-00079 Hercon Disrupt Bio-Dispenser BB. 008730-00080 Hercon Disrupt Bio-Dispenser DFB. 008848-00086 Black Jack Roach & Ant Killer VI. 008996-00009 Sulfur Dioxide. 009009-00016 So White Brand Ultra Bleach and Disinfectant. 009198-00231 The Andersons GC Fertilizer Bait Granules Plus 0.058% Bifenthrin. 009468-00033 Kull 41 S. 009468-00034 Kull 62 MUP. 009468-00035 Kull Tgai Glyphosate. 009768-00007 T-Chlor. 010707-00051 X-Cide 508 Industrial Microbicide. 011631-00004 Antimicrobial Alphasan RC 7000. 011631-00005 Antimicrobial Alphasan CW 12. 011694-00034 Do-It All. 011930-00005 Omego Mist Wet. 011930-00011 Pyrifos Poultry House Mist. 013283-00009 Rainbow Weed Killer. 013283-00017 Rainbow Ko Fire Ant Killer. 015297-00007 Bio-Groom Flea & Tick-14 Long Lasting Residual Spray with Lanolin. 015297-00017 Bio-Groom Flea & Tick Pyrethrin Spray. 017545-00012 R.D. 20. 019369-00002 Algaecide 30 Concentrate-L. 033906-00016 Pyridaben Technical Product. 033906-00022 Pyridaben K. 033981-00012 Sodium Hypochlorite MP 12.5%. 035138-00090 Aero General Use Insecticide. 035253-00005 BCS-Copper Fungicide. 035512-00037 Turf Pride Fertilizer + 0.67% Preemergent Weed Control. 035512-00056 Turf Pride Lawn Food with Trimec Herbicide. 035512-00061 Turf Pride Fertilizer + 1.0% Preemergent Weed Control. 036638-00036 Nomate CM Fiber. 041209-00004 Chlorine Liquified Gas. 041209-20002 Sodium Hypochlorite Solution 10% EUP. 041428-20001 Scott Chlor. 041504-20002 Borchlor 10. 042519-00034 Prosoy PPT. 043813-00013 Wocosen Technical. 043813-00027 Econea Technical. 043813-00041 Wocosen 150 EC. 043813-00042 Wocosen 15 TK. 043813-00043 Wocosen 450. 043813-00044 Wocosen 45 TK. 044446-00073 Beat-It Insect Repellent Pump Spray. 046597-00002 Q-San. 051934-00014 Cidetrak CMDA 115/30. 051934-00015 Cidetrak CMDA 185/60. 052374-00016 Chlorine. 054614-00007 Spa-Chlor. 054614-00008 Lithchlor. 054614-00009 Mini Pucks. 056212-00001 DMX-7 Mold Inhibitor. 058007-00011 Ultrathon Insect Repellent Pump 8. 058616-00005 PCT 3023. 063823-00064 Game Stop. 063838-00011 Enviro-Brom 20l. 065615-00007 Scoot Deer & Rabbit Repellent. 066171-00010 Iodis. 069061-00001 Davis Pyrethrins. 069061-00002 Sivad Davis Dip and Spray. 069361-00035 Triclo 4 Specialty Herbicide. 069361-00036 Imida 2C Insecticide. 069361-00043 Permethrin Technical. 069361-00045 Permethrin AG. 069361-00046 Repar Permethrin H&G. 069361-00047 Deltamethrin Technical. 069836-00001 Ecosharp Weed & Grass Killer. 069836-00002 Ecosharp Weed & Grass Killer Ready To Use. 070627-00011 Johnson End-Bac Liquid Disinfectant. 070627-00012 Johnson End Bac Pressurized Disinfectant Spray. 070627-00013 Johnson Envy Instant Cleaner for Washrooms. 070627-00014 Johnson Crew Bathroom Power Cleanser. 070627-00016 Johnson J-80 Sanitizer. 070627-00019 Johnson J-81 Hospital Cleaner-Germicidal. 070627-00020 Johnson Wax Liquid Envy Instant Cleaner Germicidal. 070627-00022 Virex II Ready To Use (RTU). 070627-00025 Liquid Vanish Disinfectant Toilet Bowl Cleaner. 070627-00029 Surfacide/6. 070627-00031 Absolute. 070627-00032 Johnson Envy II Instant Cleaner. 070627-00036 Easy Paks 4-Shot Disinfectant Cleaner. 070627-00048 Crew 10. 070627-00049 Crew 11. 070627-00050 Crew 12. 070950-00003 Avachem Sorbitol Octanoate (90%). 071532-00004 LG Permethrin 3.2 HG. 072112-00011 Provair PGR. 072138-00004 Xtra-Pine Cleans Disinfects* Deodorizes. 072500-00021 Mouse Hook. 072679-00005 Copper Paint No.1 Red. 072693-00004 Acephate 90 WDG. 072693-00011 Chlorpyrifos 4E. 072992-00016 Flora Patch. 074320-00001 RB-90 Jumbo Tab. 074320-00003 RB-56 Chlor. 074779-00013 Xytect 2F. 075108-00001 Red Scale Down. 075499-00003 Plant Synergists, Inc. GA3 4% Liquid Plant Growth Regulator Solution. 080203-00002 Go-Away Fabric Treatment/<Article>. 080286-00015 Splat CLM. 081117-00001 Ro-Pel Tree Squirrel, Vole, Dog, and Cat Repellent. 081390-00001 Provisiongard 23207 Rub Resistant Carton Top Coat. 082771-00001 King Pine Brand Disinfectant. 082932-00001 All-Clear. 083070-00002 Tee-1 Up WDG Fungicide. 083411-00002 Clean Field 88.8 WDG. 083451-00010 Aquate. 083518-00002 SDIC-G Dihydrate Granules. 083525-00003 Wegochlor 60. 083529-00020 Sharda Glyphosate 41 SL. 084009-00006 Malathion-5 Emulsifiable Concentrate. 084009-00007 Diamond Copper Sulphate (Bluestone). 084009-00008 Trifluralin 4EC Herbicide. 084009-00010 Atrazine 4L Herbicide. 084009-00011 Atrazine 90 Herbicide. 084009-00014 Mepiquat Chloride 4.2. 084009-00015 Bifenthrin 2EC. 084009-00016 Ethephon 6.0. 084009-00017 UCPA Simazine 4L. 084009-00018 UCPA Simazine 90DF. 084009-00019 Lambda CY 1EC. 084009-00020 Abamectin 0.15 EC. 084009-00021 Acetochlor ATZ. 084009-00022 Paraquat 3.0. 084009-00023 Tebucon 3.6F. 084009-00024 Fomesafen 2.0. 084009-00025 Propiconazole 41.8. 084214-00001 AG3+ Fiber 17%. 084214-00003 AG3+ Fiber 13%. 084542-00004 Anti-Dustmite Fibers and Fabrics. 084622-00001 Microlite. 084993-00001 Capsicum Oleoresin 300,000 SHU. 085678-00030 Iprodione 41.6SC. 085724-00004 Rimon 100EC Insecticide. 085738-00001 pH 12.6. 086004-00002 Glyphosate 2% Ready-To-Use. 086153-00003 Enclosure 4 Flowable Fungicide and Nematicide. 086313-00001 Grotek Elimaweed Weed and Grass Killer. 086374-00001 Ecopel All-Family Protection Insect Repellent Spray. 086461-00003 2,4-D Amine Manufacturing Concentrate. 086461-00004 2,4-D Ester Manufacturing Concentrate. 086461-00005 Bifenthrin 2EC. 086461-00007 2,4-D Acid Technical. 086461-00013 Bifenthrin Technical. 086834-00001 Gly-Force 1. 087203-00001 AMS Biguanide 20. 087273-00001 Pro Chlor Granules. 087290-00009 Pronamide 50W WSB Herbicide. 087290-00027 Willowood Bromacil 80DF. 087290-00028 Willowood Diuron 80DF. 087290-00029 Willowood Diuron 4SC. 087290-00031 Willowood Diuron/Bromacil 80DF. 087373-00003 Thiophanate Methyl 70W. 087373-00008 Iprodione/Thiophanate Methyl Combo. 087373-00009 Thiophanate Methyl 85EG. 087886-00001 Primeclo2. 088452-00001 Juicy Roots. 088498-00001 Willowood Bromacil Technical. 088529-00001 Willowood Diuron Technical. 088602-00001 Prodigy Fipronil Technical. 088633-00001 Copper Sulfate Pentahydrate Technical. 088633-00002 Delcup L. 088710-00001 Abluere Disinfectant Spray. 088779-00001 CU Fusion Csp. 088801-00001 Ceresus IM. 088911-00001 Liquid Copper Sulfate. 088966-00002 Vetguard for Dogs. 089530-00001 Sani-Du. 089550-00001 Tip-Top Cl02. 089711-00001 Zap'em All Purpose Insect Spray. 089816-00004 Mebrom 67-33. 089816-00005 Mebrom 75-25. 089816-00006 Mebrom 50-50. 089816-00007 Mebrom 80-20. IV. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    The effective date of cancellation will be the date of the cancellation order. The orders effecting these requested cancellations will generally permit a registrant to sell or distribute existing stocks until January 15, 2016, 1 year after the date on which the fee was due.

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products which are currently in the United States and which have been packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation order. Unless the provisions of an earlier order apply, existing stocks already in the hands of dealers or users can be distributed, sold, or used legally until they are exhausted, provided that such further sale and use comply with the EPA-approved label and labeling of the affected product. Exception to these general rules will be made in specific cases when more stringent restrictions on sale, distribution, or use of the products or their ingredients have already been imposed, as in a special review action, or where the Agency has identified significant potential risk concerns associated with a particular chemical.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: October 27, 2015. Jack E. Housenger, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28855 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL 9936-93-OA] Meetings of the Small Community Advisory Subcommittee and the Local Government Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The Small Community Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS) will meet via teleconference on Wednesday, December 9, 2015, 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. (EDT). The Subcommittee will discuss small community issues related to environmental issues which effect small communities. These issues include: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) remand issue, decentralized wastewater treatment, capacity building and other environmental issues effecting small, rural and disadvantaged communities. This is an open meeting. Individuals or organizations wishing to address the Subcommittee meeting will be allowed a maximum of five minutes to present their point of view on issues pertaining to small communities.

    The Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) will meet via teleconference on Wednesday, December 9, 2015, 12:30 p.m. to 1:45 p.m. (EDT). The Committee meeting will focus on reviewing recommendations of the LGAC's subcommittee and workgroups. These issues include: MS4 remand issue, toxic algal blooms and other water issues, including decentralized wastewater treatment, pharmaceutical proposed rule, waste generator proposed rule, brownfields, capacity building and sustainability, Animas River toxic spill issues, and Plan EJ 2020.

    These are open meetings, and all interested persons are invited to participate. The Subcommittee will hear comments from the public between 11:15 a.m. and 11:25 a.m. on Wednesday, December 9, 2015, and the Committee will hear comments from the public between 1:00 p.m. and 1:15 p.m. on Wednesday, December 9, 2015. Individuals or organizations wishing to address the Subcommittee or the Committee will be allowed a maximum of five minutes to present their point of view. Also, written comments should be submitted electronically to [email protected] Please contact the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the number listed below to schedule a time on the agenda. Time will be allotted on a first-come first-serve basis, and the total period for comments may be extended if the number of requests for appearances requires it.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee and Local Government Advisory Committee meetings will meet via teleconference. Meeting summaries will be available after the meeting online at www.epa.gov/ocir/scas_lgac/lgac_index.htm and can be obtained by written request to the DFO.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) and Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS), contact Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 564-3115 or email at [email protected]

    Information on Services for those with Disabilities: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Frances Eargle at (202) 564-3115 or email at [email protected]. To request accommodation of a disability, please request it 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: October 27, 2015. Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer, Local Government Advisory Committee.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28765 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-xxxx] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before January 12, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control No.: 3060-xxxx.

    Title: Media Bureau Incentive Auction Implementation, Sections 73.3700(b)(4)(i)-(ii), (c), (d), (h)(5)-(6) and (g)(4).

    Form No.: N/A.

    Type of Review: New information collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not for profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,950 respondents and 174,219 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .004-15 hours.

    Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirement; on occasion reporting requirement; recordkeeping requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 316, 319, 325(b), 332, 336(f), 338, 339, 340, 399b, 403, 534, 535, 1404, 1452, and 1454.

    Total Annual Burden: 24,932 hours.

    Annual Cost Burden: $1,214,400.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection.

    Needs and Uses: The collection is being made to the Office of Management (OMB) for the approval of information collection requirements contained in the Commission's Incentive Auction Order, FCC 14-50, which adopted rules for holding an Incentive Auction, as required by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act). The information gathered in this collection will be used to require broadcasters transitioning to a new station following the Incentive Auction, or going off the air as a result of a winning bid in the Incentive Auction, to notify their viewers of the date the station will terminate operations on its pre-Auction channel by running public service announcements, and allow these broadcasters to inform MVPDs of their relinquishment or change in channel. It requires channel sharing agreements enter into by television broadcast licensees to contain certain provisions regarding access to facilities, financial obligations and to define each party's rights and responsibilities; the Commission will review each channel sharing agreement to ensure it comports with general rules and policies regarding license agreements. The provisions contained in this collection also require wireless licensees to notify low-power television and TV translator stations commence wireless operations and the likelihood of receiving harmful interference from the low power TV or TV translator station to such operations within the wireless licensee's licensed geographic service area. Finally, it requires license relinquishment stations and channel sharing stations to comply with notification and cancellation procedures as they terminate operations on their pre-Auction channel.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28776 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0844] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before January 12, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0844.

    Title: Carriage of the Transmissions of Television Broadcast Stations: Section 76.56(a), Carriage of qualified noncommercial educational stations; Section 76.57, Channel positioning; Section 76.61(a)(1)-(2), Disputes concerning carriage; Section 76.64, Retransmission consent.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 835 respondents and 14,040 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 to 5 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in Sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 325, 336, 614 and 615 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Total Annual Burden: 14,840 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: Under Section 614 of the Communications Act and the implementing rules adopted by the Commission, commercial TV broadcast stations are entitled to assert mandatory carriage rights on cable systems located within the station's television market. Under Section 325(b) of the Communications Act, commercial TV broadcast stations are entitled to negotiate with local cable systems for carriage of their signal pursuant to retransmission consent agreements in lieu of asserting must carry rights. This system is therefore referred to as “Must- Carry and Retransmission Consent.” Under Section 615 of the Communications Act, noncommercial educational (NCE) stations are also entitled to assert mandatory carriage rights on cable systems located within the station's market; however, noncommercial TV broadcast stations are not entitled to retransmission consent. The information collection requirements for this collection are contained in 47 CFR Sections 76.56(a), 76.57, 76.61(a)(1)-(2) and 76.64.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28777 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    DATE AND TIME:

    Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. and Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 1:30 p.m.

    PLACE:

    999 E Street NW., Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    This Meeting Will Be Closed to the Public.

    ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109.

    Internal personnel rules and internal rules and practices.

    Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action.

    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceeding, or arbitration.

    PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Shelley E. Garr, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29173 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

    Federal Maritime Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    November 17, 2015; 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    800 N. Capitol Street NW., First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    The first portion of the meeting will be held in Open Session; the second in Closed Session.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Open Session

    1. Briefing on the Danish Maritime Forum.

    Closed Session

    1. Briefing on FMC-Transpacific Stabilization Agreement Semi-Annual Meeting.

    2. Ocean Common Carrier and Marine Terminal Operator Agreements Subject to the 1984 Shipping Act—Regulatory Review.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Karen V. Gregory, Secretary, (202) 523-5725.

    Karen V. Gregory, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29161 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [Docket No. OP-1521] Supervisory Rating System for Financial Market Infrastructures AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) granted the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) enhanced authority to supervise “financial market utilities” that are designated as systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight Council (financial market utilities are defined to comprise a subset of the entities that, outside the United States, are generally called “financial market infrastructures” or “FMIs”). In addition, the Board may have direct supervisory authority over other FMIs subject to its jurisdiction. The Board and, under delegated authority, the Federal Reserve Banks (collectively, the “Federal Reserve”) propose to use the ORSOM (Organization; Risk Management; Settlement; Operational Risk and Information Technology (IT); and Market Support, Access, and Transparency) rating system in reviews of FMIs. The Board is seeking comment on this system for rating FMIs. The Federal Reserve anticipates implementing the ORSOM rating system in 2016.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    When submitting comments, please consider submitting your comments by email or fax because paper mail in the Washington, DC area and at the Board may be subject to delay. You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. OP-1521, by any of the following methods:

    Agency Web site: http://www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments at http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include docket number in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 452-3819 or (202) 452-3102.

    Mail: Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20551.

    All public comments are available from the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as submitted, unless modified for technical reasons. Accordingly, comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper form in Room 3515, 1801 K Street NW. (between 18th and 19th Street NW.), Washington, DC 20006 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stuart Sperry, Deputy Associate Director (202) 452-2832 or Kristopher Natoli, Sr. Financial Services Analyst (202) 452-3227, Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems; Evan H. Winerman, Counsel (202) 872-7578, Legal Division; for users of Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact (202) 263-4869.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    FMIs are multilateral systems that transfer, clear, settle, or record payments, securities, derivatives, or other financial transactions among participants or between participants and the FMI operator. FMIs include payment systems, central securities depositories (“CSDs”), securities settlement systems (“SSSs”), central counterparties (“CCPs”), and trade repositories (“TRs”). FMIs can strengthen the markets that they serve and play a critical role in fostering financial stability. If not properly managed, however, they can pose significant risks to the financial system and be a potential source of contagion, particularly in periods of market stress. For example, improperly managed FMIs can be sources of financial shocks or channels through which shocks are transmitted across domestic and international financial markets.

    The Federal Reserve supervises certain FMIs that provide payment, clearing, and settlement services for critical U.S. financial markets. Specifically, under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Federal Reserve is the “Supervisory Agency” for certain “designated financial market utilities” (“DFMUs”).1 These DFMUs are subject to risk-management standards set out in Regulation HH.2 In addition, the Federal Reserve may have supervisory authority over FMIs that are operated by state member banks, Edge or agreement corporations, or bank holding companies. Furthermore, the Board supervises FMIs that are operated by the Federal Reserve Banks, such as the Fedwire Funds Service.3 These latter two categories of FMIs are expected to meet the risk-management standards set out in the Board's Payment System Risk (“PSR”) policy.4 The risk management standards set out in both Regulation HH and the PSR policy are based on the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (“PFMI”).5

    1 The term “financial market utility” (“FMU”) is defined in Title VIII as “any person that manages or operates a multilateral system for the purpose of transferring, clearing, or settling payments, securities, or other financial transactions among financial institutions or between financial institutions and the person” (12 U.S.C. 5462(6)). FMUs are a subset of FMIs; for example, trade repositories are excluded from the definition of a FMU. Pursuant to section 804 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“Council”) is required to designate those FMUs that the Council determines are, or are likely to become, systemically important. Such a designation by the Council makes an FMU subject to the supervisory framework set out in Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act.

    The term “Supervisory Agency” is defined in Title VIII as the “Federal agency that has primary jurisdiction over a designated financial market utility under Federal banking, securities, or commodity futures laws” (12 U.S.C. 5462(8)). Currently, the Board is the Supervisory Agency for two DFMUs: (i) The Clearing House Payments Company, L.L.C., on the basis of its role as operator of the Clearing House Interbank Payments System (CHIPS), and (ii) CLS Bank International (CLS).

    2 12 CFR 234.3 (2014).

    3See Sections 11(a)(1) and 11(j) of the Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. 248(a)(1) and 248(j).

    4 The Board's PSR policy is available at http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/files/psr_policy.pdf.

    5 The PFMI, published by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (now the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures) and the Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities Commissions in April 2012, is widely recognized as the most relevant set of international risk-management standards for payment, clearing, and settlement systems.

    The ORSOM (Organization; Risk Management; Settlement; Operational Risk and IT; and Market Support, Access, and Transparency) rating system is a supervisory tool that the Federal Reserve will use to provide a consistent internal framework for discussing FMI assessments across the Federal Reserve's FMI portfolio. The ORSOM rating system will be applied to DFMUs for which the Board is the Supervisory Agency pursuant to Title VIII, other DFMUs over which the Board has supervisory authority because they are members of the Federal Reserve System, and FMIs that are operated by a Federal Reserve Bank.6 The Federal Reserve will convey the annual rating to a DFMU's management and board of directors. The rating system is designed to link supervisory assessments and messages to the regulations and guidance that form the foundation of the supervisory program, such as Regulation HH and the PSR policy.

    6 At present, the first group includes CLS and CHIPS, the second group includes the Depository Trust Company, and the third group includes Fedwire Funds Service and Fedwire Securities Service.

    The Federal Reserve is requesting public comment on all aspects of the FMI rating system.

    Proposed Text of the Supervisory Rating System for FMIs Introduction

    Under the ORSOM rating system for FMIs, the Federal Reserve develops a rating for each of the ORSOM categories and rolls those category ratings into an overall composite rating. The rating system is designed to (1) be clearly tied to relevant Federal Reserve regulations and guidance, (2) facilitate a clear and logical discussion of the FMI's condition with the FMI's management and board of directors, (3) be easily understood and used by both supervisors and FMIs, (4) be flexible, (5) facilitate comprehensive and consistent assessments across the Federal Reserve's FMI portfolio, and (6) promote financial stability by ensuring that systemically important FMIs understand and are held to the Federal Reserve's rigorous risk-management standards. Importantly, the rating system is designed to allow for supervisory judgment and discretion, and should not be viewed as establishing a formula for determining an FMI's rating. Each of the assigned ratings, including the composite rating, should reflect supervisory judgment about the importance of the individual categories and issues as they pertain to the FMI. Relevant provisions of Regulation HH and the PSR policy, which are reflected in each rating category, help to organize and structure ratings for each category. The criticality of categories and issues, however, may differ among FMIs because of factors such as their differing services, risk profiles, and operational and organizational structures. An FMI's rating should also take into account the FMI's responsiveness to supervisory concerns and the sustainability of any measures that the FMI has implemented to address those concerns, both in terms of long-term viability and demonstrated effectiveness.

    Categories

    The ORSOM rating system consists of the following five categories, which were selected to highlight broadly the risk management issues that FMIs face, to guide supervisory examinations, and to provide a structure for organizing assessment letters:

    • Organization • Risk Management • Settlement • Operational Risk and IT • Market Support, Access, and Transparency

    Analysis of the issues considered under each category should be consistent with Regulation HH, the PSR policy, and relevant guidance, such as supervision and regulation (SR) letters and guidance of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC). The categories' order is not a reflection of their relative importance. The weight prescribed to either a category or a category's components is a matter of supervisory judgment and expertise, and may differ among FMIs. In addition, supervisory staff's assessment of an FMI should take into account the categories' interrelationships and the FMI's entire risk management framework, and should integrate knowledge derived from all available sources, including examination work, continuous monitoring efforts, and other relevant sources (for example, the Regulation HH advance notice process for designated financial market utilities (“DFMUs”) and lessons learned from market events). Finally, an FMI's category rating should reflect consideration of the sustainability of any remediation measures that the FMI has implemented to address supervisory concerns, both in terms of the measures' demonstrated effectiveness and long-term viability.

    Organization

    The foundations of an FMI's risk management framework are its management and governance structures, which include the board of directors' and management's authority, responsibilities, and reporting. The Organization category evaluates the FMI's overarching objectives, and the ability of the FMI's board and management to implement them. This category also considers the relationships among the FMI's stakeholders and their influence on the FMI's business strategy. Further, analysis under this category considers the independence and effectiveness of the FMI's internal audit function and its ability to inform the board and management about the robustness of the FMI's risk management and control processes. As a result, the Organization category contains two subcomponents, Board and Management Oversight, and Internal Audit. The FMI's assessment under these subcomponents is reflected in a single category rating.7

    7 The Board and Management Oversight and the Internal Audit subcomponents are not individually rated; they represent matters examiners should consider when assigning the Organization category rating. Depending on the issues at the FMI, examiners should use their judgment in weighting each of these subcomponents in their assessment of the Organization category overall.

    Board and Management Oversight

    The Board and Management Oversight subcomponent addresses the organization and conduct of the FMI's board of directors and senior management. It assesses the structure and effectiveness of the FMI's legal and compliance risk monitoring and management framework. This rating evaluates how effectively the board of directors and senior management guide and manage the FMI, and ensure that the FMI operates in a safe and sound manner; specific considerations in this regard include management's responsiveness to supervisory concerns. This rating component also evaluates the board's effectiveness at establishing the FMI's objectives, strategy, and risk tolerances, and management's effectiveness at ensuring that the FMI's activities are consistent with them. Specific considerations in this regard include the board's effectiveness in setting strategic objectives, developing a risk-management framework, creating clear and responsive corporate governance structures, and establishing corporate risk tolerances. This rating also evaluates the effectiveness of the FMI's governance program for risk models and its use of independent validation mechanisms to validate the FMI's model methodologies and output.

    Relevant statutes, regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(1)-(3) (excluding (a)(2)(iv)(I)) • Regulations implementing the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) 8

    8 The BSA is codified at 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq., 12 U.S.C. 1829b, and 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959. Federal Reserve supervised institutions that are subject to the BSA include state member banks (Regulation H, 12 CFR part 208), bank holding companies (Regulation Y, 12 CFR part 225), Edge and agreement corporations, and foreign banking organizations operating in the United States (Regulation K, 12 CFR part 211). The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network has published regulations implementing the BSA at 31 CFR chapter X.

    • PSR policy: Legal Basis (PFMI 1), Governance (PFMI 2, excluding references to internal audit), Framework for Comprehensive Management of Risks (PFMI 3, excluding references to internal audit) Internal Audit

    The Internal Audit subcomponent reflects the ability and independence of the FMI's internal audit function to assess risk and to inform the board and management. An FMI should have an effective internal audit function with sufficient resources and independence from management to provide a rigorous and unbiased assessment of the FMI's risk appetite and risk exposure, including financial and operational risk, as well as the effectiveness of risk management and controls. The Internal Audit subcomponent assesses the internal audit function's day-to-day management, including its annual risk assessment, audit program, quality of work papers, quality assurance, planning and reporting, and training.9

    9 The Internal Audit subcomponent does not assess the board's effectiveness at establishing and overseeing an internal audit function at the FMI; that is assessed in the Board and Management Oversight subcomponent.

    Relevant regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(2)(iv)(I) • Audit guidance (for example, Institute of Internal Auditors, FFIEC, SR Letters, Bank for International Settlements, and ISACA) • PSR policy: Governance (PFMI 2, as it pertains to internal audit), Framework for Comprehensive Management of Risks (PFMI 3, as it pertains to internal audit), Operational Risk (PFMI 17, as it pertains to internal audit) Risk Management

    The Risk Management category evaluates the effectiveness of the FMI's risk management, including the availability to the FMI of acceptable financial resources to contain and manage losses and liquidity pressures, and the FMI's ability to meet its obligations in the event of a participant's default. Further, the rating assesses the FMI's ability to implement a recovery or orderly wind-down of its operations and the viability of its capital plan. The rating also considers the FMI's ability and practices in safeguarding its own assets and those of its participants, and the FMI's ability to ensure those assets are accessible at all times with minimum losses. In addition, the Risk Management rating assesses the FMI's awareness of, and control over, the risk that its participants' customers and other FMIs indirectly introduce.

    Relevant regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(4)-(7), (14)-(16), (19)-(20) • PSR policy: Credit risk (PFMI 4), Collateral (PFMI 5), Margin (PFMI 6), Liquidity risk (PFMI 7), Segregation and Portability (PFMI 14), General Business Risk (PFMI 15), Custody and Investment Risks (PFMI 16), Tiered Participation Arrangements (PFMI 19), and FMI Links (PFMI 20) Settlement

    Final settlement is the irrevocable and unconditional transfer of an asset or financial instrument, or the discharge of an obligation by an FMI or its participants in accordance with the underlying contract's terms. Settlement risk, which is the risk that settlement will not take place as expected, is a key risk that FMIs and their participants face. Failure to settle a transaction on time and in full can create liquidity and credit problems for an FMI or its participants, with potential systemic implications. This is especially true during a participant default event. Well-designed, clearly articulated, and effectively disclosed default management rules are imperative to maintaining market confidence in the event of a participant default.

    The Settlement category focuses on the risk-management tools that an FMI uses to ensure settlement takes place as expected, and the default management procedures the FMI follows in the event of a participant default. The rating assesses the FMI's ability to ensure settlement finality, and its ability to manage the risks related to money settlements and the delivery of physical assets. The rating also includes CSDs' abilities to safeguard the rights of securities issuers and holders, and to ensure the integrity of the securities issues that they hold in custody. Finally, this category includes assessing the adequacy of the FMI's participant default rules and procedures, and the steps that the FMI takes to ensure that it is prepared to execute them.

    Relevant regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(8)-(13) • PSR Policy: Settlement Finality (PFMI 8), Money Settlements (PFMI 9), Physical Deliveries (PFMI 10), Central Securities Depositories (PFMI 11), Exchange-of-Value Settlement Systems (PFMI 12), and Participant Default Rules and Procedures (PFMI 13) Operational Risk and IT

    FMIs face significant operational and IT risks in their provision of post-trade services. Operational risk entails deficiencies in information systems, internal processes, and personnel, or disruptions from external events that may result in the reduction, deterioration, or breakdown of services provided by an FMI. FMIs are expected to ensure that, through the development of appropriate systems, controls, and procedures, their operations and IT infrastructure are reliable, secure, and have adequately scalable capacity. FMIs' information security practices and controls are expected to be strong and effective. FMIs should protect and secure the systems, media, and facilities that process and maintain information vital to their operations in the context of a continually changing threat landscape. Further, FMIs are expected to have robust business continuity plans that allow for the rapid recovery and timely resumption of critical operations. FMIs are expected to test and update these plans regularly.

    The Operational Risk and IT category focuses on the FMI's operational reliability and its ability to support the safe and continuous functioning of the markets that it serves. This category considers the FMI's operational risk management framework and IT infrastructure, including the adequacy of the FMI's operational risk management governance, internal controls, physical and information security, data management, capacity management, interdependency monitoring programs, and business continuity plan.

    Relevant regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(17) • PSR Policy: Operational Risk (PFMI 17, excluding references to internal audit) • Interagency Paper on Sound Practices to Strengthen Resilience of the U.S. Financial System • FFIEC and relevant industry guidance Market Support, Access, and Transparency

    FMIs should be designed and operated to meet the needs of their participants and the markets that they serve. Access to FMIs' services is often necessary for meaningful participation in the markets that they serve, and FMIs' efficiency and effectiveness can influence financial activity and market structure. Also, access to, and understanding of, relevant information about an FMI fosters confidence among participants and the public.

    The Market Support, Access, and Transparency category focuses on the FMI's efforts to support the markets they serve, to ensure fair and open access to, and use of, its services, and to provide participants with the information necessary to understand the risks and responsibilities attendant with their participation in the FMI. Analysis under this category should consider, among other things, an FMI's participation requirements; its member monitoring framework; the efficiency with which it consumes resources in providing its services; and the adequacy of its disclosure of its rules, procedures, and relevant information about its operations.

    Relevant regulations and guidance include—

    • Regulation HH § 234.3(a)(18), (21)-(23) • PSR policy: Access and Participation Requirements (PFMI 18), Efficiency and Effectiveness (PFMI 21), Communication Procedures and Standards (PFMI 22), Disclosure of Rules, Key Procedures, and Market Data (PFMI 23), Disclosure of Market Data by Trade Repositories (PFMI 24) Category Ratings

    FMIs receive a rating for each ORSOM category based on an evaluation of the FMI against that category's key attributes as described herein. Regulation HH prescribes risk-management standards for DFMUs for which the Board or another federal banking agency is the Supervisory Agency under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act. Other FMIs subject to Federal Reserve supervision—for example, FMIs that are members of the Federal Reserve System—are subject to the Federal Reserve Act and the expectations set out in the Federal Reserve's PSR policy. An FMI's rating should be consistent with the expectations set forth in Regulation HH, the PSR policy, and supervisory guidance, such as SR letters and FFIEC guidance.10 The rating scale ranges from 1 to 5, with a rating of 1 indicating the strongest performance and, therefore, the level of least supervisory concern. A rating of 5 indicates the most critically deficient level of performance and, therefore, the greatest level of supervisory concern. Importantly, an FMI's category rating should reflect supervisory judgment and expertise as to the materiality of any issues identified based on the resulting effect those issues have on the safety and soundness of the FMI, the growth of systemic risks, or the stability of the broader financial system.11

    10 In any event where Regulation HH's provisions establish standards different from those articulated in supervisory guidance, designated FMUs subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Reserve under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act should adhere to, and will be assessed against, Regulation HH's provisions.

    11See Dodd-Frank Act Section 805, 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).

    A common set of definitions for each rating level is applied across all of the ORSOM categories. These general definitions focus on broad supervisory interests, which are—

    • The extent to which any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are issues of concern for the safety and soundness of the FMI, the growth of systemic risks, or the stability of the broader financial system.

    • the immediacy with which the FMI is expected to remedy the issues, and the extent to which close supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts, or supervisory action,12 is needed.

    12 FMIs are responsible for remedying supervisory concerns. “Supervisory action” in this context refers to the range of supervisory measures that relevant laws authorize the Federal Reserve to take. These include issuing a Matter Requiring Attention (MRA) or Matter Requiring Immediate Attention (MRIA); entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the FMI; or more severe enforcement action measures as authorized under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act or other relevant laws.

    Supervisors may identify multiple issues with differing degrees of concern. In such cases, supervisors typically should assign the category a rating that reflects their judgment of the severity of the most serious concerns identified. For example, if a payment system meets the majority of supervisory standards for the Settlement category, but only partly observes the risk management standard pertaining to settlement finality, then, because of that issue's criticality to a payment system, the payment system's rating for the Settlement category should reflect its weaknesses with regard to that key risk management standard.

    1: Strong

    • Any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are not issues of concern with respect to the category's supervisory guidance. For example, the FMI observes all of the key risk management standards in Regulation HH or the PSR policy, as applicable.13

    13 The applicable standards are based on the Federal Reserve's source of authority. DFMUs for which the Federal Reserve acts as the Supervisory Agency under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to Regulation HH. Other FMIs subject to Federal Reserve supervision, for example, by virtue of being members of the Federal Reserve System, are subject to the Federal Reserve Act and the expectations set out in the Federal Reserve's PSR policy. The applicable standards in both Regulation HH and the PSR policy are based on the PFMI. The Board has stated that it does not intend for differences in language in the two documents to lead to inconsistent policy results.

    • The FMI can correct any issues identified in the normal course of business and dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is not needed.

    2: Satisfactory

    • Any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are not presently issues of concern with respect to the category's supervisory guidance, but may become so if left uncorrected. For example, the FMI either observes or broadly observes the key risk management standards in Regulation HH or the PSR policy, as applicable.

    • The FMI can correct any issues identified in the normal course of business, but limited, dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts may be needed.

    3: Fair

    • One or more issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are issues of concern with respect to the category's supervisory guidance. For example, the FMI, at a minimum, broadly observes most of the key risk management standards in Regulation HH or the PSR policy, as applicable, but may partly observe some of them.

    • The FMI should correct one or more of the issues identified within a defined period, dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is likely needed, and supervisory action may be needed.

    4: Marginal

    • One or more issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are substantial issues of concern with respect to the category's supervisory guidance. For example, the FMI only partly observes many key risk management standards in Regulation HH or the PSR policy, as applicable, and may not observe some of them.

    • The FMI should correct one or more of the issues identified immediately, dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is needed, and supervisory action is likely.

    5: Unsatisfactory

    • One or more issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are critical and immediate issues of concern with respect to the category's supervisory guidance. For example, the FMI does not observe key risk management standards in Regulation HH or the PSR policy, as applicable.

    • The FMI must correct one or more of the issues identified immediately, and immediate supervisory action and monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts are needed.

    Composite Ratings

    An FMI's composite rating indicates whether and to what extent the issues identified, in the aggregate, give cause for supervisory concern. Like the category ratings, an FMI's composite rating ranges from 1 to 5. A rating of 1 indicates the strongest performance and, therefore, the level of least supervisory concern, and a rating of 5 indicates a critically deficient level of performance and, therefore, the greatest level of supervisory concern. Importantly, an FMI's composite rating should not represent a formulaic combination of its category ratings, such as an arithmetic average. Rather, the ratings definitions provide factors that supervisory staff should consider when viewing an FMI's performance against the totality of supervisory guidance.

    1: Strong

    • As reflected in its category ratings, an FMI with a composite rating of 1 is substantially sound in every respect and does not give cause for supervisory concern.

    • Any issues identified do not reflect a pattern of risk management or governance failures and, either individually or cumulatively, are not issues of concern for the safety and efficiency of either the FMI or the markets that it supports.

    • The FMI can correct any issues identified in the normal course of business and dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is not needed.

    2: Satisfactory

    • As reflected in its category ratings, an FMI with a composite rating of 2 is sound in most respects and does not presently give cause for supervisory concern.

    • Any issues identified do not reflect a pattern of risk management or governance failures and, either individually or cumulatively, are not presently issues of concern for the safety and efficiency of either the FMI or the markets that it supports, but may become so if left uncorrected.

    • The FMI can correct any issues identified in the normal course of business, but limited, dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts may be needed.

    3: Fair

    • As reflected in its category ratings, an FMI with a composite rating of 3 is sound in many respects, but gives cause for some supervisory concern, and supervisory action may be necessary.

    • Any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are issues of concern for the safety and efficiency of either the FMI or the markets that it supports.

    • The FMI should correct one or more of the issues of concern identified within a defined period and dedicated monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is likely needed.

    4: Marginal

    • As reflected in its category ratings, an FMI with a composite rating of 4 may be unsound in one or more respects and gives cause for substantial supervisory concern, which will likely lead to supervisory action.

    • Any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are substantial issues of concern for the safety and efficiency of either the FMI or the markets that it supports.

    • The FMI should correct one or more of the issues of concern identified immediately and dedicated supervisory monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts is needed.

    5: Unsatisfactory

    • As reflected in its category ratings, an FMI with a composite rating of 5 is considered critically unsound and gives cause for substantial and immediate supervisory concern and action.

    • Any issues identified, either individually or cumulatively, are critical and immediate issues of concern for the safety and efficiency of either the FMI or the markets that it supports.

    • The FMI must correct one or more of the issues of concern identified immediately, and immediate supervisory action and monitoring of the FMI's remediation efforts are needed.

    Administrative Law Matters Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to address concerns related to the effects of agency rules on small entities, and the Board is sensitive to the impact its rules may impose on small entities. The RFA requires agencies either to provide an initial regulatory flexibility analysis with a proposed rule or to certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Board has reviewed the proposed text of the ORSOM rating system. In this case, the rating system would apply to FMUs that are designated by the Council under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act as systemically important, for which the Board is the Supervisory Agency, and which are subject to Regulation HH. In addition, the supervisory rating system for FMIs will apply to other FMIs over which the Board has supervisory authority, including FMIs operated by the Federal Reserve Banks, pursuant to the PSR policy. Based on current information, none of the designated FMIs are “small entities” for purposes of the RFA, and so, the proposed rating system likely would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The following Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, however, has been prepared in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, based on current information. The Board will, if necessary, conduct a final regulatory flexibility analysis after consideration of comments received during the public comment period. The Board requests public comments on all aspects of this analysis.

    1. Statement of the need for, objectives of, and legal basis for, the proposed rule. The Board is proposing the ORSOM rating system in order to carry out its supervisory responsibilities regarding FMIs under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act and other applicable law, as discussed above. As noted above, the ORSOM rating system is a supervisory tool that the Federal Reserve will use to provide a consistent internal framework for discussing FMI assessments across the Federal Reserve's FMI portfolio, including DFMUs for which the Board is the Supervisory Agency pursuant to Title VIII, other DFMUs that are members of the Federal Reserve System, and FMIs that are operated by a Federal Reserve Bank. The Federal Reserve will convey the annual ORSOM rating to a DFMU's management and board of directors. The rating system is designed to link supervisory assessments and messages to the regulations and guidance that form the foundation of the supervisory program, such as Regulation HH and the PSR policy.

    2. Small entities affected by the proposed rule. Pursuant to regulations issued by the Small Business Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201), a “small entity” includes an establishment engaged in (i) financial transaction processing, reserve and liquidity services, and/or clearinghouse services with an average annual revenue of $35.5 million or less (NAICS code 522320); (ii) securities and/or commodity exchange activities with an average annual revenue of $35.5 million or less (NAICS code 523210); and (iii) trust, fiduciary, and/or custody activities with an average annual revenue of $35.5 million or less (NAICS code 523991). Based on current information, the Board does not believe that any of the FMIs that would be subject to the ORSOM rating system would be “small entities” pursuant to the SBA regulation.

    3. Projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements. The proposed ORSOM rating system does not impose any reporting or recordkeeping requirements on the relevant FMIs. Although the rating system reflects risk management standards set out in Regulation HH, the PSR policy, and other applicable rules and guidance, the ORSOM rating system itself does not impose any compliance requirements.

    4. Identification of duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules. The Board does not believe that any Federal rules duplicate, overlap with, or conflict with the proposed rating system.

    5. Significant alternatives. The Board is not aware of any significant alternatives to the proposed rating system that accomplish the objectives of reflecting the relevant risk management standards in the supervisory rating system and that minimize any significant economic impact on small entities.

    Competitive Impact Analysis

    As a matter of policy, the Board subjects all operational and legal changes that could have a substantial effect on payment system participants to a competitive impact analysis, even if competitive effects are not apparent on the face of the proposal. Pursuant to this policy, the Board assesses whether the proposed changes “would have a direct and material adverse effect on the ability of other service providers to compete effectively with the Federal Reserve in providing similar services” and whether any such adverse effect “was due to legal differences or due to a dominant market position deriving from such legal differences.” If, as a result of this analysis, the Board identifies an adverse effect on the ability to compete, the Board then assesses whether the associated benefits—such as improvements to payment system efficiency or integrity—can be achieved while minimizing the adverse effect on competition.

    Designated FMUs are subject to the supervisory framework established under Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act. At least one currently designated FMU that is subject to Regulation HH competes with a similar service provided by the Reserve Banks. Under the Federal Reserve Act, the Board has general supervisory authority over the Reserve Banks, including the Reserve Banks' provision of payment and settlement services (“Federal Reserve priced services”). This general supervisory authority is much more extensive in scope than the authority provided under Title VIII over designated FMUs. In practice, Board oversight of the Reserve Banks goes well beyond the typical supervisory framework for private-sector entities, including the framework provided by Title VIII.

    The Board is committed to applying risk-management standards to the Reserve Banks' Fedwire Funds Service and Fedwire Securities Service that are at least as stringent as the applicable Regulation HH standards applied to DFMUs that provide similar services. The risk management and transparency expectations in part I of the PSR policy, which applies to the Federal Reserve priced services, are consistent with those in Regulation HH. The proposed ORSOM rating system will be applied equally to both designated FMUs subject to Regulation HH and to the other FMIs subject to the Board's authority, including the Federal Reserve priced services, subject to the PSR policy. Therefore, the Board does not believe the proposed rating system will have any direct and material adverse effect on the ability of other service providers to compete with the Reserve Banks.

    Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR part 1320, appendix A.1), the Board may not conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The Board has reviewed this rating system proposal and determined that it contains no collections of information. As the Board considers the public comments received and finalizes the proposal, the Board will reevaluate this PRA determination.

    By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 9, 2015. Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28821 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0073; Docket 2015-0055; Sequence 29] Information Collection; Advance Payments AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning advance payments.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0073 Advance Payments by any of the following methods:

    • Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number. Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0073, Advance Payments”. Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0073, Advance Payments” on your attached document.

    • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0073, Advance Payments.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0073, Advance Payments, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change tohttp://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Kathy Hopkins, Procurement Analyst, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, GSA 202-969-7226 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Purpose

    Advance payments may be authorized under Federal contracts and subcontracts. Advance payments are the least preferred method of contract financing and require special determinations by the agency head or designee. Specific financial information about the contractor is required before determinations by the agency head or designee can be made, and before such payments can be authorized (see FAR 32.4 and 52.232-12). The information is used to determine if advance payments should be provided to the contractor.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 500.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 500.

    Hours per Response: 6.

    Total Burden Hours: 3,000.

    C. Public Comments

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

    Obtaining Copies Of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0073, Advance Payments, in all correspondence.

    Edward Loeb, Acting Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28803 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0053; Docket 2015-0055; Sequence 25] Information Collection; Permits, Authorities, or Franchises AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension of a previously existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning permits, authorities, or franchises for regulated transportation.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number. Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises”. Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises” on your attached document.

    • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite “Information Collection 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises,” in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, GSA 202-208-4949 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Purpose

    The FAR requires insertion of clause 52.247-2, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, when regulated transportation is involved. The clause requires the contractor to indicate whether it has the proper authorization from the Federal Highway Administration (or other cognizant regulatory body) to move material. The contractor may be required to provide copies of the authorization before moving material under the contract. The clause also requires the contractor, at its expense, to obtain and maintain any permits, franchises, licenses, and other authorities issued by State and local governments. The Government may request to review the documents to ensure that the contractor has complied with all regulatory requirements.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 255.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 255.

    Hours per Response: 0.5.

    Total Burden Hours: 128.

    C. Public Comments

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

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405 telephone 202-501-4755.

    Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0053, Permits, Authorities, or Franchises, in all correspondence.

    Edward Loeb, Acting Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28802 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS-9093-N] Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Quarterly Listing of Program Issuances—July through September 2015 AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This quarterly notice lists CMS manual instructions, substantive and interpretive regulations, and other Federal Register notices that were published from July through September 2015, relating to the Medicare and Medicaid programs and other programs administered by CMS.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    It is possible that an interested party may need specific information and not be able to determine from the listed information whether the issuance or regulation would fulfill that need. Consequently, we are providing contact persons to answer general questions concerning each of the addenda published in this notice.

    EN13NO15.002 I. Background

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is responsible for administering the Medicare and Medicaid programs and coordination and oversight of private health insurance. Administration and oversight of these programs involves the following: (1) Furnishing information to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, health care providers, and the public; and (2) maintaining effective communications with CMS regional offices, state governments, state Medicaid agencies, state survey agencies, various providers of health care, all Medicare contractors that process claims and pay bills, National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), health insurers, and other stakeholders. To implement the various statutes on which the programs are based, we issue regulations under the authority granted to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under sections 1102, 1871, 1902, and related provisions of the Social Security Act (the Act) and Public Health Service Act. We also issue various manuals, memoranda, and statements necessary to administer and oversee the programs efficiently.

    Section 1871(c) of the Act requires that we publish a list of all Medicare manual instructions, interpretive rules, statements of policy, and guidelines of general applicability not issued as regulations at least every 3 months in the Federal Register.

    II. Format for the Quarterly Issuance Notices

    This quarterly notice provides only the specific updates that have occurred in the 3-month period along with a hyperlink to the full listing that is available on the CMS Web site or the appropriate data registries that are used as our resources. This is the most current up-to-date information and will be available earlier than we publish our quarterly notice. We believe the Web site list provides more timely access for beneficiaries, providers, and suppliers. We also believe the Web site offers a more convenient tool for the public to find the full list of qualified providers for these specific services and offers more flexibility and “real time” accessibility. In addition, many of the Web sites have listservs; that is, the public can subscribe and receive immediate notification of any updates to the Web site. These listservs avoid the need to check the Web site, as notification of updates is automatic and sent to the subscriber as they occur. If assessing a Web site proves to be difficult, the contact person listed can provide information.

    III. How to Use the Notice

    This notice is organized into 15 addenda so that a reader may access the subjects published during the quarter covered by the notice to determine whether any are of particular interest. We expect this notice to be used in concert with previously published notices. Those unfamiliar with a description of our Medicare manuals should view the manuals at http://www.cms.gov/manuals.

    Dated: November 6, 2015. Kathleen Cantwell, Director, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs. BILLING CODE 4120-01-P EN13NO15.003 EN13NO15.004 EN13NO15.005 EN13NO15.006 EN13NO15.007 EN13NO15.008 EN13NO15.009 EN13NO15.010 EN13NO15.011 EN13NO15.012 EN13NO15.013
    [FR Doc. 2015-28870 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES).

    OMB No.: 0970-0151.

    Description: The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is proposing to collect data for a new round of the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES). Featuring a new “Core Plus” study design, FACES will provide data on a set of key indicators, including information for performance measures. The design allows for more rapid and frequent data reporting (Core studies) and serves as a vehicle for studying more complex issues and topics in greater detail and with increased efficiency (Plus studies).

    The FACES Core study will assess the school readiness skills of Head Start children, survey their parents, and ask their Head Start teachers to rate children's social and emotional skills. In addition, FACES will include observations in Head Start classrooms, and program director, center director, and teacher surveys. FACES Plus studies include additional survey content of policy or programmatic interest, and may include additional programs or respondents beyond those participating in the Core FACES study.

    Previous notices provided the opportunity for public comment on the proposed Head Start program recruitment and center selection process (FR V.78, pg. 75569 12/12/2013; FR V.79, pg. 8461 02/12/2014), the child-level data collection in fall 2014 and spring 2015(FR V. 79, pg. 11445 02/28/2014; FR V. 79; pg. 27620 5/14/2014), the program- and classroom-level spring 2015 data collection activities (FR v.79; pg. 73077 12/09/2014), and the American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (AI/AN FACES) child-level data collection activities in fall 2015 and spring 2016 (FR V. 80, pg. 30250 08/07/2015). This 30-day notice describes the planned additional data collection activities for AI/AN FACES in spring 2016, including surveys with parents, teachers, program directors, and center directors.

    AI/AN FACES spring 2016 data collection includes site visits to 37 centers in 22 Head Start programs. As in fall 2015, parents of sampled children will complete surveys on the Web or by telephone (or in person if needed) about their children, activities family members engage in with their children, and family and household background characteristics. Head Start teachers, program directors, and center directors will complete surveys about the Head Start classroom or program and their own background using the Web or paper-and-pencil forms.

    The purpose of the Core data collection is to support the 2007 reauthorization of the Head Start program (Pub. L. 110-134), which calls for periodic assessments of Head Start's quality and effectiveness. As additional information collection activities are fully developed, in a manner consistent with the description provided in the 60-day notice (79 FR 11445) and prior to use, we will submit these materials for a 30-day public comment period under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Respondents: Parents of Head Start children, Head Start teachers and Head Start staff.

    Annual Burden Estimates—Current Information Collection Request Instrument Total
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Number
  • of responses
  • per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • hour per
  • response
  • Estimated
  • annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • Head Start core parent survey for plus study (AI/AN FACES Spring 2016) 800 267 1 0.50 134 Head Start core teacher survey for plus study (AI/AN FACES) 80 27 1 0.58 16 Head Start program director core survey for plus study (AI/AN FACES) 22 7 1 0.33 2 Head Start center director core survey for plus study (AI/AN FACES) 37 12 1 0.33 4 Total 156

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: OPRE Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected].

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Fax: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, ACF Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28815 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: State Self-Assessment Review and Report.

    OMB No.: 0970-0223.

    Description: Section 454(15)(A) of the Social Security Act, as amended by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, requires each State to annually assess the performance of its child support enforcement program in accordance with standards specified by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and to provide a report of the findings to the Secretary. This information is required to determine if States are complying with Federal child support mandates and providing the best services possible. The report is also intended to be used as a management tool to help States evaluate their programs and assess performance.

    Respondents: State Child Support Enforcement Agencies or the Department/Agency/Bureau responsible for Child Support Enforcement in each State.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    Self-assessment report 54 1 4 216 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 216

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Fax: 202-395-7285, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28820 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0920] Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food” has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On September 17, 2015, the Agency submitted a proposed collection of information entitled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food” to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0751. The approval expires on October 31, 2018. A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is available on the Internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28790 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0049] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the collection of information associated with the reporting of harmful and potentially harmful constituents in tobacco products and tobacco smoke under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0049 for the information collection request entitled “Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted onhttp://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (OMB Control Number 0910-0732)—Extension

    On June 22, 2009, the President signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-31) into law. This law amended the FD&C Act and granted FDA authority to regulate the manufacture, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect public health generally and to reduce tobacco use by minors. Section 904(a)(3) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387d(a)(3)) required each tobacco product manufacturer or importer, or an agent, to begin reporting to FDA no later than June 22, 2012, “all constituents, including smoke constituents, identified by [FDA] as harmful or potentially harmful to health in each tobacco product, and as applicable in the smoke of each tobacco product.” Reports must be by the brand and by quantity in each brand and subbrand. Section 904(c)(1) of the FD&C Act states that manufacturers of tobacco products not on the market as of June 22, 2009, must also provide information reportable under section 904(a)(3) at least 90 days prior to introducing the product into interstate commerce.

    FDA has taken several steps to identify harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) to be reported under sections 904(a)(3) and (c)(1) of the FD&C Act, including issuing a guidance discussing FDA's current thinking on the meaning of the term “harmful and potentially harmful constituent” in the context of implementing the HPHC list requirement under section 904(e) of the FD&C Act (76 FR 5387, January 31, 2011). The guidance is available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ucm241339.htm. In addition, in the Federal Register of April 3, 2012 (77 FR 20034), FDA published a notice (the HPHC list notice) announcing the established list of HPHCs as required by section 904(e) of the FD&C Act and describing the criteria we used in identifying the HPHCs for the established list. Previously, FDA sought comment on both the criteria that would be used to identify HPHCs for the established list and a list of chemicals and chemical compounds that met the proposed criteria.

    The purpose of the information collection is to collect statutorily mandated information regarding HPHCs in tobacco products and tobacco smoke, by quantity in each brand and subbrand.

    To facilitate the submission of HPHC information, FDA has developed Forms 3787a, 3787b, and 3787c in both paper and electronic formats. Manufacturers or importers, or their agents, may submit information either electronically or in paper format. The FDA eSubmitter tool provides electronic forms to streamline the data entry and submission process for reporting HPHCs. Users of eSubmitter may populate an FDA-created Excel file and import data into eSubmitter. Whether respondents decide to submit reports electronically or on paper, each form provides instructions for completing and submitting HPHC information to FDA. The forms contain fields for company information, product information, and HPHC information. Respondents finished reporting initial HPHC information under section 904(a)(3) in 2012, and this collection of information is in connection with the reporting requirements under section 904(c)(1) of the FD&C Act for tobacco products introduced into interstate commerce after June 22, 2009.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Information collected Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    Reporting for Section 904(c)(1) Products 1. Reporting of Manufacturer Company and Product Information by Completing Submission Forms Cigarette 78 0.79 62 1.82 113 Roll-Your-Own 39 0.21 8 0.43 3 Smokeless 52 0.21 11 0.63 7 Total 123 2. Testing of HPHC Quantities in Products Cigarette Filler 78 0.79 62 9.42 584 Roll-Your-Own 39 0.21 8 9.42 75 Smokeless 52 0.21 11 12.06 133 Total 792 3. Testing of HPHC Quantities in Mainstream Smoke Cigarette: International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Regimen 78 0.79 62 23.64 1,466 Cigarette: Health Canada Regimen 78 0.79 62 23.64 1,466 Total 2,932 Total Section 904(c)(1) Reporting Burden Hours 3,847 1 There are no capital costs or operating costs associated with this collection of information.

    Table 1 contains estimates for new product information received annually under section 904(c)(1) of the FD&C Act. Manufacturers must report HPHC information under section 904(c)(1) of the FD&C Act at least 90 days prior to delivery for introduction into interstate commerce. The total annual burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 3,847 hours. The burden estimate for this collection of information includes the time it will take to test the products and prepare the HPHC report.

    Table 1 indicates that 169 respondents will submit HPHC reports when new products enter the market. Section 1 of the table addresses the time required for manufacturers to report their company information. We estimate that the time to report HPHC information is no more than 1.82 hours for cigarettes, 0.42 hours for roll-your-own, and 0.63 hours for smokeless tobacco products for each response regardless of whether the paper or electronic form (Form FDA 3787) is used. (The estimated times to report smokeless tobacco products (0.63 hour) and roll-your-own tobacco products (0.43 hour) are lower than the estimated reporting time for cigarette products because fewer HPHCs are normally reported for these two types of products. The total annual burden for reporting company and product information is 123 hours.

    Section 2 of the table addresses the time required for manufacturers to test quantities of HPHCs in their products. The burden hour estimates include the time needed to test the tobacco products, draft testing reports, and draft the report for FDA. For cigarette filler, smokeless, and roll-your-own products, we estimate the burden to be 792 annual burden hours. The burden for each product type reflects our estimate of the time to test the tobacco products (i.e., carry out laboratory work).

    In addition to addressing the time required to report information and test quantities of HPHCs in tobacco products, section 3 of table 1 addresses the time required for manufacturers to test quantities of HPHCs in cigarette smoke. The burden estimates include testing the tobacco products, drafting testing reports, and drafting the report for FDA. We estimate the annualized burden for this section to be 2,932 hours. The annual burden reflects our estimate to test the tobacco products (i.e., carry out laboratory work). The burden estimate assumes that manufacturers report HPHC quantities in cigarette mainstream smoke according to the two smoking regimens described in the table.

    The estimated total annual burden for the reporting of HPHC under section 904(c)(1) of the FD&C Act is 3,847 hours. We do not believe there are any capital costs associated with this collection.

    Dated: November 6, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28787 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-1630] Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker—Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker—Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis.” This guidance provides a qualified context of use (COU) for Galactomannan detection in serum and/or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid as the sole microbiological criterion to classify patients as having probable invasive Aspergillosis (IA) for enrollment in clinical trials. This guidance also describes the experimental conditions and constraints for which this biomarker is qualified through the CDER Biomarker Qualification Program. This biomarker can be used by drug developers for the qualified COU in submissions of investigational new drug applications (INDs), new drug applications (NDAs), and biologics license applications (BLAs) without the relevant CDER review group reconsidering and reconfirming the suitability of the biomarker.

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the guidance by January 12, 2016

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comment as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2013-D-1630 for “Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker—Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted onhttp://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marianne Noone, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (Office of Translational Sciences, Immediate Office), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 21, Rm. 4528, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-2600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker—Galactomannan in Studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis.” In the Federal Register of October 27, 2014 (79 FR 63921), FDA announced the availability of a draft guidance entitled “Draft Guidance on Qualification of Biomarker—Galactomannan in studies of Treatments of Invasive Aspergillosis.” The Agency received one comment during the public comment period which was supportive of the qualification of this biomarker. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance issued in October 2014.

    This guidance provides qualification recommendations for the use of Galactomannan detection in serum and/or BAL fluid as the sole microbiological criterion to classify patients with hematologic malignancies and recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants and who also have radiologic evidence suggestive of invasive fungal infection (Ref. 1) as having probable IA for enrollment in clinical trials.

    Specifically, this guidance provides the COU for which this biomarker is qualified through the CDER Biomarker Qualification Program. Qualification of this biomarker for this specific COU represents the conclusion that analytically valid measurements of the biomarker can be relied on to have a specific use and interpretable meaning. This biomarker can be used by drug developers for the qualified COU in submission of INDs, NDAs, and BLAs without the relevant CDER review group reconsidering and reconfirming the suitability of the biomarker. “Qualification” means that the use of this biomarker in the specific COU is not limited to a single, specific drug development program. Making the qualification recommendations widely known and available for use by drug developers will contribute to drug innovation, thus supporting public health.

    Innovative and improved Drug Development Tools (DDTs) can help streamline the drug development process, improve the chances for clinical trial success, and yield more information about a treatment and/or disease. DDTs include, but are not limited to, biomarkers, clinical outcome assessments, and animal models. Refer to DDTs Qualification Programs athttp://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/default.htm for additional information.

    In the Federal Register of January 7, 2014 (79 FR 831), FDA announced the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Qualification Process for Drug Development Tools” that described the process that would be used to qualify DDTs and to make new DDT qualification recommendations available on FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm. The current guidance is an attachment to that final guidance.

    CDER has initiated this formal qualification process to work with developers of these biomarker DDTs to guide them as they refine and evaluate DDTs for use in the regulatory context. Once qualified, biomarker DDTs will be publicly available for use in any drug development program for the qualified COU. As described in the January 2014 guidance, biomarker DDTs should be developed and reviewed using this process. For more information on FDA's DDTs Qualification Programs, refer to the following Web page: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/default.htm.

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the Agency's current thinking for the use of Galactomannan detection in serum and/or BAL fluid as the sole microbiological criterion to classify patients as having probable IA for enrollment in clinical trials. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    II. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR 312.30, 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5), and 21 CFR 314.126(b)(6) have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0014.

    III. Electronic Access

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

    IV. Reference

    The following reference is on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; it is also available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov.

    1. De Pauw, B., T. J. Walsh, J. P. Donnelly, et al., “Revised Definitions of Invasive Fungal Disease from European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, 46:12, pp. 1813-1821, 2008. Dated: November 4, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28804 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0922] Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals” has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On September 17, 2015, the Agency submitted a proposed collection of information entitled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals” to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0789. The approval expires on October 31, 2018. A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is available on the Internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28789 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0564] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Dietary Supplement Labeling Requirements and Recommendations Under the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0642. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Dietary Supplement Labeling Requirements and Recommendations Under the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act—(OMB Control Number 0910-0642)-Extension

    In 2006, the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act (the DSNDCPA) amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) with respect to serious adverse event reporting for dietary supplements and nonprescription drugs marketed without an approved application. The DSNDCPA also amended the FD&C Act to add section 403(y) (21 U.S.C. 343(y)), which requires the label of a dietary supplement marketed in the United States to include a domestic address or domestic telephone number through which the product's manufacturer, packer or distributor may receive a report of a serious adverse event associated with the dietary supplement.

    In the Federal Register of September 1, 2009 (74 FR 45221), we announced the availability of a guidance document entitled, “Guidance for Industry: Questions and Answers Regarding the Labeling of Dietary Supplements as Required by the Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act.” The guidance document contains questions and answers related to the labeling requirements in section 403(y) of the FD&C Act and provides guidance to industry on the use of an explanatory statement before the domestic address or telephone number. The guidance document provides our interpretation of the labeling requirements for section 403(y) of the FD&C Act and our views on the information that should be included on the label. We believe that the guidance will enable persons to meet the criteria for labeling that are established in section 403(y) of the FD&C Act.

    In the Federal Register of August 24, 2015 (80 FR 51278), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1 Activity Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • disclosures per
  • respondent
  • Total annual disclosures Average
  • burden per disclosure
  • Total hours
    Domestic address or phone number labeling requirement (21 U.S.C. 343(y)) 1,700 3.27 5,560 0.2 1,112 FDA recommendation for label statement explaining purpose of domestic address or phone number 1,700 3.27 5,560 0.2 1,112 Total 2,224 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    The labeling requirements of section 403(y) of the FD&C Act became effective on December 22, 2007, although we exercised enforcement discretion until September 30, 2010, to enable all firms to meet the labeling requirements for dietary supplements. At this time, therefore, we expect that all labels required to include the domestic address or telephone number issued in section 403(y) have been revised accordingly. Thus our current burden estimate for this information collection applies only to new product labels.

    In row 1 of Table 1 we estimate the total annual hourly burden necessary to comply with the requirement under section 403(y) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 343(y)) to be 1,112 hours. Using historical A.C. Nielson Sales Scanner Data, we estimate the number of dietary supplement SKUs for which product sales are greater than zero to be 55,600. Assuming that the flow of new products is 10 percent per year, then each year approximately 5,560 new dietary supplement products are projected to enter the market. Estimating that there are 1,700 dietary supplement manufacturers, re-packagers, re-labelers, and holders of dietary supplements subject to the information collection requirement (using the figure 1,460 as provided in our final rule of June 25, 2007 (72 FR 34752) on the Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations for Dietary Supplements, and factoring for a two percent annual growth rate), we calculate an annual disclosure burden of 3.27 disclosures (labels) per firm. Last, we expect that firms prepare the required labeling for their products in a manner that takes into account at one time all information required to be disclosed and therefore believe that less than 0.2 hours (12 minutes) per product label would be expended to fulfill this requirement.

    In row 2 of Table 1 we estimate the total burden associated with the recommendation to include an explanatory statement on dietary supplement product labels letting consumers know the purpose of the domestic address or telephone number to be 1,112 hours. Based upon our knowledge of food and dietary supplement labeling, we estimate it would require less than 0.2 hours (12 minutes) per product label to include such a statement.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28788 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Decision To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees From the Battelle King Avenue Site in Columbus, Ohio, To Be Included in the Special Exposure Cohort AGENCY:

    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    NIOSH gives notice of a decision to evaluate a petition to designate a class of employees from the Battelle King Avenue site in Columbus, Ohio, to be included in the Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226-1938, Telephone 877-222-7570. Information requests can also be submitted by email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority:

    42 CFR 83.9-83.12.

    Pursuant to 42 CFR 83.12, the initial proposed definition for the class being evaluated, subject to revision as warranted by the evaluation, is as follows:

    Facility: Battelle King Avenue.

    Location: Columbus, Ohio.

    Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All Atomic Weapons Employees who worked at the facility owned by the Battelle Laboratories at the King Avenue site in Columbus, Ohio, during the period from July 1, 1956 through December 31, 1970, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the Special Exposure Cohort.

    Period of Employment: July 1, 1956 through December 31, 1970.

    John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28905 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Advisory Committee to the Director, National Institutes of Health.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Advisory Committee to the Director, National Institutes of Health.

    Date: December 10-11, 2015.

    Time: December 10, 2015, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: NIH Director's report and ACD Working Group reports.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, 6th Floor, Conference Room 6C6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Time: December 11, 2015, 9:00 a.m. to Adjournment

    Agenda: IC Director reports and any other committee business.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, 6th Floor, Conference Room 6C6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892

    Contact Person: Gretchen Wood, Staff Assistant, National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director, One Center Drive, Building 1, Room 126, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-4272, [email protected].

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://acd.od.nih.gov, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.14, Intramural Research Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 93.232, Loan Repayment Program for Research Generally; 93.39, Academic Research Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan Repayment Program; 93.187, Undergraduate Scholarship Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 6, 2015. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28797 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute On Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; U54 Review.

    Date: December 3, 2015.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jeannette L. Johnson, Ph.D., National Institutes on Aging, National Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7705, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 5, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28798 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2015-0961] Recreational Boating Safety—2016 Nonprofit Organization Grants AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard requests public comments on whether it should modify or move forward with its tentative list of topics on which it would invite applications for Fiscal Year 2016 grants to nonprofit organizations. These grants are intended to promote recreational boating safety.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted to the online docket via http://www.regulations.gov, or reach the Docket Management Facility, on or before 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2014-0911 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information about this document call or email Carlin Hertz, Nonprofit Grants Coordinator; 202-372-1060, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation and Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments or related material on this notice, and we may modify our tentative list of topics for Fiscal Year 2016 accordingly. The Coast Guard does not anticipate another FR Notice to discuss any of the comments received but your input will be considered in the development of the 2016 Nonprofit Organization Grants. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this notice, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

    Discussion

    Chapter 131 of Title 46, U.S. Code, requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to maintain a national recreational boating safety program, and gives the Secretary certain regulatory authority to implement that program. The Secretary has delegated that authority to the Coast Guard.1 Chapter 131 mandates annual allocations of funds to State boating safety programs, and allows the Coast Guard to allocate up to 5% of the total amount of those funds to the national boating safety programs undertaken by national nonprofit public service organizations.2 These allocations are made pursuant to statutory guidelines that prescribe the purposes for which allocated funds may be used.3 The Coast Guard annually evaluates the statutory guidelines to determine how they can best be met in the coming fiscal year.

    1 DHS Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(92.i).

    2 46 U.S.C. 13104(c).

    3 46 U.S.C. 13107(b).

    For Fiscal Year 2016, the Coast Guard has tentatively determined that it will invite national nonprofit public service organizations to apply for grant allocations in the following “areas of interest” we have identified as well as other topics.

    1. Conduct Elements of a Year-Round Safe Boating Campaign. This area of interest would conduct national campaigns throughout the year that are coordinated with other safety initiatives and media events, and would—

    • Align with the National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan, particularly Objective 2: Boating Safety Outreach;

    • Target specific boating safety topics and specific boater market segments;

    • Reach boaters at the local level;

    • Educate boaters about the consequences of drinking alcohol, taking drugs, or other irresponsible behavior on the water;

    • Educate boaters about reporting boating accidents;

    • Stress the importance of wearing life jackets;

    • Educate boaters on the “New Life Jacket Standards,” as published by the Coast Guard;

    • Educate boaters on propeller strike dangers and avoidance, particularly emphasizing the use of engine cut-off switch (lanyards and electronic devices);

    • Stress the importance of boater safety training; and

    • Emphasize that boat operators are responsible for their own safety and that of their passengers.

    2. Outreach and Awareness Conference. This area of interest would use a single national conference to focus on the topics discussed under the first area of interest, in support of the National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan's Objective 2—Boating Safety Outreach. Conference organizers must focus on professional development opportunities for conference participants while making every effort to ensure affordability to gain maximum attendance. The conference must provide opportunities for grant recipients, as appropriate, to present results of completed grant projects and on plans for using new Coast Guard grants. Three to six months after the conference, the organizers must survey participants on the long term impacts of the conference and include survey results in their final report.

    3. Standardize Statutes and Regulations. This area of interest would foster measurable standardization and reciprocity among State boating safety statutes and regulations and how they are administered and enforced, especially with respect to accident reporting, boater education, and life jacket wear requirements. Hands-on coordination of state efforts and the establishment of cooperative environments where state officials can discuss issues regarding this topic are encouraged. This standardization should be compatible with other State boating safety efforts and promote RBS program effectiveness, the use of Coast Guard-recognized boater education programs, and improved administration of Coast Guard-approved vessel numbering and accident reporting systems. A further desired outcome of this area of interest is an updated comprehensive guide to State recreational boating safety laws and regulations.

    4. Accident Investigations Seminars. This area of interest would develop Coast Guard-approved curriculum and materials for seminars for Federal and State recreational boating accident investigators in support of the National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan's Objective 9—Boating Accident Reporting. The curriculum must cover the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 6102 and 33 CFR parts 173 subpart C, part 174 subparts C & D (in particular the accident-reporting system administration requirements of 33 CFR 174.103), and part 179. Between four and eight 60 student regional seminars are desired, as well as between two and four advanced courses at an appropriate location designed to garner maximum participation at the lowest cost. Three 20-student regional train-the-trainer seminars would also be required with seminar locations agreed to with the Coast Guard. Each seminar would reserve at least four places for Coast Guard marine investigators to be assigned by the Coast Guard. Each regional seminar must cover an overview of recreational boat accident investigations, witness interviews, collision dynamics, evidence collection and preservation, diagramming, and report writing with an emphasis on adherence to definitions and detail in the accident narrative, with particular focus on human factor causal elements. The advanced seminars must include instruction in the investigation of video-simulated accidents with actual recreational boats used as training aids.

    5. Life Jacket Wear Rate Study. This area of interest would provide alternatives to achieving reliable estimates of nationwide recreational boater life jacket wear rates. This estimate will directly address the National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan's Strategy 4.1—Track and Evaluate Life Jacket Wear Rates. Plans presented should lay out the advantages and disadvantages and projected costs of an annual, biannual, and every three years study. Plans can include the use of paid or volunteer observers, and must be based on actual observation of a representative sample of boaters on high-use lakes, rivers, and bays, ideally conducted in different locations at different times of the year to accurately capture the impact of the seasonal nature of boating. Methods for developing estimates must be replicable and must be able to collect data by number, type, length, operation, and activity of boats and by boater age and gender.

    6. Voluntary Manufacturing Standards Development. This area of interest would develop and carry out a program to promote the formulation of technically sound voluntary standards for building recreational boats and associated equipment such as electronics. Development of these standards will address the National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan's Strategy 7.3—Manufacturer Outreach. The standards must help reduce accidents in which stability, speed, operator inattention, and navigation lights are factors. For example, standards could be developed for labeling flying-bridge capacity or horsepower rating, or for minimizing operator distraction, or for determining the effects of underwater or decorative lighting.

    7. Targeted Boating Safety Knowledge and Skills Awareness Training. This area of interest would build a sustainable network of training providers to target traditionally underrepresented groups in boating. The program should have structured, engaging, in-depth opportunities for learning basic boating safety and for practicing on-the-water boating safety skill. The curriculum used must be based on appropriate elements of the national skills standards being promulgated through the ANSI (or other comparable) process and available currently in draft form, and must compliment the national knowledge standards. This effort must support Objectives 2 and 3 of the National Recreational Boating Safety Program Strategic Plan—Boating Safety Outreach and Advanced and/or On the Water, Skills Based Boating Education.

    8. “Boating Under the Influence(BUI) Detection and Enforcement Courses. This area of interest would develop and conduct train-the-trainer and BUI detection and enforcement training courses for State and local marine patrol officers, Coast Guard boarding officers, and others. The goal of the training would be to give students the knowledge and skills they need to deter recreational boater alcohol use and alcohol-related accidents.

    Additionally, the area of interest would support the execution of a focused national outreach effort to highlight the dangers of BUI through education and enforcement. This outreach effort would be targeted to run during a specified time frame during a time of high boating participation to achieve maximum exposure. These courses and outreach actions will directly address National Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Plan Strategy 6.2, Train marine law enforcement officers in Boating Under the Influence and Strategy 6.3, Expand nationwide use of the validated Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST).

    9. Mediatoolbox”. This area of interest would develop a “toolbox” of methods and strategies to assist entities in carrying out media and other awareness campaigns related to pertinent boating safety messaging including, but not limited to, Boating Under the Influence (BUI), life jacket wear, accident reporting, and boating safety education. Any “toolbox” developed should include the use of social media and other innovative techniques to be used in a prevention campaign and should build on currently available boating safety messaging. This initiative directly supports Objective 2: Boating Safety Outreach.

    This notice is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: November 4, 2015. Verne B. Gifford, Captain, Coast Guard, Director of Inspections and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29139 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Test To Collect Biometric Information at the Otay Mesa Port-of-Entry AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    General notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intends to conduct a test to collect biometric information at the Otay Mesa, California land border port-of-entry from certain aliens entering and departing the United States. During this test, CBP will also collect biographic data from all travelers departing the United States at the Otay Mesa port-of-entry. This notice describes the scope of the test, its purpose, how it will be implemented, the persons covered, the duration of the test, and privacy considerations.

    DATES:

    This test will begin no earlier than December 7, 2015 and will end on or before June 30, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Edward Fluhr, Assistant Director, Entry/Exit Transformation Office, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, by phone at (202) 344-2377 or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) Program in accordance with several federal statutory mandates requiring DHS to create an integrated, automated biometric entry and exit system that records the arrival and departure of aliens; compares the biometric data of aliens to verify their identity; and authenticates travel documents presented by such aliens through the comparison of biometric identifiers. Under US-VISIT, certain aliens, as described below, may be required to provide certain biometric information (digital fingerprint scans, photographs, facial and iris images, or other biometric identifiers1 ) when attempting to enter or depart the United States.

    1 As used in this notice, a “biometric identifier” is a physical characteristic or other physical attribute unique to a person that can be collected, stored, and used to verify the identity of a person who presents himself or herself to a CBP officer at the border. To verify a person's identity, a similar physical characteristic or attribute is collected and compared against the previously collected identifier.

    The federal statutes requiring DHS to create a biometric entry and exit system to record the arrival and departure of aliens include, but are not limited to:

    • Section 2(a) of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000 (DMIA), Public Law 106-215, 114 Stat. 337 (2000);

    • Section 205 of the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act of 2000, Public Law 106-396, 114 Stat. 1637, 1641 (2000);

    • Section 414 of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act), Public Law 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 353 (2001);

    • Section 302 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (Border Security Act), Public Law 107-173, 116 Stat. 543, 552 (2002);

    • Section 7208 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), Public Law 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638, 3817 (2004); and

    • Section 711 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Public Law 110-52, 121 Stat. 266 (2007).

    Section 7208 of IRTPA, as codified in 8 U.S.C. 1365b, requires specifically that DHS' entry and exit data system collects biometric exit data for all categories of individuals who are required to provide biometric entry data.

    On January 5, 2004, DHS published an interim final rule in the Federal Register (69 FR 468) implementing the first phase of US-VISIT at certain U.S. air and sea ports-of-entry. The interim final rule amended 8 CFR 235.1 to authorize DHS to require certain aliens who arrive at designated U.S. air and sea ports-of-entry to provide biometric data to CBP during the inspection process. The air and sea ports-of-entry where such collection of biometric information occurs were designated by notice in the Federal Register. See 69 FR 482 (January 5, 2004). Since that time, aliens who are required by law to submit biometric information have been submitting fingerprints and photographs upon entry to the United States at designated air and sea ports-of-entry. This DHS biometric entry program is currently operational at 115 airports and 15 seaports across the United States.

    The second phase of US-VISIT was implemented on August 31, 2004 when DHS published an interim final rule in the Federal Register (69 FR 53318) expanding the program to the 50 most highly trafficked land border ports-of-entry in the United States as required in 8 U.S.C. 1365a(d)(2).2 This interim final rule amended 8 CFR 215.8, which provides that the Secretary, or his designee, may establish pilot programs to collect biometric information from certain aliens departing the United States at land border ports-of-entry, and up to fifteen air or sea ports of entry, designated through notice in the Federal Register. See 8 CFR 215.8(a)(1). The interim final rule also authorized DHS to identify the specific land border ports-of-entry in a separate notice published in the Federal Register.3

    2 Section 1365a(d)(2) provides in pertinent part: “Not later than December 31, 2004, the Attorney General [now Secretary of Homeland Security] shall implement the integrated entry and exit data system . . . at the 50 land border ports of entry determined by the Attorney General to serve the highest numbers of arriving and departing aliens.”

    3 On December 19, 2008, DHS published a final rule in the Federal Register (73 FR 77473) finalizing this interim final rule without change.

    On November 9, 2004, DHS published a notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 64964) identifying the fifty most trafficked land border ports-of-entry where biometric data would be collected from certain aliens upon arrival. Today, DHS collects fingerprint biometric data to verify the identity of certain aliens seeking admission at all land border ports-of-entry. This notice also specified that DHS would announce, through a future Federal Register notice, the piloting of a future biometric collection program at a limited number of sites as part of DHS' efforts to process aliens upon departure from the United States.

    On March 16, 2013, US-VISIT's entry and exit operations, including deployment of a biometric exit system, were transferred to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). See Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Public Law 113-6 (2013). The Act also transferred US-VISIT's overstay analysis function to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its biometric identity management services to the Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM), a newly-created office within the National Protection and Programs Directorate. CBP assumed the biometric entry and exit operations on April 1, 2013.

    The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that CBP will be conducting a test on the collection of biometric exit information at the Otay Mesa, California land border port-of-entry. This notice describes the scope of the test, its purpose, how it will be implemented, the persons covered, the duration of the test, and privacy considerations.

    Otay Mesa Land Border Port-of Entry Pedestrian Exit Test

    The Otay Mesa Land Border Port-of Entry Pedestrian Exit Test is a short-term biometric data collection that will help CBP determine the viability of capturing biometric data from certain departing aliens in various environmental conditions. This test is one of CBP's key steps in developing the capability to fulfill DHS' mandate to collect biometric information from arriving and departing aliens.

    Scope, Purpose and Implementation

    Currently, aliens who seek admission at the Otay Mesa, California land border port-of-entry may be required to provide fingerprint biometric data for CBP to verify their identity. (Certain aliens, including individuals traveling on A or G visas and others as specified in 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2), are exempt from this requirement). During this test, facial and iris images of these non-exempt aliens will be captured, either via a biometric kiosk or freestanding facial and iris cameras, upon arrival and departure of the alien if they cross the border at the Otay Mesa land border port-of-entry. The captured biometric exit data will be stored in a secure, standalone database and analyzed for off-line matching against facial and iris images previously captured upon arrival and associated with biometric data already on file. No biometric data will be distributed from the standalone database, except for analysis and reporting purposes on the results of the test. Biometric information will not be collected from U.S. citizens under this test.

    CBP will also collect biographic data from all travelers exiting the United States at the Otay Mesa port-of-entry, including U.S. citizens. Biographic data consists of the traveler's identifying information provided on his or her travel documents, such as full name, date of birth, gender, and country of citizenship, and does not involve biometric identifiers such as fingerprints and facial or iris images. The traveler's travel documents will be read upon exit via a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) technology reader, a kiosk, or a hand-held device.

    Pursuant to various authorities under Titles 8 and 19 of the U.S. Code, and other authorities CBP enforces on behalf of third party agencies at the border, CBP routinely collects biographic data from travelers entering and departing the United States. See, e.g., 8 U.S.C. 1181, 1185, 1221; and 19 U.S.C. 1433. During the test at the Otay Mesa port-of-entry, this same data will be collected from all departing travelers. This will enable CBP to evaluate the viability of using biographic or biometric data or a combination of the two to provide a high level of confidence in validating the traveler's identity upon exit.

    CBP will use the results of the test to assess the operational feasibility of biometric information collection for potential deployment across the U.S. southwest border. Once the biometric data is captured, CBP will analyze and evaluate the test based on a number of criteria, including the speed and quality of the data capture, the ability to match biometric data captured upon arrival and departure, the concurrent and independent capability of facial and iris biometrics, and the feasibility and accuracy of capturing biometrics from a distance. With regard to biographic data, CBP will use such data to identify travelers who are known or suspected of being terrorists, have affiliations to terrorist organizations, have active warrants for criminal activity, are inadmissible, have overstayed their visas, or have been otherwise identified as potential security risks or are the subject of law enforcement concerns. A successful test will enhance DHS security efforts at our Nation's border while expediting the movement of legitimate travelers.

    Persons Covered

    For the duration of the test, all aliens shall provide the biometric information described above at the time of arrival to and departure from the United States to the extent they cross through the Otay Mesa land port-of-entry, except for aliens who, at the time of such arrival or departure, are exempt pursuant to 8 CFR 235.1(f)(1)(iv) and 8 CFR 215.8(a)(2). Exempted aliens include:

    (1) Canadian citizens who under section 101(a)(15)(B) of the INA who are not otherwise required to present a visa or have been issued Form I-94 (see § 1.4) or Form I-95 upon arrival at the United States;

    (2) Aliens admitted on A-1, A-2, C-3 (except for attendants, servants, or personal employees of accredited officials), G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO-2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6 visas, and certain Taiwan officials who hold E-1 visas and members of their immediate families who hold E-1 visas who are maintaining such status at time of departure, unless the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security jointly determine that a class of such aliens should be subject to this notice;

    (3) Children under the age of 14;

    (4) Persons over the age of 79;

    (5) Classes of aliens the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State jointly determine shall be exempt; or

    (6) An individual alien whom the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or the Director of Central Intelligence determines shall be exempt.

    As a part of this test, CBP will also collect biographic information from all persons exiting the Otay Mesa port-of-entry.

    Duration of Test

    Beginning no earlier than December 7, 2015, CBP will collect facial and iris biometric data from non-exempt aliens subject to this notice upon arrival at the Otay Mesa land border port-of-entry.

    Beginning no earlier than February 1, 2016, CBP will collect facial and iris biometric data from these non-exempt aliens when they exit the United States through the Otay Mesa land border port-of-entry.

    Beginning no earlier than February 1, 2016, CBP will collect biographic information from all persons exiting the Otay Mesa port-of-entry.

    This test will end on or before June 30, 2016.

    For purposes of analysis, CBP will retain data collected from this test for approximately one year from the date of collection.

    Privacy

    CBP will ensure that all Privacy Act requirements and applicable policies are adhered to during the implementation of this test. Additionally, CBP will be issuing a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), which will outline how CBP will ensure compliance with Privacy Act protections. The PIA will examine the privacy impact of the Otay Mesa Land Border Port-of Entry Pedestrian Exit Test as it relates to DHS' Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs). The FIPPs account for the nature and purpose of the information being collected in relation to DHS' mission to preserve, protect and secure the United States. The PIA will address issues such as the security, integrity, and sharing of data, use limitation and transparency. Once issued, the PIA will be made publicly available at: http://www.dhs.gov/privacy-documents-us-customs-and-border-protection. CBP has also issued an update to the DHS/CBP-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of Records, which fully encompasses all the data that is being collected at the Otay Mesa land border port-of-entry for purposes of this test. The system of records notice (SORN) was published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2015 (80 FR 26937).

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    CBP requires aliens subject to this notice to provide biometric and biographic data at the Otay Mesa port-of-entry in the circumstances described above. This requirement is considered an information collection requirement under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, has previously approved this information collection for use. The OMB control number for this collection is 1651-0138.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28843 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0108] Agency Information Collection Activities: Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit (CBP Form I-68). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before December 14, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 25313) on May 4, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

    Title: Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit.

    OMB Number: 1651-0108.

    Form Number: CBP Form I-68.

    Abstract: The Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit (CBP Form I-68) allows participants entering the United States along the northern border by small pleasure boats weighing less than 5 tons to telephonically report their arrival without having to appear in person for an inspection by a CBP officer. United States citizens, Lawful Permanent Residents of the United States, Canadian citizens, and Landed Residents of Canada who are nationals of the Visa Waiver Program countries listed in 8 CFR 217.2(a) are eligible to participate.

    The information collected on CBP Form I-68 allows people who enter the United States from Canada by small pleasure boats to be inspected only once during the boating season, rather than each time they make an entry. This information collection is provided for by 8 CFR 235.1(g) and Section 235 of Immigration and Nationality Act. CBP Form I-68 is accessible at http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms?title=68&=Apply.

    Current Actions: This submission is being made to extend the expiration date with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

    Type of Review: Extension (without change).

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 68,000.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 10 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 11,288.

    Estimated Annual Cost: $1,088,000.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28831 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning Acyclovir Tablets AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final determination.

    SUMMARY:

    This document provides notice that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) has issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain Acyclovir tablets. Based upon the facts presented, CBP has concluded that the country of origin of the Acyclovir Tablets is China and India for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

    DATES:

    The final determination was issued on November 5, 2015. A copy of the final determination is attached. Any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of this final determination no later than December 14, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Dinerstein, Valuation and Special Programs Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade (202) 325-0132.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that on November 5, 2015, pursuant to subpart B of Part 177, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 CFR part 177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain Acyclovir Tablets, which may be offered to the U.S. Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. This final determination, HQ267177, was issued under procedures set forth at 19 CFR part 177, subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18). In the final determination, CBP concluded that the processing in the United States does not result in a substantial transformation. Therefore, the country of origin of the Acyclovir tablets is China and India for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

    Section 177.29, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that a notice of final determination shall be published in the Federal Register within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), provides that any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such determination in the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Myles B. Harmon, Acting Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade. HQ H267177 November 5, 2015 MAR-2 OT:RR:CTF:VS H267177 RSD CATEGORY: ORIGIN Ms. Karen Yu, Regulatory Affairs, Carlsbad Technology Inc., 5923 Balfour Court, Carlsbad, California 92008 RE: U.S. Government procurement; Trade Agreements Act; Country of Origin of Acyclovir Tablets; Substantial Transformation

    Dear Ms. Yu: This is in response to your ruling request dated July 7, 2015, requesting a final determination on behalf of Carlsbad Technology Inc., (Carlsbad) pursuant to subpart B of Part 177 of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Regulations (19 CFR part 177). Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (“TAA”), as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations as to whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government.

    This final determination concerns the country of origin of Acyclovir Tablets. As a U.S. manufacturer of a like product, Carlsbad Inc. is a party-at-interest within the meaning of 19 CFR 177.22(d)(1), and is entitled to request this final determination.

    FACTS:

    Acyclovir is a pharmaceutical product used as a synthetic nucleoside analogue active against herpes viruses. The active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”), Acyclovir is manufactured in China and India. The API is shipped to the U.S., where it undergoes five manufacturing steps. Inactive ingredient (excipients) used in the production of the product in the U.S. are corn starch, microcrystalline cellulose, magnesium stearate, and sodium starch glycolate.

    The first stage of U.S. manufacturing is the sizing of the active and inactive ingredients including the corn starch glycolate, by passing them through a sieve to remove any larger granules.

    The second stage of U.S. manufacturing is the preparation of Acyclovir granules. The Acyclovir API, corn starch, and sodium starch glycolate are de-lumped and granulated with a binding suspension of corn starch. The wet granules are then sieved through a comil and discharged into stainless steel drums. These granules are then moved to a tray dryer for a drying process for 10 to 18 hours or until it meets its dryness specification. The dried granules will then be sieved through a comil again and discharged into stainless steel drums. The third stage of U.S. manufacturing is the preparation of the tablet blend. The inactive ingredients, microcrystalline cellulose and sodium starch glycolated are de-lumped by passing them through a sieve and added to the de-lumped acyclovir granules for preblend. Then the magnesium stearate is sieved and added to the final blend. All the blended product is discharged into stainless steel drums. The fourth stage of U.S. manufacturing is tablet compression. The blended granules are then fed to a tablet press machine where the tablets are formed. The bulk tablets are collected into plastic bags, which are sealed and packaged in containers. The fifth stage of U.S. manufacturing is packaging in high density polyethylene plastic bottles. These bottles are then put into cartons for distribution in the U.S.

    ISSUE:

    What is the country of origin of the Acyclovir tablets processed as described above for purposes U.S. Government procurement?

    LAW AND ANALYSIS:

    Pursuant to Subpart B of Part 177, 19 CFR 177.21 et seq., which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations as to whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting waivers if certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. government.

    Under the rule of origin set forth under 19 U.S.C. 2518(4)(B):

    An article is a product of a country or instrumentality only if (i) it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country or instrumentality, or (ii) in the case of an article which consists in whole or in part of materials from another country or instrumentality, it has been substantially transformed into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so transformed.

    See also 19 CFR 177.22(a).

    In rendering advisory rulings and final determinations for purposes of U.S. government procurement, CBP applies the provisions of subpart B of part 177 consistent with the Federal Acquisition Regulations. See 19 CFR 177.21. In this regard, CBP recognizes that the Federal Acquisition Regulations restrict the U.S. Government's purchase of products to U.S.-made or designated country end products for acquisitions subject to the TAA. See 48 CFR 25.403(c)(1). The Federal Acquisition Regulations define “U.S.-made end product” as:

    . . . an article that is mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States or that is substantially transformed in the United States into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was transformed. 48 CFR 25.003

    A substantial transformation occurs when an article emerges from a process with a new name, character and use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. A substantial transformation will not result from a minor manufacturing or combining process that leaves the identity of the article intact. See United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (1940); and, National Juice Products Association v. United States, 628 F. Supp. 978 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986).

    In determining whether a substantial transformation occurs in the manufacture of chemical products such as pharmaceuticals, CBP has consistently examined the complexity of the processing and whether the final article retains the essential identity and character of the raw material. To that end, CBP has generally held that the processing of pharmaceutical products from bulk form into measured doses does not result in a substantial transformation of the product. See e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) 561975, dated April 3, 2002; HQ 561544, dated May 1, 2000; and, HQ 735146, dated November 15, 1993.

    For instance, in HQ 561975, the anesthetic drug sevoflurane imported into the U.S. in bulk form and processed into dosage form by extensive testing operations, followed by filtering and packaging into bottles, was found not to have undergone a substantial transformation in the U.S. There was no change in name (the product was identified as sevoflurane in both its bulk and processed form). The sevoflurane retained its chemical and physical properties after the U.S. processing. Lastly, because the imported bulk sevoflurane had a predetermined medicinal use as an inhalable anesthetic drug, the processing in the United States resulted in no change in the product's use.

    Likewise, in HQ 561544, the testing, filtering and sterile packaging of Geneticin Sulfate bulk powder, to create Geneticin Selective Antibiotic, was not found to have substantially transformed the antibiotic substance because the processing only involved the removal of impurities from the bulk chemical and the placement of the chemical into smaller packaging.

    In HQ 735146, 100 percent pure acetaminophen imported from China was blended with excipients in the United States, granulated and sold to pharmaceutical companies to process into tablets for retail sale under private labels. It was found that the process in the United States did not substantially transform the imported product because the product was referred to as acetaminophen before importation and after U.S. processing, its use was for medicinal purposes and continued to be so used after U.S. processing, and the granulating process minimally affected the chemical and physical properties of the acetaminophen.

    In HQ H233356 dated December 26, 2012, mefenamic acid imported from India was blended with excipients and packaged into dosage form in the United States. Based on prior rulings, we found that the specific processing consisting of blending the active ingredients with inactive ingredients in a tumbler and then encapsulating and packaging the product did not substantially transform the mefenamic acid because its chemical character remained the same. As such, we found that the country of origin of the Ponstel (mefenamic acid) capsules was India, where the mefanamic acid was manufactured.

    In this case, the processing performed in the U.S. does not result in a change in the medicinal use of the finished product and the active ingredient. The Acyclovir retains its chemical and physical properties and is merely put into a dosage form and is packaged for sale. The active ingredient does not undergo a change in name, character or use. Therefore, in accordance with our prior rulings, we find that no substantial transformation occurs in U.S., and for purposes of government procurement, the Acyclovir tablets would be considered a product where the active ingredient was produced, which would be China and India.

    HOLDING:

    Based upon the facts in this case, we find that the imported Acyclovir is not substantially transformed in U.S. Accordingly, the country of origin for government procurement purposes of the Acyclovir tablets is China and India, where the active ingredient is produced.

    Notice of this final determination will be given in the Federal Register, as required by 19 CFR 177.29. Any party-at-interest other than the party which requested this final determination may request, pursuant to 19 CFR 177.31 that CBP reexamine the matter anew and issue a new final determination. Pursuant to 19 CFR 177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30 days of publication of the Federal Register notice referenced above, seek judicial review of this final determination before the Court of International Trade.

      Sincerely, Myles B. Harmon Acting Executive Director Office of Regulations and Rulings Office of International Trade
    [FR Doc. 2015-28827 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0124] Agency Information Collection Activities: Cargo Container and Road Vehicle Certification for Transport Under Customs Seal AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Cargo Container and Road Vehicle for Transport under Customs Seal. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before December 14, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (80 FR 48117) on August 11, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

    Title: Cargo Container and Road Vehicle for Transport under Customs Seal.

    OMB Number: 1651-0124.

    Abstract: The United States is a signatory to several international Customs conventions and is responsible for specifying the technical requirements that containers and road vehicles must meet to be acceptable for transport under Customs seal. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has the responsibility of collecting information for the purpose of certifying containers and vehicles for international transport under Customs seal. A certification of compliance facilitates the movement of containers and road vehicles across international territories. The procedures for obtaining a certification of a container or vehicle are set forth in 19 CFR part 115.

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

    Type of Review: Extension (without change).

    Affected Public: Businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 25.

    Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 120.

    Estimated Time per Response: 3.5 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 10,500.

    Dated: November 4, 2015. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28828 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Agency Information Collection Activities: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies (NICCS) Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog (Training/Workforce Development Catalog) Collection AGENCY:

    Cybersecurity Education & Awareness Office (CE&A), DHS.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; reinstatement with change, 1601-0016.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity Education & Awareness Office (CE&A), will submit the following Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). DHS previously published this information collection request (ICR) in the Federal Register on Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 80 FR 53180 for a 60-day public comment period. No comments were received by DHS. The purpose of this notice is to allow additional 30-days for public comments.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until January 12, 2016. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to OMB Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title II, Homeland Security Act, 6 U.S.C. 121(d)(1) To access, receive, and analyze laws enforcement information, intelligence information and other information from agencies of the Federal Government, State and local government agencies . . . and Private sector entities and to integrate such information in support of the mission responsibilities of the Department. The following authorities also permit DHS to collect information of the type contemplated: Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA), 44 U.S.C. 3546; Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 7, “Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection” (2003); and NSPD-54/HSPD-23, “Cybersecurity Policy” (2009).

    In May 2009, the President ordered a Cyberspace Policy Review to develop a comprehensive approach to secure and defend America's infrastructure. The review built upon the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI).

    In response to increased cyber threats across the Nation, the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) expanded from a previous effort, the CNCI #8. NICE formed in March 2011, and is a nationally coordinated effort comprised of over 20 federal departments and agencies, and numerous partners in academia and industry. NICE focuses on cybersecurity awareness, education, training and professional development. NICE seeks to encourage and build cybersecurity awareness and competency across the Nation and to develop an agile, highly skilled cybersecurity workforce.

    The NICCS Portal is a national online resource for cybersecurity awareness, education, talent management, and professional development and training. NICCS Portal is an implementation tool for NICE. Its mission is to provide comprehensive cybersecurity resources to the public.

    To promote cybersecurity education, and to provide a comprehensive resource for the Nation, NICE developed the Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog. The Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog will be hosted on the NICCS Portal. Training Course and certification information will be included in the Training/Workforce Development Catalog. Note: Any information received from the public in support of the NICCS Portal and Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog is completely voluntary. Organizations and individuals who do not provide information can still utilize the NICCS Portal and Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog without restriction or penalty. An organization or individual who wants their information removed from the NICCS Portal and/or Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog can email the NICCS Supervisory Office. There are no requirements for a provider to fill out a specific form for their information to be removed; standard email requests will be honored. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity Education & Awareness Office (CE&A) intends for the collected information from the NICCS Cybersecurity Training Course Form and the NICCS Cybersecurity Certification Form to be displayed on a publicly accessible Web site called the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies (NICCS) Portal (http://niccs.us-cert.gov/). Collected information from these two forms will be included in the Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog that is hosted on the NICCS Portal.

    The DHS CE&A NICCS Supervisory Office will use information collected from the NICCS Vetting Criteria Form to primarily manage communications with the training/workforce development providers; this collected information will not be shared with the public and is intended for internal use only. Additionally, this information will be used to validate training providers before uploading their training and certification information to the Training Catalog.

    The information will be collected via fully electronic or partially electronic means. Collection will be coordinated between the public and DHS CE&A via email ([email protected]). The following form is fully electronic: NICCS Vetting Criteria Web Form. The following forms are partially electronic: NICCS Cybersecurity Training Course Form and NICCS Certification Course Form. All partially electronic forms are created in excel. The NICCS SO is looking to develop and transition partially electronic forms to fully electronic web forms. This transition is dependent on contract requirements and available department funding. All information collected from the NICCS Cybersecurity Training Course Form, the NICCS Cybersecurity Training Course Web Form, and the NICCS Certification Course Form will be stored in the public accessible NICCS Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog (http://niccs.us-cert.gov/training/training-home). The NICCS Supervisory Office will electronically store information collected via the NICCS Vetting Criteria Form. This information will not be publicly accessible.

    There is no assurance of confidentiality provided to the respondents. This collection is covered by the existing Privacy Impact Assessment, DHS General Contact List (DHS/ALL/PIA-006) and the existing Systems of Records Notice, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Mailing and other Lists Systems (DHS/ALL/SORN-002). DHS CE&A has revised the collection to reflect three changes. These changes include the addition of: Training/WFD Provider Logo, Organization URL and National Cybersecurity Workforce Framework Role collection. These changes were added based on input received from the public. Including provider logos and an organization URL allows users to more easily find organization information. The addition of Cybersecurity Workforce Framework Role information will allow users to better align their courses with specific cybersecurity roles found in the newest Workforce Framework. The adjustments reported in the estimates of burden were based on historical data and current training provider outreach. The estimate of annualized cost was updated based off of actual wage.

    The prior information collection request for OMB No. 1601-0016 was approved through April 30, 2015 by OMB. This collection will be submitted to OMB for review to request reinstatement of the collection. DHS CE&A has revised the collection to reflect three changes. These changes include the addition of: Training/WFD Provider Logo, Organization URL, National Cybersecurity Workforce Framework Role collection. These changes were added based on input received from the public. Including provider logos and an organization URL allows users to more easily find organization information. The addition of Cybersecurity Workforce Framework Role information will allow users to better align their courses with specific cybersecurity roles found in the newest Workforce Framework. The adjustments reported in the estimates of burden were based on historical data and current training provider outreach. The estimate of annualized cost was updated based off of actual wage.

    The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments which:

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

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

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

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

    Analysis

    Agency: Cybersecurity Education & Awareness Office, DHS.

    Title: Agency Information Collection Activities: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Careers and Studies (NICCS) Cybersecurity Training and Education Catalog (Training/Workforce Development Catalog) Collection.

    OMB Number: 1601-0016.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Affected Public: Private Sector.

    Number of Respondents: 1,000.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 2.5 hours.

    Total Burden Hours: 2,125 hours.

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Carlene C. Ileto, Executive Director, Enterprise Business Management Office.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28884 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5828-N-46] Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for use to assist the homeless.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing this Notice to identify Federal buildings and other real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. The properties were reviewed using information provided to HUD by Federal landholding agencies regarding unutilized and underutilized buildings and real property controlled by such agencies or by GSA regarding its inventory of excess or surplus Federal property. This Notice is also published in order to comply with the December 12, 1988 Court Order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.).

    Properties reviewed are listed in this Notice according to the following categories: Suitable/available, suitable/unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, and unsuitable. The properties listed in the three suitable categories have been reviewed by the landholding agencies, and each agency has transmitted to HUD: (1) Its intention to make the property available for use to assist the homeless, (2) its intention to declare the property excess to the agency's needs, or (3) a statement of the reasons that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use as facilities to assist the homeless.

    Properties listed as suitable/available will be available exclusively for homeless use for a period of 60 days from the date of this Notice. Where property is described as for “off-site use only” recipients of the property will be required to relocate the building to their own site at their own expense. Homeless assistance providers interested in any such property should send a written expression of interest to HHS, addressed to: Ms. Theresa M. Ritta, Chief Real Property Branch, The Department of Health and Human Services, Room 5B-17, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, (301) 443-2265 (This is not a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the interested provider an application packet, which will include instructions for completing the application. In order to maximize the opportunity to utilize a suitable property, providers should submit their written expressions of interest as soon as possible. For complete details concerning the processing of applications, the reader is encouraged to refer to the interim rule governing this program, 24 CFR part 581.

    For properties listed as suitable/to be excess, that property may, if subsequently accepted as excess by GSA, be made available for use by the homeless in accordance with applicable law, subject to screening for other Federal use. At the appropriate time, HUD will publish the property in a Notice showing it as either suitable/available or suitable/unavailable.

    For properties listed as suitable/unavailable, the landholding agency has decided that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use to assist the homeless, and the property will not be available.

    Properties listed as unsuitable will not be made available for any other purpose for 20 days from the date of this Notice. Homeless assistance providers interested in a review by HUD of the determination of unsuitability should call the toll free information line at 1-800-927-7588 for detailed instructions or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at the address listed at the beginning of this Notice. Included in the request for review should be the property address (including zip code), the date of publication in the Federal Register, the landholding agency, and the property number.

    For more information regarding particular properties identified in this Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing sanitary facilities, exact street address), providers should contact the appropriate landholding agencies at the following addresses: GSA: Mr. Flavio Peres, General Services Administration, Office of Real Property Utilization and Disposal, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7040, Washington, DC 20405, (202) 501-0084; (This is not a toll-free number).

    Dated: November 5, 2015. Brian P. Fitzmaurice, Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs. TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT FOR 11/13/2015 Suitable/Available Properties Building New York Michael J. Dillon U.S. Memorial Courthouse 68 Court Street Buffalo NY 14202 Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201540010 Status: Excess GSA Number: NY-0993-AA Comments: 180,950 gross sq. ft.; sits on 0.75 acres; 48+ months vacant; asbestos/LBP maybe present; eligible for Nat'l Register; subject to Historic Preserv. covenants; contact GSA for more info.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28678 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2015-0162; FXIA16710900000-156-FF09A30000] Endangered Species; Marine Mammals; Issuance of Permits AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of issuance of permits.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have issued the following permits to conduct certain activities with endangered species, marine mammals, or both. We issue these permits under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).

    ADDRESSES:

    Brenda Tapia, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, Branch of Permits, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; fax (703) 358-2281.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda Tapia, (703) 358-2104 (telephone); (703) 358-2281 (fax).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On the dates below, as authorized by the provisions of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as amended, and/or the MMPA, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), we issued requested permits subject to certain conditions set forth therein. For each permit for an endangered species, we found that (1) The application was filed in good faith, (2) The granted permit would not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species, and (3) The granted permit would be consistent with the purposes and policy set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

    Endangered Species Permit No. Applicant Receipt of application Federal Register notice Permit issuance date 54794B Tanganyika Wildlife Park 80 FR 33541; June 12, 2015 October 19, 2015. 68842B Monty David 80 FR 39795; July 10, 2015 August, 12, 2015. 06588B Frank Buck Zoo 80 FR 39795; July 10, 2015 October 30, 2015. 70086B Timothy Twietmeyer 80 FR 43790; July 23, 2015 September 1, 2015. 59836B The Wild Animal Sanctuary 80 FR 47947; August 10, 2015 October 13, 2015. 59837B The Wild Animal Sanctuary 80 FR 47947; August 10, 2015 October 13, 2015. 669467 Utica Zoo 80 FR 51299; August 24, 2015 October 15, 2015. 73254B William Mathers 80 FR 51299; August 24, 2015 October 5, 2015. 68861B San Diego Zoo 80 FR 51299; August 24, 2015 October 30, 2015. Marine Mammals Permit No. Applicant Receipt of application Federal Register notice Permit issuance date 225854 Tom Smith 80 FR 16694; March 30, 2015 08/24/2015. 61681B Florian Schulz 80 FR 46042; August 3, 2015 09/11/2015. Availability of Documents

    Documents and other information submitted with these applications are available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who submits a written request for a copy of such documents to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, Branch of Permits, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; fax (703) 358-2281.

    Brenda Tapia, Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28781 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2015-0163: FXIA16710900000-156-FF09A30000] Endangered Species; Receipt of Applications for Permit AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of applications for permit.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits activities with listed species unless Federal authorization is acquired that allows such activities.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments or requests for documents on or before December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2015-0163.

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2015-0163; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We will post all comments onhttp://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information). Viewing Comments: Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2095.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda Tapia, (703) 358-2104 (telephone); (703) 358-2281 (fax); [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Public Comment Procedures A. How do I request copies of applications or comment on submitted applications?

    Send your request for copies of applications or comments and materials concerning any of the applications to the contact listed under ADDRESSES. Please include the Federal Register notice publication date, the PRT-number, and the name of the applicant in your request or submission. We will not consider requests or comments sent to an email or address not listed under ADDRESSES. If you provide an email address in your request for copies of applications, we will attempt to respond to your request electronically.

    Please make your requests or comments as specific as possible. Please confine your comments to issues for which we seek comments in this notice, and explain the basis for your comments. Include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include.

    The comments and recommendations that will be most useful and likely to influence agency decisions are: (1) Those supported by quantitative information or studies; and (2) Those that include citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. We will not consider or include in our administrative record comments we receive after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or comments delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES).

    B. May I review comments submitted by others?

    Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the street address listed under ADDRESSES. The public may review documents and other information applicants have sent in support of the application unless our allowing viewing would violate the Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act. 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.

    II. Background

    To help us carry out our conservation responsibilities for affected species, and in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), along with Executive Order 13576, “Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government,” and the President's Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies of January 21, 2009—Transparency and Open Government (74 FR 4685; January 26, 2009), which call on all Federal agencies to promote openness and transparency in Government by disclosing information to the public, we invite public comment on these permit applications before final action is taken.

    III. Permit Applications Endangered Species Applicant: City of Idaho Falls Zoo, Idaho Falls, ID; PRT-73296B

    The applicant requests a permit to export one captive-bred female snow leopard (Uncia uncia) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species through captive breeding. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: San Francisco Zoological Society, San Francisco, CA; PRT-69861B

    The applicant requests a permit to export one captive-bred male Francois langur (Trachypithecus francoisi) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species captive-breeding. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Angelica Rodriquez/American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY; PRT-66999B

    The applicant requests a permit to import biological samples from the lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae) collected from the wild in Mexico, for the purpose of scientific research. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium, Tacoma, WA; PRT-71096B

    The applicant requests a permit to import one captive-bred female Malayan tapir (Tapirus indicus) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species through zoological display and captive propagation.

    Applicant: University of Illinois, Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, Maywood, IL; PRT-73315B

    The applicant requests a permit to re-export 49 glass slides and paraffin tissue blocks derived from captive-bred Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) for the purpose of scientific research. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Jerry Fife dba Fife Reptiles, Laveen, AZ; PRT-66860B

    The applicant requests a permit to ten captive-bred Galapagos tortoise (Chelonoidis nigra) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species through captive propagation.

    Applicant: Fox Brown Outfitters, Indiantown, FL; PRT-71724B

    The applicant requests a captive-bred wildlife registration under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for the following species to enhance species propagation or survival: Barasingha (Rucervus duvaucelii). This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: The Sacramento Zoological Society, dba Sacramento Zoo, Sacramento, CA; PRT-677611

    The applicant requests an amendment to their captive-bred wildlife registration under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for the following species to enhance species propagation or survival: Yellow-footed rock wallaby (Petrogale xanthopus). This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Multiple Applicants

    The following applicants each request a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species.

    Applicant: David Hessler, Westlake OH; PRT-78797B Applicant: Margaret Williams, Midland TX; PRT-79073B Brenda Tapia, Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28780 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Cowlitz Indian Tribe AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of reservation proclamation.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice informs the public that through the issuance of the Record of Decision on April 22, 2013 announcing the decision to acquire the subject property in trust, the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs proclaimed such subject property as the initial reservation of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe of Washington on November 6, 2015. The subject property was accepted by the United States in trust for the Tribe on March 9, 2015. Now that the subject property is held in trust by the United States for the Tribe, the Department is implementing its 2013 decision to proclaim the subject property as the initial reservation of the Tribe.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4642-MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone (202) 208-3615.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by part 209 of the Departmental Manual.

    A proclamation was issued according to the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984; 25 U.S.C. 467) for the land described below. The land was proclaimed to be the Cowlitz Indian Reservation of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe, County of Clark and State of Washington.

    Cowlitz Indian Reservation Legal description containing 156.401 acres, more or less 1

    1 Prior to the transfer of the subject property into trust, the Department reviewed title evidence and the legal descriptions for the parcels comprising the subject property. At the time of the April 22, 2013 Record of Decision, these parcels were separately described in County records. Since that time, some of these parcels were consolidated in County records due to the parcels' common ownership. Accordingly, the legal description and estimated acreage total have been updated to reflect this consolidation in the title record and the final survey.

    PARCEL I—BEGINNING at the intersection of the West line of Primary State Highway No. 1 and the East line of the Southeast quarter of Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington; thence Northerly along said West line of Primary State Highway No. 1 a distance of 1307.5 feet to the Point of Beginning of this description; thence West 108.5 feet to an angle point thereon; thence Northerly along the fence 880.5 feet to the center line of a creek; thence Northerly along said creek 443 feet to the West line of Primary State Highway No. 1; thence Southerly along said West line of Highway to the Point of Beginning.

    EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the State of Washington by Auditor's File Nos. G 450664 and G 147358.

    PARCEL II—That portion of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 8, and the West half of the Northwest quarter of Section 9, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington, described as follows:

    COMMENCING at a railroad spike marking the North quarter corner of Section 8, as shown in Book 27 of Surveys, page 134, records of the Clark County Auditor; thence South 88°10′18″ East along the North line of the Northeast quarter of Section 8 for a distance of 1843.02 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence East to Highway Engineer's Station DB 9+50 on the DB line of SR-5 as shown on the Washington State Department of Highways Right of Way Plan “Ridgefield Junction to Woodland” Sheet 5 of 12 sheets dated August 10, 1965; thence South 01°49′42″ West 20.00 feet; thence South 78°34′39″ East 90.00 feet to a point 35 feet right of HES DB 10+38.74 (R/W Plan); thence South 34°20′13″ East 451.85 feet to a point 65 feet left of HES Co. Rd. No. 25 44+81.63 PT (R/W Plan); thence South 16°33′29″ East, 386.57 feet to a point 50 feet left of HES Co. Rd. No. 25 40+50 (R/W Plan); thence South 88°22′31″ East 50.00 feet to HES Co. Rd. No. 25 40+50 said point being on the section line between Sections 8 and 9; thence South 88°22′31″ East 50.00 feet; thence North 01°37′29″ East parallel with the West line of the Northwest quarter of Section 9 for a distance of 100.00 feet; thence South 80°57′04″ East, 42.57 feet to a point 160 feet left of the SR-5 “L” Line (R/W Plan); thence South 16°24′49″ East parallel with and 160 feet from, when measured perpendicular to the SR-5 “L” Line (R/W Plan), 586.32 feet to HES L 535+50 (R/W Plan); thence South 27°43′24″ East 101.98 feet to a point 140 feet left of HES L 534+50 (R/W Plan); thence South 16°24′49″ East parallel with and 140 feet from, when measured perpendicular to the SR-5 “L” Line (R/W Plan), 450.00 feet to a point 140.00 feet left of HES L 530+00 (R/W Plan); thence South 15°35′42″ East, 253.51 feet to the South line of the North half of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 9; thence North 88°31′16″ West along said South line 537.76 feet to the West line of said Northwest quarter; thence North 01°37′29″ East along said West line 858.79 feet; thence North 88°07′39″ West 435.00 feet; thence South 01°37′29″ West 200.00 feet to the South line of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 8; thence North 88°07′39″ West along said South line 365.31 feet; thence North 01°29′02″ East parallel with the West line of said Northeast quarter 1316.97 feet to the Point of Beginning.

    EXCEPT the right of way of NW 31st Avenue and NW 319th Street. Also known as Parcels II, III, VII and VIII of the Olson Survey recorded in Book 56, Page 193.

    PARCEL IV—All that part of the Southeast quarter of Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington, lying West of Primary State Road No. 1 (Pacific Highway).

    EXCEPT the Henry Ungemach tract recorded in Volume 76 of Deeds, page 33, records of Clark County, Washington, described as follows:

    BEGINNING at a point 19.91 chains North of the Southwest corner of said Southeast quarter; thence East 13.48 chains to creek; thence Northerly along creek to North line of said Southeast quarter at a point 6.66 chains West of the Northeast corner thereof; thence West to Northwest corner of said Southeast quarter; thence South 19.91 chains to the Point of Beginning.

    ALSO EXCEPT the John F. Anderson tract as conveyed by deed recorded under Auditor's File No. F 38759, records of Clark County, Washington, described as follows:

    BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington; and running thence East 514 feet; thence Southerly 340 feet; thence Northwesterly 487 feet to a point 196 feet due South of the Point of Beginning; thence North to the Point of Beginning.

    ALSO EXCEPT that tract described as follows:

    BEGINNING at a point 26 rods and 9 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington; and running thence West 20 rods to County Road; thence North 182 feet; thence East 20 rods; thence South 182 feet to the Point of Beginning.

    ALSO EXCEPT a certain reserved tract described as follows:

    BEGINNING at the intersection of the West line of Primary State Highway No. 1 (Pacific Highway) and the East line of the Southeast quarter of said Section 5, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington; thence Northerly along said West line of Primary State Highway No. 1, a distance of 1307.5 feet to the True Point of Beginning of this description; thence West 108.5 feet to an angle point therein; thence Northerly along fence 880.5 feet to center line of creek; thence Northeasterly along said creek 443 feet, more or less, to the West line of Primary State Highway No. 1; thence Southerly along said West line of highway to the True Point of Beginning.

    ALSO EXCEPT that portion thereof lying within Primary State Highway No. 1 (SR-5) as conveyed to the State of Washington by deed recorded under Auditor's File Nos. G 458085, G 143553 and D 94522.

    ALSO EXCEPT the right of way of NW 319th Street and Primary State Highway No. 1.

    PARCEL V—That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 8, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington, described as follows:

    BEGINNING at a railroad spike marking the North quarter corner of Section 8 as shown in Book 27 of Surveys, page 134, records of the Clark County Auditor; thence South 88°10′18″ East along the North line of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 8 for a distance of 921.75 feet; thence South 01°29′02″ West parallel with the West line of said Northwest quarter, 1316.26 feet to the South line thereof; thence North 88°07′39″ West along said South line, 921.76 feet to the Southwest corner of said Northwest quarter; thence North 01°29′02″ East along the West line of said Northwest quarter, 1315.55 feet to the Point of Beginning.

    EXCEPT the right of way of NW 319th Street and NW 41st Avenue.

    PARCEL VI—That portion of the North half of the Northeast quarter of Section 8, Township 4 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clark County, Washington, described as follows:

    BEGINNING at a railroad spike marking the North quarter corner of Section 8 as shown in Book 27 of Surveys, page 134, records of the Clark County Auditor; thence South 88°10′18″ East along the North line of the Northeast quarter of Section 8 for a distance of 921.75 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said North line, South 88°10′18″ East 921.26 feet; thence South 01°29′02″ West parallel with the West line of said Northeast quarter, 1316.97 feet to the South line of the North half of said Northeast quarter; thence North 88°07′39″ West along said South line, 921.26 feet; thence North 01°29′02″ East, 1316.26 feet to the Point of Beginning.

    EXCEPT the right of way of NW 319th Street.

    The above-described lands contain a total of 156.401 acres, more or less, which are subject to all valid rights, reservations, rights-of-way, and easements of record.

    This proclamation does not affect title to the lands described above, nor does it affect any valid existing easements for public roads, highways, public utilities, railroads, and pipelines, or any other valid easements of rights-of-way or reservations of record.

    Dated: November 6, 2015. Kevin Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28805 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLWO210000.16X.L11100000.PH0000 LXSISGST0000] Extension of Public Comment Period and Schedule of Public Scoping Meetings and Public Meetings for the Proposed Withdrawal of Sagebrush Focal Areas in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, and an Associated Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 24, 2015, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) published a Notice of Proposed Withdrawal; Sagebrush Focal Areas; Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming and Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Withdrawal in the Federal Register. This notice extends the comment period for both the proposed withdrawal and initial scoping for the environmental impact statement (EIS) being prepared to consider the merits of the proposed withdrawal and announces the times, dates, and locations of public meetings.

    DATES:

    Written or emailed comments for scoping for the EIS and on the proposed withdrawal may be submitted through January 15, 2016. In addition, through this Notice the BLM is also announcing that it will hold public meetings in December 2015 to focus on relevant issues and environmental concerns, identify possible alternatives, help determine the scope of the EIS, and provide an opportunity for public comments on the proposed withdrawal. For dates and locations for the scoping meetings, please see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the BLM Director, 1849 C Street NW. (WO-200), Washington, DC 20240 or emailed to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Mark Mackiewicz, BLM, by telephone at 435-636-3616. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to reach the BLM contact person. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The BLM filed an application requesting the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Land and Minerals Management to withdraw, subject to valid existing rights, approximately 10 million acres of BLM-managed public and National Forest System lands located in the States of Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming from location and entry under the United States mining law, but not from leasing under the mineral or geothermal leasing or mineral materials laws.

    Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the BLM will prepare an EIS and conduct public scoping meetings on the withdrawal from the mining law of approximately 10 million acres of BLM- and United States Forest Service-administered public lands, in 6 western states as identified in the Federal Register notice of September 24, 2015 (80 FR 57635). The period for initial scoping comments from the public has been extended from December 23, 2015, to January 15, 2016. These public scoping meetings will also meet the requirements under 43 CFR 2310 to provide public meetings for comment on the Notice of Proposed Withdrawal that published on September 24, 2015.

    The dates, times, and locations of the meetings are as follows:

    Dates & times Locations BLM contact Dec. 14, 2051: 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Harney County Chamber of Commerce, 484 North Broadway, Burns, OR 97720 Jody Weil, 503-808-6287. 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Lakeview BLM District Office, 1301 South G Street, Lakeview, OR 97630 Jody Weil, 503-808-6287. 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Salt Lake City BLM Office, 2370 South Decker Lake Drive, West Valley City, UT 84119 Megan Crandall, 801-539-4020. Dec. 15, 2015: 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Best Western Vista Inn & Conference Center, 2645 Airport Way, Boise, ID 83709 Erin Curtis, 208-373-4016. 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Rock Springs BLM Field Office, 280 Highway 191 North, Rock Springs, WY 82901 Kristen Lenhardt, 307-775-6015. 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. The Nugget, 1100 Nugget Avenue, Sparks, NV 89431 Steve Clutter, 775-861-6629. Dec. 16, 2015 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Great Northern Hotel, 2 South 1st Street East, Malta, MT 59538 Al Nash, 406-896-5260. 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Shiloh Suites Conference Hotel, 780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho Falls, ID 83402 Erin Curtis, 208-373-4016. 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Elko Conference Center, 724 Moren Way, Elko, NV 89801 Steve Clutter, 775-861-6629.

    The EIS will consider a No Action alternative and consider reasonably foreseeable mineral development activities. The EIS does not support a land-use plan or a land-use plan amendment. It will provide a comprehensive programmatic NEPA analysis for the proposed action of the Secretary of the Interior withdrawing these public lands from operation of the mining law for the conservation benefit of the Greater Sage-grouse.

    The BLM has initially identified the following issues for analysis in this EIS: Air quality/climate, American Indian resources, cultural resources, wilderness and wilderness characteristics, mineral resources, public health and safety, recreation, social and economic conditions, soil resources, soundscapes, special status species, vegetation resources, visual resources, water resources, and fish and wildlife habitat.

    In addition, the BLM expects to address economic effects of withdrawing these public lands from operation of the mining law, wildlife habitat conservation; improvement, restoration of ecosystem processes; protection of cultural resources, watershed and vegetative community health, new listings of threatened and endangered species and consideration of other sensitive and special status species.

    Steve Ellis, Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28877 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-84-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLNVC00000.L16100000.DR0000; 14-08807; MO# 4500080864] Opportunity To Comment on Changes to the Nevada and California Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan and the Tonopah Field Office Resource Management Plan Amendment, Nevada AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is soliciting comments on significant changes to the Proposed Plan as set forth in the Greater Sage-Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment (BSSG) Forest Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), announced on February 13, 2015. Following consideration of any comments on these changes, the BLM intends to issue a Record of Decision (ROD) amending the Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan and the Tonopah Field Office Resource Management Plan.

    DATES:

    Written comments on the changes to the Proposed Plan will be accepted until December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments related to the significant changes to the Proposed Plan by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: 775-885-6147.

    Mail: BLM Carson City District, Attn: Colleen Sievers, Project Manager, 5665 Morgan Mill Rd., Carson City, NV 89701.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colleen Sievers, Project Manager, telephone: 775-885-6168; address: 5665 Morgan Mill Rd., Carson City, NV 89701; email: [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Forest Service (USFS) was the lead agency for preparing the BSSG Forest Plan Amendment (Plan Amendment) and Final EIS. As part of that effort and based on the analysis in the Final EIS, the BLM, a cooperating agency, proposes to amend the Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan and the Tonopah Field Office Resource Management Plan. Following the release of the Proposed Plan and the conclusion of the protest process, the BLM identified changes and a clarification for the Proposed Plan as explained below and determined, pursuant to the applicable authorities (43 CFR 1610.2(f)(5) and 43 CFR 1610.5-1(b)), that public comment on those measures is necessary. The environmental consequences of the proposed changes and clarification have been analyzed as part of the Plan Amendment and Final EIS. After considering any comments on these changes, the BLM expects to issue a ROD amending the Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resource Management Plan and the Tonopah Field Office Resource Management Plan.

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Notice of Availability (NOA) for the BSSG Forest Plan Amendment/Draft EIS in the Federal Register on August 23, 2013 (78 FR 52524), which initiated a 90-day comment period. An NOA for the BSSG Forest Plan Amendment/Revised Draft EIS was published by the EPA on July 11, 2014 (79 FR 40100), which initiated a second 90-day comment period. The EPA published the NOA for the BSSG Forest Plan Amendment and Final EIS in the Federal Register on February 13, 2015 (80 FR 8081), which initiated a 30-day BLM protest period and 60-day Governors consistency review period. The Plan Amendment and Final EIS identified the BLM Plan as the Proposed Plan. The BLM received three protest letters. In response to those protests and based on additional policy discussions, the BLM has determined that it will clarify and make changes to the Proposed Plan.

    The clarification and changes include: (1) Identifying disturbance levels within BSSG habitat; (2) Adjusting buffers for tall structures near active or pending leks; (3) Adding a restriction for new high-power transmission lines; and (4) Changing on-the-ground management for habitat connectivity. This notice identifies those clarifications and changes and initiates a 30-day public comment period (43 CFR 1610.2(f)(5) and 43 CFR 1610.5-1(b)).

    Habitat Disturbance—Proposed Change

    The BLM is changing the Proposed Plan, as it was set forth in the Plan Amendment and Final EIS, to set a total anthropogenic disturbance of no more than 3 percent of the total BSSG habitat on Federal lands within the Bodie Mountain/Grant, Desert Creek/Fales, and White Mountains population management unit boundaries (C-Wild-S-04), and a total anthropogenic disturbance of no more than 1.5 percent of the total BSSG habitat on Federal lands within the Pine Nut Mountains population management unit (PMU) boundaries (C-Wild-S-05), due to higher presence of risk factors in the PMU as analyzed under Final EIS Alternative C. This change is being made in response to issues raised during the protest period and based on additional policy discussions.

    Concerns were raised by the public that the BLM action was not adequate to protect BSSG and its habitat. Disturbance levels identified in the Final EIS will require site-specific project mitigation to insure no unmitigated net loss of habitat. This requires assessing habitat availability at the landscape scale.

    Tall Structure Buffer—Proposed Change

    As part of the protest process, the BLM found that it needed to correct an error in the Proposed Plan Amendment and Final EIS. The BLM found that it should have identified the buffer distance for tall structures as 4 miles from active or pending leks. This is consistent with management prescriptions proposed by the USFS. Specifically, the BLM proposes to adopt the action from Alternative C which states that tall structures, which could serve as predator perches, will not be authorized within 4 miles of an active or pending lek (C-LUSU-S-04). The 4-mile lek buffer accords with other prescriptions of surface disturbance in sage-grouse habitat and is consistent with best science available.

    High-Voltage (≥120kV) Transmission Line—Proposed Change

    The BLM is designating exclusion areas for new high-power (≥120kV) transmission lines in BSSG habitat. Specifically, new high-power (≥120kV) transmission line corridors, rights-of-way, facilities, or construction areas in habitat (outside of existing corridors) will not be authorized (C-Min-S-09). This change is being made in response to issues raised during the protest period and based on additional policy discussions and was analyzed under Alternative C in the EIS.

    Connectivity Habitat—Proposed Change

    The BLM is clarifying language from Alternative C to provide for management of connectivity habitat. The BSSG landscape is fragmented by areas of agriculture and urbanization, as well as areas of naturally occurring and encroaching pinyon-juniper vegetation. Sage-grouse habitats within and between PMU are often separated by stretches of unsuitable areas that may inhibit sage-grouse movements across the landscape. Alternative C provides a limited amount of management direction to maintain or enhance suitability of connective area. Alternative C includes a goal about habitat and movement and an objective of improving degraded habitat, including areas with conifer encroachment (i.e., pinyon-juniper). Actions and Best Management Practices relating to connectivity apply primarily to mineral uses. Alternative C states that where valid existing rights exist, in connective habitat areas, vegetation characteristics suitable to sage-grouse should be maintained to the extent technically feasible (C-Min-S-01). In addition, Alternative C provides additional direction not specific to connectivity which states, “Vegetation treatments and post-disturbance restoration should seed and/or transplant sagebrush to restore large patches of sagebrush cover and connect existing patches” (C-Wild-S-02). Given the fragmented nature of the bi-state landscape and the level of apparent isolation of subpopulations, additional management direction for connective habitat area is necessary to facilitate sage-grouse movement, reduce isolation, and increase genetic interchange between subpopulations. This change is being made in response to policy discussions.

    Please note that public comments and information submitted including names, street addresses, and email addresses of persons who submit comments will be available for public review and disclosure at the above address during regular business hours (7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.), Monday through Friday, except holidays.

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

    Authority:

    40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2

    John F. Ruhs, Acting State Director, Nevada.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28876 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCA932000.L13400000.DQ0000.LXSSB0020000.16X] Notice of Availability of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment to the California Desert Conservation Plan and the Bakersfield and Bishop Resource Management Plans and Final Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP). This LUPA would amend the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan and the Bakersfield and Bishop Resource Management Plans (RMPs). By this notice, the BLM is announcing the availability of the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS.

    DATES:

    BLM planning regulations state that any person who meets the conditions as described in the regulations may protest the BLM's Proposed LUPA/Final EIS. A person who meets the conditions and files a protest must do so within 30 days of the date that the Environmental Protection Agency publishes its Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    Copies of the DRECP Proposed LUPA and Final EIS have been sent to affected Federal, State, and local government agencies, affected tribal governments, and to other stakeholders. The Proposed LUPA and Final EIS are available for review online at www.drecp.org and www.blm.gov/ca/drecp. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for a list of locations where copies of the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS are available for public inspection.

    All protests must be in writing and mailed to one of the following addresses: Regular Mail: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest Coordinator, P.O. Box 71383, Washington, DC 20024-1383; Overnight Delivery: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest Coordinator, 20 M Street SE., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20003.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Vicki Campbell, Program Manager, DRECP, telephone 916-978-4401; address BLM California State Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-1623, Sacramento, CA; email [email protected] To request a DVD, please send an email to [email protected] or call 1-866-936-7477 to provide a mailing address. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1 800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The BLM developed the DRECP to: (1) Advance Federal and State natural resource conservation goals and other Federal land management goals; (2) Meet the requirements of the Federal Endangered Species Act, Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (OPLMA), California Endangered Species Act, Natural Community Conservation Planning Act, and FLPMA in the Mojave and Colorado/Sonoran desert region of Southern California; and (3) Facilitate the timely and streamlined permitting of renewable energy projects. The Draft DRECP includes a strategy that identifies and maps potential areas for renewable energy development and areas for long-term natural resource conservation. The Draft DRECP was published on September 26, 2014 (79 FR 57971), and comments were accepted until February 23, 2015.

    In March 2015, the DRECP partner agencies (the BLM, California Energy Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife) announced a phased approach to completing the DRECP. As part of this approach, the BLM's component of the DRECP is being finalized first in Phase I, outlining important designations for conservation and renewable energy on public lands.

    The Proposed DRECP LUPA would amend the CDCA Plan for the entire CDCA, and the RMPs for portions of the Bishop and Bakersfield Field Offices, which includes the Mojave Desert and Colorado/Sonoran Desert ecoregion subareas in California. The DRECP Plan Area includes all or a portion of the following counties: Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego. The DRECP Plan Area covers approximately 22,585,000 acres, of which approximately 9,784,000 acres are BLM-administered lands. An additional 1,085,000 acres of BLM-administered lands are within the CDCA but outside of the DRECP Plan Area.

    The BLM's objectives for the Proposed DRECP LUPA and Final EIS are to:

    • Conserve biological, physical, cultural, social, and scenic resources;

    • Promote renewable energy and transmission development, consistent with Federal renewable energy and transmission goals and policies, in consideration of State renewable energy targets;

    • Comply with all applicable Federal laws, including the BLM's obligation to manage the public lands consistent with FLPMA;

    • “Preserve the unique and irreplaceable resources, including archaeological values, and conserve the use of the economic resources” of the CDCA (FLPMA 601(a)(6), 43 U.S.C. 1781(a)(6));

    • Incorporate goals, objectives, and allowable uses on areas of the public lands managed for conservation purposes within the CDCA and which the BLM identifies as components of the National Landscape Conservation System, consistent with the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11);

    • Amend land use plans consistent with the criteria in FLPMA and the CDCA Plan;

    • Coordinate planning and management activities with other Federal, State, local, and tribal planning and management programs by considering the policies of approved land resource management programs, to the extent consistent with Federal law; and

    • Make some land use allocation decisions outside the DRECP area but within the CDCA, including Visual Resource Management Classes and land use allocations to replace multiple-use classes.

    Following the publication of the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS, the BLM expects to issue a decision that will identify the public lands in the CDCA that Congress included in the National Landscape Conservation System under Section 2002(b)(2)(D) of Public Law 111-11. The Proposed LUPA and Final EIS would define the goals, objectives, and allowable uses within those lands. It would also identify areas suitable for renewable energy development (Development Focus Areas or DFAs); Areas of Critical Environmental Concern and Wildlife Allocation Areas; areas suitable for an emphasis on recreation (Special Recreation Management Areas and Extensive Recreation Management Areas), and areas that would continue to be managed for other uses. In addition, the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS contemplate modifications in the management of recreation (including the establishment of Special Recreation Management Areas and Extensive Recreation Management Areas), allowing for continued exploration of mineral resources, establishment of Visual Resource Management Classes, and grazing. The Proposed LUPA and Final EIS also incorporate proposed mitigation measures to be considered in relation to future authorized uses on the public lands and activities on non-public lands that could adversely affect public land resources. The BLM consulted with tribes and carefully considered tribal comments when developing proposed DFAs and conservation areas and other elements of the proposed LUPA.

    The Proposed DRECP LUPA and Final EIS include the BLM's proposed alternative, four additional action alternatives, and a no action alternative. Action alternatives analyzed in detail are the result of integrating varying locations and configurations for renewable energy and conservation on BLM-managed lands. These alternatives were developed through the interagency process that led to the development of the Draft DRECP. The preferred alternative in the draft DRECP/Draft EIS has been modified based on public comment.

    The alternatives differ in the following ways:

    • Areas suitable for renewable energy: The alternatives range from 81,000 acres of Development Focus Areas (Alternative 1) to 718,000 acres of Development Focus Areas (Alternative 2). Under the No Action Alternative, 2,804,000 acres would be open to some form of renewable energy development. The Proposed Alternative identifies 388,000 acres of Development Focus Areas. The alternatives include Conservation and Management Actions for development in these areas.

    • Conservation Designations: With respect to lands to be included in the National Landscape Conservation System, the alternatives range from 3,264,000 acres (Alternative 1) to 5,113,000 acres (Alternative 2). Under the No Action Alternative, no lands would be identified as National Conservation Lands, although 2,966,000 acres would remain as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. The Proposed Alternative would identify 3,856,000 acres of National Conservation Lands. The alternatives also analyze a range of management actions for National Conservation Lands. In addition, the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS would identify new and expanded Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. The Proposed Alternative would identify approximately 4,717,000 acres of ACECs, although approximately 3,337,000 acres would overlap with proposed National Conservation Lands.

    • Recreation: The Proposed LUPA and Final EIS would identify Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) and Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs). The alternatives range from 2,537,000 acres of SRMA (Alternative 1) and 2,458,000 acres of SRMA (Proposed Alternative). The Proposed Alternative would also include 946,000 acres of ERMAs. Under the No Action Alternative, there would be zero acres of ERMA, 193,000 acres of SRMA, and 1,465,000 acres managed for recreation emphasis.

    Comments on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS received from the public and internal BLM review were considered and incorporated as appropriate into the proposed plan. Public comments resulted in the addition of clarifying text, but did not significantly change proposed land use plan decisions.

    Instructions for filing a protest with the Director of the BLM regarding the Proposed LUPA/Final EIS may be found in the “Dear Reader” Letter of the DRECP Proposed LUPA and Final EIS and at 43 CFR 1610.5-2. All protests must be in writing and mailed to the appropriate address, as set forth in the ADDRESSES section above. Emailed protests will not be accepted as valid protests unless the protesting party also provides the original protest by either regular or overnight mail postmarked by the close of the protest period. Under these conditions, the BLM will consider the emailed protest as an advance copy and it will receive full consideration. If you wish to provide the BLM with such advance notification, please direct emails to: [email protected]

    Copies of the Proposed LUPA and Final EIS are available for public inspection at the following locations:

    • BLM California State Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-1623, Sacramento, CA 95825;

    • BLM California Desert District Office, 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos, Moreno Valley, CA 92553;

    • BLM Barstow Field Office, 2601 Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311;

    • BLM El Centro Field Office, 1661 S. 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243;

    • BLM Needles Field Office, 1303 S. Highway 95, Needles, CA 92363;

    • BLM Palm Springs South Coast Field Office, 1201 Bird Center Drive,

    Palm Springs, CA 92262;

    • BLM Ridgecrest Field Office, 300 S. Richmond Road, Ridgecrest, CA 93555;

    • BLM Bakersfield Field Office, 3801 Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, CA 93308;

    • BLM Bishop Field Office, 351 Pacu Lane, Suite 100, Bishop, CA 93514; and

    • FWS Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office, 777 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 208, Palm Springs, CA 92262.

    Electronic copies will also be available at public libraries throughout the Planning Area. See the project Web site above or contact the BLM for further information on other locations.

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

    Authority:

    40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2, 43 CFR 1610.5.

    Thomas Pogacnik, Deputy State Director, Bureau of Land Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28791 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-19542;PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP15.R50000] Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee: Notice of Nomination Solicitation AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for nominations.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service is seeking nominations for one member of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee). The Secretary of the Interior will appoint the member from nominations submitted by Indian tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and traditional Native American religious leaders. The nominee need not be a traditional Indian religious leader.

    DATES:

    Nominations must be received by December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Melanie O'Brien, Program Manager, National NAGPRA Program (2253), National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, or via email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Review Committee was established by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA), at 25 U.S.C. 3006, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

    The Review Committee is responsible for:

    1. Monitoring the NAGPRA inventory and identification process;

    2. reviewing and making findings related to the identity or cultural affiliation of cultural items, or the return of such items;

    3. facilitating the resolution of disputes;

    4. compiling an inventory of culturally unidentifiable human remains and developing a process for disposition of such remains;

    5. consulting with Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations and museums on matters within the scope of the work of the Review Committee affecting such tribes or organizations;

    6. consulting with the Secretary of the Interior in the development of regulations to carry out NAGPRA; and

    7. making recommendations regarding future care of repatriated cultural items.

    The Review Committee consists of seven members appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary may not appoint Federal officers or employees to the Review Committee. Three members are appointed from nominations submitted by Indian tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and traditional Native American religious leaders. At least two of these members must be traditional Indian religious leaders. Three members are appointed from nominations submitted by national museum or scientific organizations. One member is appointed from a list of persons developed and consented to by all of the other members.

    Members serve as Special Government Employees, which requires completion of annual ethics training. Members are appointed for 4-year terms and incumbent members may be reappointed for 2-year terms. The Review Committee's work takes place during public meetings. The Review Committee normally meets in person two times per year, normally for two or three days. The Review Committee may also hold one or more public teleconferences of several hours duration.

    Review Committee members serve without pay but shall be reimbursed for each day the member participates in Review Committee meetings. Review Committee members are reimbursed for travel expenses incurred in association with Review Committee meetings (25 U.S.C. 3006(b)(4)). Additional information regarding the Review Committee, including the Review Committee's charter, meeting protocol, and dispute resolution procedures, is available on the National NAGPRA Program Web site, at www.nps.gov/NAGPRA/REVIEW/.

    Individuals who are federally registered lobbyists are ineligible to serve on all FACA and non-FACA boards, committees, or councils in an individual capacity. The term “individual capacity” refers to individuals who are appointed to exercise their own individual best judgment on behalf of the government, such as when they are designated Special Government Employees, rather than being appointed to represent a particular interest.

    Nominations should:

    1. Be submitted on the official letterhead of the tribe or organization.

    2. Affirm that the signatory is the official authorized by the tribe or organization to submit the nomination.

    3. Nominations by a traditional religious leader must explain that he or she is a traditional religious leader.

    4. Include the nominee's full legal name, home address, home telephone number, and email address.

    5. Include the nominee's resume or a brief biography of the nominee, in which the nominee's NAGPRA experience and ability to work as a member of a Federal advisory committee are addressed.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melanie O'Brien, Program Manager, National NAGPRA Program (2253), National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, or via email [email protected]

    Dated: October 30, 2015. Alma Ripps, Chief, Office of Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28826 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EE-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain Aquarium Fittings and Parts Thereof, DN 3098; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing under section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.8(b)).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS 1 , and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

    1 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at USITC.2 The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS.3 Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    2 United States International Trade Commission (USITC): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    3 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of HYDOR USA Inc. on November 6, 2015. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain aquarium fittings and parts thereof. The complaint names as a respondent JEBAO CO., LTD of China. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a general exclusion order, a limited exclusion order, a cease and desist order, and a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

    Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments, not to exceed five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments, on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

    In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

    (i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

    (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

    (iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

    (iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

    (v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

    Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation.

    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3098”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures4 ). Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

    4 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf.

    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.5

    5 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 6, 2015. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28800 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE-15-038] Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    November 13, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.

    STATUS:

    Open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Agendas for future meetings: None.

    2. Minutes.

    3. Ratification List.

    4. Vote in Inv. Nos. 701-TA-548 and 731-TA-1298 (Preliminary)(Welded Stainless Steel Pressure Pipe from India). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determinations on November 16, 2015; views of the Commission are currently scheduled to be completed and filed on November 23, 2015.

    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 4, 2015. William R. Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29142 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION Notice of Intent To Award—Grant Awards for the Provision of Civil Legal Services to Eligible Low-Income Clients in February 2016 AGENCY:

    Legal Services Corporation.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of intention to make FY 2016 Grant Awards for Service Area MI-13 in southeastern Michigan.

    SUMMARY:

    The Legal Services Corporation (LSC) hereby announces its intention to award grants to provide economical and effective delivery of high quality civil legal services to eligible low-income clients in southeastern Michigan in February 2016.

    DATES:

    All comments and recommendations must be received on or before the close of business on December 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Legal Services Corporation—Grants Awards, Legal Services Corporation; 3333 K Street NW., Third Floor; Washington, DC 20007.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reginald Haley, Office of Program Performance, at (202) 295-1545, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to LSC's announcement of funding availability on September 22, 2015, 80 FR 57235, LSC intends to award funds to provide civil legal services in southeastern Michigan. The service area is comprised of Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties. The applicants for the service area are listed below. The amounts below reflect the funding amounts for 2015 grant awards to each service area. These amounts will change based on the 2016 census adjustment and the final FY2016 appropriation. LSC will post all updates and/or changes to this notice at http://www.grants.lsc.gov/grants-grantee-resources. Interested parties are asked to visit http://www.grants.lsc.gov/grants-grantee-resources regularly for updates on the LSC grants process.

    Name of applicant organization State Service area Estimated
  • annualized 2016
  • funding
  • Lakeshore Legal Aid MI MI-13 $ 4,368,810 Legal Aid and Defender Association MI MI-13 4,368,810

    The grant will be awarded under the authority conferred on LSC by section 1006(a)(1) of the Legal Services Corporation Act, 42 U.S.C. 2996e(a)(l). The award will be made so that the service area is served, although no listed organization is guaranteed an award. The grant will become effective and grant funds will be distributed in February 2016.

    This notice is issued pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2996f(f). Comments and recommendations concerning potential grantees are invited, and should be delivered to LSC within thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this notice.

    Dated: November 9, 2015. Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28812 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7050-01-P
    NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    3:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 18, 2015.

    PLACE:

    Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Proposed Credit Union/Bank Merger. Closed pursuant to Exemption (8).

    RECESS:

    3:30 p.m.

    TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 19, 2015.

    PLACE:

    Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Corporate Stabilization Fund Quarterly Report.

    2. 2016/2017 Annual Performance Plan.

    3. NCUA Rules and Regulations, Chartering and Fields of Membership.

    4. NCUA's 2016/2017 Operating Budget and 2016/2017 Corporate Stabilization Fund Oversight Budget.

    5. 2016 Overhead Transfer Rate.

    6. 2016 Operating Fee Assessment Scale.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29187 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meetings; National Science Board

    The National Science Board, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of meetings for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

    DATE AND TIME:

    November 18, 2015 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and November 19, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. to 2:10 p.m. (EST).

    PLACE:

    These meetings will be held at the National Science Foundation, 4201Wilson Blvd., Room 1235, Arlington, VA 22230. All visitors must contact the Board Office (call 703-292-7000 or send an email message to [email protected]) at least 24 hours prior to the meeting and provide name and organizational affiliation. Visitors must report to the NSF visitor desk located in the lobby at the 9th and N. Stuart Streets entrance to receive a visitor's badge.

    WEBCAST INFORMATION:

    Public meetings and public portions of meetings will be webcast. To view the meetings, go to http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/nsf/151118/ and follow the instructions.

    UPDATES:

    Please refer to the National Science Board Web site for additional information. Meeting information and schedule updates (time, place, subject matter or status of meeting) may be found at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/notices.jsp.

    AGENCY CONTACT:

    Ron Campbell, [email protected], (703) 292-7000.

    PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONTACT:

    Nadine Lymn, [email protected], (703) 292-2490.

    STATUS:

    Portions open; portions closed.

    OPEN SESSIONS:

    November 18, 2015 8-8:30 a.m. (Plenary introduction, Chair and Director Reports) 8:30-9 a.m. (AO) 9:55-11:55 a.m. (CPP) 12:55-2 p.m. (SEI) November 19, 2015 8:30-9:15 a.m. (AB) 9:15-9:35 a.m. (SCF) 9:35-10:10 a.m. (CSB) 11:50 a.m.-12:10 p.m. (NPP) 1:10-1:55 p.m. (CEH) 1:55-2:10 p.m. (Plenary) CLOSED SESSIONS:

    November 18, 2015 9-9:45 a.m. (AO) 2-2:45 p.m. (NPP) 3-3:50 p.m. (CPP) 3:50-4:30 p.m. (Plenary closed) 4:30-5 p.m. (Plenary executive closed) November 19, 2015 10:20-11:50 a.m. (CPP/SCF joint meeting) MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Wednesday, November 18, 2015 Plenary Board Meeting Open Session: 8-8:30 a.m. • Introduction and NSB Chair's Report • NSF Director's Report Committee on Audit & Oversight (AO) Open Session: 8:30-9 a.m. • AO Chair's opening remarks • Approval of August 2015 open meeting minutes • Approval of OIG Semiannual Report to Congress • Inspector General's update • Chief Financial Officer's update • AO Chair's closing remarks Audit and Oversight Committee Closed Session: 9-9:45 a.m. • AO Chair's opening remarks • Approval of August 2015 closed AO meeting minutes • Report on status of National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) study • AO Chair's closing remarks Committee on Programs and Plans (CPP) Open Session: 9:55-11:55 a.m. • CPP Chair's opening remarks ○ Update: CY 2015 schedule of planned action and information items; update for the August 2015 meeting ○ CY 2016 Schedule of Planned Action and Information Items ○ Update: National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI) ○ iPlant Status update • Approval of open CPP meeting minutes for the August 2015 meeting • Overview of Geosciences Infrastructure Investments: Status and Timelines • Information Item: High Performance Computing (HPC) • NSB Recompetition Policy and Statement • Report on NSB Antarctic Site Visit • CPP Chair's closing remarks Committee on Science & Engineering Indicators (SEI) Open Session: 12:55-2 p.m. • SEI Chair's opening remarks • Approval of the open SEI August 2015 meeting minutes • Discussion and approval of the 2016 Overview and Digest • Update on the 2016 digital Indicators • Discussion of `companion briefs' (formerly `vignettes') • Discussion of Indicators future directions: possible 2016 workshop • SEI Chair's closing remarks Ad hoc Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans (NPP) Closed Session: 2-2:45 p.m. • NPP Chair's opening remarks • Approval of closed teleconference minutes of October 8 and October 23, 2015 • NSF Director's update on NEON • Update on NPP Task Force activities and next steps • NPP Chair's closing remarks Committee on Programs and Plans (CPP) Closed Session: 3-3:50 p.m. • CPP Chair's opening remarks • Approval of closed CPP minutes for August 2015 meeting • Action Item: National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) • CPP Chair's closing remarks Plenary Board Meeting Closed Session: 3:50-4:30 p.m. • NSB Chair's opening remarks • Approval of closed plenary minutes for August 2015 • Approval of NRAO preliminary resolution • NSF Director's report • Closed committee reports • NSB Chair's closing remarks Plenary Board Meeting Executive Closed Session: 4:30-5 p.m. • NSB Chair's opening remarks • Approval of executive closed session minutes for August 2015 • Elect four members to the Elections Committee (to nominate candidates for May 2016 elections of NSB Chair, Vice-Chair, and two Executive Committee members) • Approval of Honorary Awards recommendations • Report from the NOMS Committee • Board member NSF grant awards • NSB Chair's closing remarks MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Thursday, November 19, 2015 Working Group on Administrative Burdens (AB) Open Session: 8:30-9:15 a.m. • AB Working Group Chair's opening remarks • Approval of open AB working group minutes for August 2015 • Discussion of National Academies of Science Report • AB Working Group Chair's closing remarks Subcommittee on Facilities (SCF) Open Session: 9:15-9:35 a.m. • SCF Chair's opening remarks • Approval of open SCF teleconference minutes from November 2, 2015 • Discussion of SCF's role and charge • SCF Chair's closing remarks Committee on Strategy and Budget (CSB) Open Session: 9:35-10:10 a.m. • CSB Chair's opening remarks • Approval of CSB open minutes for the August 2015 meeting • Approval of the 2014 Annual Portfolio Review • Information Item: NSF International Strategy CPP/SCF Joint Meeting 10:20-11:50 a.m. • CPP Chair's opening remarks • Discussion: The Evolving Needs of Science and Engineering Infrastructure • Antarctic Infrastructure Modernization for Science (AIMS) update Ad hoc Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans (NPP) Open Session: 11:50 a.m.-12:10 p.m. • NPP Chair's opening remarks • NPP Chair's report on NPP activities • Discussion: New NSB product for monitoring large facilities Committee on Education and Human Resources (CEH) Open Session: 1:10-1:55 p.m. • CEH Chair's opening remarks • Approval of CEH open minutes for the August 2015 meeting • Vision and plan for grand challenges in STEM education • CEH Chair's closing remarks Plenary Board Meeting Open Session: 1:55-2:10 p.m. • NSB Chair's opening remarks • NSF Director's remarks • Approval of plenary open session minutes for August 2015 meeting • Approval of the 2014 Annual Portfolio Review • Confirm ad hoc Honorary Awards Committee as a standing committee • Approval of the 2016 SEI Overview and Digest • Approval of the OIG Semiannual Report to Congress • Open committee reports • NSB Chair's closing remarks MEETING ADJOURNS:

    2:10 p.m.

    Kyscha Slater-Williams, Program Specialist, National Science Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-29167 Filed 11-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of permit applications received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of permit applications received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law 95-541.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish a notice of permit applications received to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of permit applications received.

    DATES:

    Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by December 14, 2015. This application may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Division of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, at the above address or [email protected] or (703) 292-7149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas a requiring special protection. The regulations establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected Areas.

    Application Details 1. Applicant Permit Application: 2016-019

    Dr. Diana H. Wall, School of Global Environmental Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1036.

    Activity for Which Permit Is Requested

    ASPA entry, Import. Applicant wishes to enter Cape Royds ASPA 121 to collect soil samples and associated invertebrates as well as benthic algal mats and underlying soil. This project follows up on several past surveys of orthinogenic soils conducted in this ASPA which examined invertebrate genetic distribution, and also explores the influence of climate change on soil invertebrate populations. The algae sampling is to also follow up on previous surveys, to examine the temporal stability of lake algal communities in the region. Soil samples of approximately 600 grams each would be collected at up to 30 sites within the ASPA using sterile collecting techniques. For benthic algae, at 6 sites along the shore of Poly Lake, the applicant and team would use a sanitized 2 cm copper coring apparatus to collect, by hand, 4 replicates of surface algal mats and 1-2 cm of underlying sediment. Samples would be transported back to the US for further study.

    Location ASPA 121 Cape Royds Dates January 1, 2016 to February 15, 2016 Nadene G. Kennedy, Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28799 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-14 and CP2016-17; Order No. 2809] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 21 negotiated service agreement to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: November 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 21 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 21 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, November 6, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-14 and CP2016-17 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 21 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than November 16, 2015. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-14 and CP2016-17 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than November 16, 2015.

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

    By the Commission.

    Ruth Ann Abrams, Acting Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28881 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: November 13, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 6, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 21 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-14, CP2016-17.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28783 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76390; File No. SR-NSX-2015-05] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 11.1, Hours of Trading, To Rescind Interpretations and Policies .01, “Cessation of Trading Operations on NSX;” Adopting Rule 11.25 Relating to Use of Market Data Feeds; Amending NSX Rule 11.13 Relating to the Order Delivery Mode of Order Interaction; Amending NSX Rule 11.11 To Remove Certain Order Types and Correct Technical Deficiencies in the Numbering of Certain Sections of the Rule; and Amending Rule 11.12, Cross Message and Making Conforming Amendments to NSX Rules 11.11(c) and 16.2 November 9, 2015.

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act” or “Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on November 3, 2015, National Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NSX®” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change, as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.1, Hours of Trading, to rescind Interpretations and Policies .01, “Cessation of Trading Operations on NSX.” The Exchange is also proposing to: (i) Adopt new Rule 11.25, Use of Market Data Feeds; (ii) amend NSX Rule 11.13 and Interpretations and Policies .01 with respect to the order delivery mode of order interaction with the Exchange's trading system (“Order Delivery”); (iii) amend NSX Rule 11.11, Orders and Modifiers, to remove descriptions of certain order types that the Exchange will not offer upon a resumption of trading and to correct technical deficiencies in the numbering of certain subparagraphs of the rule; and (v) amend Rule 11.12, Cross Message, to delete the rule in its entirety and make conforming amendments to NSX Rules 11.11(c) and 16.2.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nsx.com, at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's public reference room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    NSX, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware,3 is a registered national securities exchange under Section 6 of the Exchange Act 4 and operates as a self-regulatory organization governed by the requirements of Section 19 of the Exchange Act.5 The Exchange is filing this rule proposal to rescind Interpretations and Policies .01 of Rule 11.1 (hereinafter referred to as “I&P.01”), “Cessation of Trading Operations on the Exchange.” I&P.01 currently states that, as of the close of business on May 30, 2014 (the “Closing Date”), NSX shall cease trading activity on its trading system (the “System”); 6 that all NSX Rules will remain in full force and effect through and after the Closing Date; and that the Exchange shall file a proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4 of the Exchange Act prior to any resumption of trading on the Exchange pursuant to Chapter XI (Trading Rules).7 Rescinding I&P.01 will permit the Exchange to resume trading activity on the System as soon as practicable after the instant rule amendment is operative, thereby restoring NSX to its status as an operating, all-electronic national securities exchange as it had been for many years prior to ceasing trading operations

    3 NSX was founded in 1885 as the Cincinnati Stock Exchange and changed its name to “National Stock Exchange” in 2003. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48774 (November 12, 2003), 68 FR 65332 (November 19, 2003) (SR-CSE-2003-12). In 2006, the Exchange de-mutualized and changed its corporate organizational structure from a non-stock, not-for-profit Ohio corporation to a Delaware for-profit stock corporation. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53963 (June 8, 2006), 71 FR 34660 (June 15, 2006) (SR-NSX-2006-03).

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    5 15 U.S.C. 78s.

    6 Exchange Rule 1.5S.(4) defined the term “System” as “. . . the electronic securities communications and trading facility designated by the Board [of Directors] through which orders . . . are consolidated for ranking and execution.”

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72107 (May 6, 2014), 79 FR 27017 (May 12, 2014) (SR-NSX-2014-14).

    In connection with the proposed resumption of trading on the System, the Exchange is proposing several other rule amendments. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing in new Rule 11.25 to describe the Exchange's use of certain data feeds for order handling and execution, order routing and regulatory compliance. The Exchange is also proposing amendments to: (i) Rule 11.11 to eliminate the Double Play and Auto-Ex Only Order types; (ii) Rule 11.13 and the Interpretations and Policies under the rule to eliminate rule text relating to Order Delivery; and (iii) Rule 11.16, Cross Message, to rescind the rule text in its entirety. The Exchange is further proposing non-substantive or conforming amendments to Rules 11.11 and 16.2.

    The details of these proposed rule changes are discussed below.

    Proposed Resumption of Trading on NSX

    At the time that NSX ceased trading operations, the Exchange operated as a wholly-owned subsidiary of CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC (“CBSX”).8 Thereafter, on February 13, 2015,9 the Commission issued an Order granting its approval of a transaction in which National Stock Exchange Holdings, Inc. (“NSX Holdings”), a Delaware corporation, purchased all of the outstanding shares of NSX from the CBSX (the “Approval Order”). The Commission noted in the Approval Order that “[t]he Exchange is, and will remain, registered as a national securities exchange under Section 6 of the Act 10 and a self-regulatory organization [“SRO”] . . . as defined in [S]ection 3(a)(26) of the Act 11 after the Closing [of the Transaction].” The Commission further noted that “. . . [t]he Exchange states that it plans to reopen its trading operations as soon as practicable after the Closing and plans to operate the Exchange using its existing . . . [S]ystem pursuant to the rules of the Exchange currently in effect . . . .”12

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66071 (December 29, 2011); 77 FR 521 (January 5, 2012)(SR-CBOE-2011-107 and SR-NSX-2011-14), Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Proposed Rule Changes in Connection with the Proposed Acquisition of the National Stock Exchange, Inc. by the CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC.

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74270 (February 13, 2015), 80 FR 9286 (February 20, 2015) (SR-NSX-2014-017), Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change in Connection With a Proposed Transaction in Which National Stock Exchange Holdings, Inc. Will Acquire Ownership of the Exchange from the CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC. The Approval Order described in detail, inter alia, the ownership structure of the Exchange upon its acquisition by NSX Holdings and the requirement that NSX Holdings give due regard to the preservation of the independence of the Exchange's self-regulatory function.

    10See 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    11See 15 U.S.C. 78s.

    12See Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change in Connection With a Proposed Transaction in Which National Stock Exchange Holdings, Inc. Will Acquire Ownership of the Exchange from the CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC, 80 FR at 9287.

    After the Closing of the Transaction up to the date of the instant rule filing, the Exchange has continued to discharge its applicable SRO responsibilities in anticipation of resuming trading operations on the Exchange. Specifically, as outlined below, the Exchange has continued as a party to the National Market System (“NMS”) Plans 13 and has updated its rules as appropriate.14 The Exchange also filed with the Commission an amendment to NSX Rule 2.5, Application Procedures for an ETP Holder or to become an Associated Person of an ETP Holder, adding Interpretations and Policies .01, Expedited Process for Reinstatement as an ETP Holder.15 The amendment provided an expedited procedure, available for a period of 90 days from the date the rule amendment became operative, for ETP Holders in good standing as of the close of business on May 30, 2014 to reinstate their status as such and to register Associated Persons.16

    13See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74323 (February 19, 2015), 80 FR 10169 (February 25, 2015) (File No. 4-631), Order Approving the Eighth Amendment to the National Market System Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (the “Limit Up-Limit Down Plan”); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75192 (June 17, 2015), 80 FR 36028 (June 23, 2015) (File No. 4-668), Order Approving Amendment No. 1 to the National Market System Plan Governing the Process of Selecting a Plan Processor and Developing a Plan for the Consolidated Audit Trail; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75505 (July 22, 2015), 80 FR 45254 (July 29, 2015) (File No. S7-24-89), Order Approving Amendment No. 35 to the Joint Self-Regulatory Organization Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation and Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privileges Basis; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75504 (July 22, 2015), 80 FR 45252 (July 29, 2015) (SR-CTA/CQ 2015-01), Order Approving the Twenty Second Substantive Amendment to the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan and Sixteenth Substantive Amendment to the Restated CQ Plan; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75660 (August 11, 2015), 80 FR 48940 (August 14, 2015), (SR-CTA-2015-02), Order Approving the Twenty Third Substantive Amendment to the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan; Securities Exchange Act Release No 75980 (September 25, 2015), 80 FR 58796 (September 30, 2015),Order Approving Amendment No. 2 to the National Market System Plan Governing the Process of Selecting a Plan Processor and Developing a Plan for the Consolidated Audit Trail.

    14See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72434 (June 19, 2014), 79 FR 36110 (June 25, 2014) (SR-NSX-2014-08), Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Changes Relating to Clearly Erroneous Executions; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72914 (August 26, 2014), 79 FR 52089 (September 2, 2014) (SR-NSX-2014-16), Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 15.5 to Provide Additional Clarity and Precision, Correct Certain Citations, and Align the Rule with the Rules of Other Exchanges With Respect to the Original and Continued Listing Standards for Issuers' Compensation Committees; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75355 (July 2, 2015), 80 FR 39460 (July 9, 2015) (SR-NSX-2015-03), Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 4.3, Record of Written Complaints; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75554 (July 30, 2015), 80 FR 46620 (August 5, 2015) (SR-NSX-2015-04), Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Exchange Rule 11.21, Short Sales, to Describe the Exchange's Implementation of Rule 201 of Regulation SHO Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Relocate Certain Text from Rule 11.11, Orders and Modifiers; and Amending Rule 13.2 to Incorporate By Reference Rules 200,203 and 204 of Regulation SHO.

    15 The term “ETP Holder” refers to registered brokers or dealers that have been issued an Equity Trading Permit by the Exchange for effecting approved securities transactions on the Exchange's trading facilities. See Exchange Rule 1.5E.(1).

    16See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75098 (June 3, 2015), 80 FR 32644 (June 9, 2015) (SR-NSX-2015-02).

    As noted above, the Exchange will operate using the existing System and pursuant to the rules in effect. The Exchange has maintained the System's operability and has not made any modification to the System's functionality, except to the extent necessary to comply with regulatory requirements.17 The functionality relating to order entry and execution, order routing, clearance and settlement and market data distribution, as further described below, remains the same. The Exchange does not currently list any securities and trades equity securities on an Unlisted Trading Privileges basis.18

    17 For example, the Exchange has made System changes to comply with the new timestamp requirements under the July 2015 amendments to the UTP Plan and the Consolidated Tape and Consolidated Quote Plans. See footnote 13, above.

    18See NSX Rule 15.9.

    The Exchange has implemented and continues to execute a rigorous testing process, including tests with industry participants, to assure that all components of the System function effectively, that the Exchange has full operational capability to re-open its marketplace for the trading of equity securities, and that the Exchange will operate in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations. This testing plan included three weekend tests of NSX's interfaces with the securities information processors, or “SIPs” (i.e., the Consolidated Quote System or “CQS;” the Consolidated Tape System or “CTS;” the UTP Quotation Data Feed, or “UQDF;” and the UTP Trade Data Feed, or “UTDF”). These tests, which were completed on August 29, 2015, confirmed that NSX will be ready to receive quote and trade data and relevant national market system plan information from, and transmit its quote and trade information to, the securities information processors when it resumes trading operations on the System.

    The Exchange also tested for proper functioning of client communication systems with NSX, client order entry connections, and depth of book. Moreover, the Exchange tested its matching engines, market data, trade reporting, quote publication and trade messages, and clearing systems. The tests were conducted with actual market data and clearing data. The Exchange has also re-certified its connection with the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”) to assure complete and accurate trade clearing and settlement functions.

    The Exchange has also performed a thorough review of the hardware and software components of the System and has resumed the production status of the System on a daily basis. Furthermore, the Exchange made enhancements to its connectivity and certification processes. The Exchange has created an automated certification process, providing ETP Holders and Users with a more efficient process of connecting to the System. The Exchange has also made enhancements to certain internal processes and monitoring tools. These enhancements include a message bus upgrade and security master file upgrade. The Exchange has also enhanced its System monitoring tools to provide for more effective monitoring of System health to allow quicker response within operations support.

    Having conducted these tests and made these enhancements and upon receiving regulatory approval to resume trading on the System, the Exchange will execute a staged roll-out plan to reach full operational capacity.19 Beginning one week and one day prior to the date trading will resume on the System, the Exchange will test the System using only test symbols. On the first day of trading the Exchange will allow for trading in symbols within a defined alphabetic range (for example, symbols within the letter range X-Z). After three days of trading in this range, the Exchange will activate trading in additional symbols within an alphabetic range (for example, adding symbols within the letter range A-K). Two days later the Exchange will activate trading in all remaining symbols and be fully operational. The Exchange will provide ETP Holders with advance notice of the dates and the symbol ranges that will comprise the staged roll-out.

    19 The Exchange will issue a notice to ETP Holders with the precise details of the roll-out plan prior to initiating the plan.

    The Exchange will also take affirmative steps to assure that the date that it intends to resume trading operations is communicated broadly to market participants and to the investing public. Specifically, the Exchange has a target date of on or about December 1, 2015 to resume trading operations on the System. The Exchange will provide timely written notice of the date and other information concerning its resumption of trading operations directly to the following parties: (1) ETP Holders; (2) other national securities exchanges that trade NMS securities; (3) the SIPs; and, (4) the operating committees for the various NMS plans (e.g., the Consolidated Tape Association Plan/Consolidated Quote Plan; the Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation and Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privileges Basis; and the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility). Furthermore, the Exchange will provide timely notice to the public as a whole by way of widely-disseminated press releases issued by the Exchange and notification through the Exchange's Web site and through communications with financial and industry press.

    As required by Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,20 the Exchange has the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act and to comply and to enforce compliance by ETP Holders and persons associated with ETP Holders, with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange. The Exchange has the financial, technology and staff resources to effectively surveil its marketplace and to regulate ETP Holders' trading on NSX upon the resumption of trading operations on the System. The Exchange will continue to regularly assess its regulatory resources to assure that they continue to be sufficient to discharge its SRO responsibilities. The Exchange notes that, throughout the period from the date that it ceased trading operations through the date of the instant rule filing, it has continued to be a party to certain 17d-2 Plans for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities pursuant to Section 17(d)(1) of the Exchange Act 21 and Rules 17d-1 and 17d-2 thereunder,22 specifically the 17d-2 Plan relating to the surveillance, investigation and enforcement of insider trading rules 23 and the 17d-2 Plan relating to Regulation NMS Rules.24 The Exchange will continue as a party to these plans going forward.

    20 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(1).

    21 15 U.S.C. 78q(d)(1).

    22 17 CFR 240.17d-1 and 17 CFR 240.17d-2, respectively.

    23See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65991 (December 16, 2010), 76 FR 79714 (December 22, 2011) (File No. 4-566), Notice of Filing and Order Approving and Declaring Effective an Amendment to the Plan for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities . . . Relating to the Surveillance, Investigation, and Enforcement of Insider Trading Rules.

    24See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63430 (December 3, 2010), 75 FR 76758 (December 9, 2010) (File No. 4-618), Order Approving and Declaring Effective a Plan for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities . . . Relating to Regulation NMS Rules.

    In summary, since ceasing trading operations on the System as of the close of business on May 30, 2014, the Exchange (i) continued to maintain the operability of the System; (ii) implemented and successfully executed a rigorous internal testing program to assure that the System will function as designed and subject to NSX rules in effect; (iii) successfully tested connectivity to the securities information processors and to DTCC; (iv) continued to discharge its SRO responsibilities through, among other things, remaining a party to NMS plans and in the multi-party 17d-2 plans for insider trading surveillance and certain Regulation NMS requirements; and (v) amended its rules to keep current with industry regulatory initiatives (e.g., amendments to the market-wide rules governing clearly erroneous executions), and is proposing additional rule changes in the instant rule proposal, described below, that will align with the System's functionality when trading operations resume. Further, the Exchange has sufficient financial, technology and staff resources to effectively regulate ETP Holder activity in the NSX marketplace and meet its compliance obligations under the Act.

    In view of the foregoing, the Exchange is positioned to successfully reopen its marketplace for the trading of equity securities and accordingly is proposing to rescind I&P.01 to allow the NSX to resume trading operations as soon as practicable after the instant rule proposal becomes operative.

    Adoption of NSX Rule 11.25

    The Exchange is proposing to adopt NSX Rule 11.25 to describe the sources of market data used for purposes of order handling and execution, order routing, and regulatory compliance. Paragraph (a) of the proposed Rule will specify which data feeds the Exchange utilizes for the handling, execution, and routing of orders, as well as for surveillance necessary to monitor compliance with applicable securities laws and Exchange rules. Proposed paragraph (b) will state that the Exchange may adjust its calculation of the NBBO based on information about orders sent to other venues with protected quotations, execution reports received from those venues, and certain orders received by the Exchange. With this rule and other functionalities in place, the system will use market data as follows.

    Order Handling and Execution

    In order to calculate the national best bid and offer (“NBBO”) 25 the Exchange uses only SIP data disseminated through CQ and UQDF for all exchanges. NSX does not use any exchange's proprietary data feeds. The Exchange does not include its own quotes in the calculation of the Exchange's NBBO because the system is designed such that all incoming orders are separately compared to the Exchange's Protected Best Bid or Offer (“PBBO”) 26 and the Exchange-calculated NBBO, which together create a complete view of the NBBO, prior to order display, execution, or routing.

    25 NSX Rule 1.5P.(2) defines the “Protected NBBO” as the national best bid or offer that is a protected quotation.

    26 NSX Rule 1.5P.(3) defines the “Protected BBO” as the Protected NBBO or the displayed Top of Book on NSX.

    The Exchange offers three types of “pegged” Zero Display Reserve Orders, which may be “pegged” to the buy-side of the PBBO, the sell-side of the PBBO or the midpoint of the PBBO.27 The System calculates the PBBO using the quotes from the SIPs, excluding quotes disseminated by the SIPs that originated from the NSX Book.28

    27See NSX Rule 11.11(c)(2)(A).

    28 NSX Rule 1.5N.(1) defines the NSX Book as the System's electronic file of orders.

    Order Routing

    When the Exchange has a marketable order eligible to be routed and the System identifies that there is no matching price available on the Exchange, but there is a matching price represented at another trading center displaying protected quotes, the System will cause the order to be routed to that trading center. The Exchange uses data received from the SIPs to update the System's calculation of the NBBO for purposes of routing decisions.

    Regulatory Compliance

    Locked or Crossed Markets: The System determines whether the display of an order would lock or cross the market. At the time an order is entered into the System, it will establish, based upon its calculation of the NBBO from SIP feeds, whether the order will lock or cross the prevailing NBBO for a security. In the event that the order would produce a locking or crossing condition, the System will cancel the order or route the order based on the ETP Holder's order handling instructions.

    Pursuant to Regulation NMS, a declaration of self-help can occur when an exchange displaying protected quotes is slow, as defined in Regulation NMS, or non-responsive to the Exchange's routed orders. In this circumstance, according to Rule 611(b) of Regulation NMS,29 the Exchange may declare self-help against that exchange and display a quotation that may lock or cross the market that the Exchange invoked self-help against.30 The Exchange may also declare self-help where another exchange's SIP quotes are slow or non-responsive resulting in a locked or crossed market. Once the Exchange declares self-help, the System will ignore the quotes generated from that exchange in its calculation of the NBBO for execution and routing determinations in compliance with Regulation NMS. The Exchange will also disable all routing to that exchange. However, the System will continue to receive and process that exchange's quotes in order to immediately include the quote in the NBBO calculation and enable routing once self-help is revoked.

    29See 17 CFR 242.611.

    30See also Question 5.03 in the “Division of Trading and Markets, Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Rule 611 and Rule 610 of Regulation NMS” (last updated April 4, 2008) available at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/nmsfaq610-11.htm.

    Order Protection Rule: Pursuant to Rule 611 of Regulation NMS,31 the Exchange is required to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent trade-throughs of protected quotations in NMS stocks that do not fall within a valid exception and, if relying on such an exception, that are reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the terms of the exception. The System does not permit an execution on the Exchange if there are better-priced protected quotations displayed in the market unless the order is an ISO. At the time an order is entered on NSX, the System uses the SIP data to determine if the NBBO is priced better than what is on the NSX Book. If the Exchange does not match such order on the NSX Book,32 and based on the ETP Holder's order handling instructions, the System cancels or routes the order.

    31 17 CFR 242.611.

    32 NSX Rule 1.5N.(1) defines the term “NSX Book” as the “System's electronic file of orders.”

    Regulation SHO: The Exchange is required to establish, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the execution of a Short Sale Order in a covered security at a price that is equal to or below the current National Best Bid (“NBB”) when a short sale price restriction is in effect pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO under the Exchange Act (“Short Sale Circuit Breaker”).33 When a Short Sale Circuit Breaker is in effect, the Exchange utilizes information received from SIP feeds and what is on the NSX Book, to prevent the execution of a sell short order in contravention of Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.34

    33 17 CFR 242.201.

    34See Id.

    Limit Up-Limit Down: As stated in Rule 11.24(c), the Exchange is a participant in, and subject to the applicable requirements of, the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan. The System uses price band data received through the SIP to comply with the requirements of the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan. Specifically, as provided in Rule 11.24(e) the System will not execute or display orders for an NMS stock at prices that are outside of a specified price band (i.e., below the lower price band or above the higher price band).

    Amendments to NSX Rules 11.13 and 11.11

    The Exchange is further proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.13, Proprietary and Agency Orders; Modes of Order Interaction, to eliminate text relating to two modes of order interaction available to Users.35 The Exchange is also: (i) Proposing a conforming amendment to NSX Rule 11.11(c)(2)(C) to remove text relating to a Zero Display Reserve Order 36 entered through the order delivery mode; and (ii) proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.11, Orders and Modifiers, to eliminate the Auto-Ex Only Order 37 and the Double Play Order 38 and make non-substantive amendments to correct a numbering defect with respect to certain subparagraphs of NSX Rule 11.11(c).

    35 A “User” is any ETP Holder or Sponsored Participant that is authorized to obtain access to the System pursuant to NSX Rule 11.9. See NSX Rule 1.5U.(1).

    36 NSX Rule 11.11(c)(2) defines a reserve order as “[a] limit order with a portion of the quantity displayed . . . and with a reserve portion of the quantity . . . that is not displayed.” Rule 11.11(c)(2)(A) provides a Reserve Order may be entered with a zero display quantity, in which case the Reserve Order is known as a Zero Display Reserve Order.

    37See NSX Rule 11.11(c)(13).

    38See NSX Rule 11.11(c)(10).

    On August 31, 2006, the Commission approved amendments to NSX's trading rules to provide for a price-time priority market with two modes of order interaction: (1) Automatic execution (“Auto-Ex Mode”) and (2) order delivery and automated response (previously referred to herein as “Order Delivery”).39 Every User is eligible to use the Auto-Ex Mode, under which the System matches and executes like-priced orders, including against Order Delivery Orders resting on the NSX Book. To use Order Delivery a User must demonstrate that it can meet certain eligibility criteria; specifically, a User must demonstrate that its system can automatically process the inbound order and respond immediately. If no response to an inbound order is received within 300 milliseconds, the User's displayed order will be canceled. Interpretations and Policies .01 of Rule 11.13 provides that, in determining whether a User's system can automatically process the inbound order and respond immediately, the Exchange requires that Users selecting Order Delivery have system response times that generally meet or exceed industry standards (subject to exceptions for occasional systems malfunctions that do not, in the Exchange's judgment, materially impair the User's ability to process and respond to inbound orders immediately).40

    39See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54391 (August 31, 2006), 71 FR 52836 (September 7, 2006) (SR-NSX-2006-08), Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment Nos. 2 and 3 Thereto to Amend Its Trading Rules to Provide for a Price-Time Priority Market and Other Related Changes.

    40 The Exchange considered 100 milliseconds to be the industry standard for response time to an inbound order.

    The Exchange maintained Order Delivery as a mode of interaction with the System through the cessation of trading as of the close of business on May 30, 2014. The Exchange has now determined that, upon resuming trading operations on the System, it will not offer Order Delivery as a mode of order interaction with the System and the only mode of order interaction with the System will be Auto-Ex Mode. The Exchange made this decision as a business judgment based on its assessment of customer interest and market structure considerations. The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.13 to delete paragraph (b) and Interpretations and Policies .01 relating to Order Delivery as a mode of order interaction.

    The Exchange is further proposing to amend Rule 11.11(c)(2)(C) to remove certain text related to a Zero Display Reserve Order entered through Order Delivery. The relevant rule text currently states that, if a Zero Display Reserve Order is not designated as a Post Only Order 41 and is entered using the Order Delivery and such order is immediately marketable upon entry into the System, the order will have its mode of order interaction converted to Automatic Execution as described in Rule 11.13(b)(1). This rule text is no longer apposite in view of the Exchange's decision to eliminate Order Delivery upon a resumption of trading on the System.

    41 NSX Rule 11.11(c)(5) defines a Post Only Order as “[a] limit order that is to be posted on the Exchange and not routed away to another trading center.”

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rule 11.11 to eliminate the Auto-Ex Only Order, which was implemented by the Exchange in May 2013.42 An Auto-Ex Only Order is an “immediate or cancel” (“IOC”) Limit or Market Order 43 that the System will automatically execute exclusively against other Auto-Ex Orders at a marketable price. An Auto-Ex Only Order does not interact with an Order Delivery order or route away to other Trading Centers. The System cancels any shares remaining after executing against all marketable Auto-Ex Orders. An Auto-Ex Only Order cannot be used to comply with Rule 611 of Regulation NMS pursuant to the Exchange Act because the Auto-Ex Only Order did not interact with Order Delivery orders that may be protected quotations.

    42See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69519 (May 6, 2013), 78 FR 27461 (May 10, 2013) (SR-NSX-2013-02), Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change to Adopt a New Order Type Called the “Auto-Ex Only” Order and Add New Definitions Regarding Automatic Execution Mode and Automatic Execution Orders.

    43 NSX Rule 11.11(a), General Order Types, defines a market order as an order to buy or sell a stated amount of a security that is to be executed at the best price obtainable when the order reaches the Exchange (NSX Rule 11.11(a)(1)); a limit order is defined as an order to buy or sell a stated amount of a security at a specified price or better (NSX Rule 11.11(a)(2)); NSX Rule 11.11(b), Time-in-Force, defines an IOC order as a limit order that is to be executed in whole or in part as soon as such order is received and the portion not so executed is canceled. IOC orders are not eligible to be routed to an away trading center pursuant to NSX Rule 11.15, Order Execution.

    The Exchange notes that the Auto-Ex Only order was implemented to offer Users of the System the option of interacting with marketable orders on the NSX Book without having to incur delays associated with Order Delivery. Such delays could result from sending an incoming order to an Order Delivery participant and receiving a response thereto. However, since NSX will no longer offer Order Delivery the underlying rationale for the Auto-Ex Only Order will no longer exist.

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.11(c)(10) to eliminate the Double Play Order type. The Double Play Order was implemented by the Exchange in November 2012.44 A Double Play Order is a market or limit order for which a User instructs the System to route to designated away trading centers which are approved by the Exchange from time to time without first exposing the order to the NSX Book. A Double Play Order that does not execute in full after routing away receives a new time stamp upon return to the Exchange and is ranked and maintained in the NSX Book in accordance with NSX Rule 11.14, Priority of Orders.

    44See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68317 (November 29, 2012), 77 FR 72423 (December 5, 2012) (SR-NSX-2012-22).

    After assessing the use of the Double Play Order since November 2012, the Exchange has determined that the Double Play Order was infrequently used and that it is not an efficient use of its resources to maintain and support the Double Play Order as an active order type.

    Finally, the Exchange proposes certain technical, non-substantive amendments to NSX Rule 11.11 to correct defective numbering. The Exchange added the Midpoint Seeker Order in March 2013 under NSX Rule 11.11(c)(13).45 As a result of an administrative error by the Exchange, the Auto-Ex Only order was assigned the same subparagraph number (c)(13) of Rule 11.11 when it was implemented in May 2013. The Exchange is proposing to renumber the Midpoint Seeker Order as subparagraph (c)(12), which is currently a “reserved” subparagraph. With the proposed elimination of the Auto-Ex Only Order, subparagraph (c)(13) will now be “reserved.”

    45See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69009 (February 28, 2013), 78 FR 14867 (March 7, 2013) (SR-NSX-2013-07).

    Amendments to Rule 11.12

    Currently, NSX Rule 11.12, Cross Message, provides that subject to the certain restrictions described in the rule, Users are permitted to enter a cross message instructing the System to match for execution the identified buy-side of the cross message with the identified sell side of the cross message at a specified price (a “Cross Trade”).46 Pursuant to NSX Rule 11.12(b), the price of the Cross Trade must, on the buy side, be at least $0.01 less than the lowest displayed order to sell on the NSX Book and is at a price equal to or less than the Protected NBBO offer; on the sell side of the cross, the price must be at least $0.01 greater than the highest displayed order to buy on the NSX Book and is at a price equal to or greater than the Protected NBBO bid.

    46 The Commission approved NSX Rule 11.12 in August 2006. See footnote 39, supra.

    Rule 11.12 provides for three types of Cross Trades: A Midpoint Cross, at which the Cross Trade is priced at the midpoint of the Protected NBBO and improves each side of the NSX Top of Book 47 by at least the minimum price increment for the subject security; 48 a Clean Cross, in which the Cross Trade is for at least 5,000 shares with an aggregate value of at least $100,000 and is executed at a price that is equal to or better than each side of the NSX Top of Book and equal to or better than the Protected NBBO; 49 and, a Cross/Sweep, in which the System, upon receipt of a Cross/Sweep message from a user, will enter a Protected Sweep Order 50 for the User's account in an amount necessary to execute against all protected quotations that, if not swept, would prohibit the Cross Trade from being executed by the System. Pursuant to NSX Rule 11.12(f)(1), the Cross Trade will be executed on the System simultaneously with the Protected Sweep Order, unless the size of such order would exceed the size of the Cross Trade, in which event both the Protected Sweep Order and the order for the Cross Trade would be canceled without an execution.

    47 The NSX Top of Book is the best-ranked order to buy or sell in the NSX Book. See NSX Rule 1.5T.(1).

    48See NSX Rule 11.12(c).

    49See NSX Rule 11.12(d).

    50 A Protected Sweep Order is a limit order that instructed the System to “sweep” the market with sizes equal to the order sizes in the NSX Book and the order sizes at away trading centers. See NSX Rule 11.11(c)(7)(i)(A).

    The Exchange has determined in its business judgment that, upon a resumption of trading on the System, it will not support the functionality for Users to enter a Cross into the System. This determination is based on the Exchange's assessment of its current market structure requirements and the technology resources needed to support the functionality. In the event that the Exchange determines to offer Cross Message functionality in the future, it will file a proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4 of the Exchange Act.

    In view of the determination to no longer offer Cross Message functionality, the Exchange is proposing other conforming amendments to its rules. First, the Exchange proposes to delete subparagraph (c)(7)(iii) of NSX Rule 11.11, which currently states that “[a] Sweep Order entered as part of a Cross/Sweep message pursuant to Rule 11.12 shall be treated identically to a Sweep Order designated `Sweep and Cancel' except as otherwise provided in Rule 11.12.” Similarly, the Exchange proposes to rescind in its entirety the text of NSX Rule 16.2, Crosses, which currently provides that “[c]rosses executed in Tape “A”, “B” and “C” securities will not be subject to any transaction fees.” The elimination of the Cross Message functionality renders this rule inapposite.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange's proposed rule changes are consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) 51 of the Exchange Act. Specifically, the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirement of Section 6(b)(5) 52 of the Exchange Act that the rules of an exchange be designed to, among other things, promote just and equitable principles of trade, foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    51 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    52 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange submits that the proposed rescission of I&P.01, which will operate to permit the re-opening of the System for quoting and trading equity securities, fulfills the purposes of Section 6(b)(5).53 The Exchange's rule proposal will restore the Exchange to the status of a fully operational national securities exchange, as it was prior to the close of business on May 30, 2014. Notably, throughout the period from the date that it ceased trading operations up to the date of the instant rule filing, the Exchange has continued to maintain its status as a registered national securities exchange and as an SRO. It has continued its participation as a party in the national market system plans.54

    53 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    54See footnote 13, supra.

    Upon the resumption of trading on the System, the Exchange will operate its marketplace pursuant to rules currently in effect, as amended by the rule changes proposed in this rule filing. The Exchange has completed a rigorous testing process, including tests with the SIPs and market participants, to assure that the System continues to send and receive quote and trade data and other information necessary to assure the Exchange's compliance with the national market system plans. Restoring NSX to its status as an operating Exchange will promote the protection of investors and the public interest by providing an additional trading venue, operating pursuant to an approved rule set, and available to market participants and the investing public for the trading of equity securities. The Exchange has sufficient financial and staff resources to continue to discharge its obligations as a national securities exchange and as an SRO. The Exchange submits that the proposed amendment will thus further the purposes of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 55 in that it will operate to promote just and equitable principles of trade and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by providing investors with the ability to execute trades in equity securities on a regulated marketplace operating pursuant to rules approved by the Commission and subject to regulatory oversight.

    55 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    Additionally, the Exchange's proposal to describe the Exchange's use of data feeds as a part of this filing and through the adoption of NSX Rule 11.25 is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.56 Further, the proposal removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and protects investors and the public interest because it provides additional specificity and transparency. The Exchange's proposal will enable investors to better assess the quality of the Exchange's execution and routing services. The proposal does not change the operation of the Exchange or its use of data feeds; rather it describes how, and for what purposes, the Exchange uses the quotes disseminated from data feeds to calculate the NBBO for a security for purposes of Regulation NMS, Regulation SHO and various order types that update based on changes to the applicable NBBO. The additional transparency into the operation of the Exchange as described in the proposal will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.

    56 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange's proposed amendments to conform certain of its rules to the planned operation of the System upon a resumption of trading are consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.57 Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to amend NSX Rules 11.11 and 11.13, and Interpretations and Policies .01 of Rule 11.13, to remove text relating to Order Delivery, which will not be available to Users as a mode of order interaction with the System upon a resumption of trading. The Exchange is further proposing to amend Rule 11.11 to eliminate the Auto-Ex Only Order, which relates to the handling of certain orders when interacting with Order Delivery, and the Double Play Order, which was an infrequently used order type that the Exchange no longer wishes to support. The Exchange is also proposing to correct defective numbering in Rule 11.11, which will promote clarity and ease of reference in its rules. These proposed amendments are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 58 in that they will operate to align the Exchange's rules with the planned operation of the System upon a resumption of trading, thereby promoting just and equitable principles of trade and the protection of investors and the public interest.

    57 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    58Id.

    The Exchange's proposals to amend NSX Rule 11.12 to rescind the rule text governing Cross Trades on the System, and making conforming amendments to NSX Rules 11.11(c)(7)(iii), regarding a Cross/Sweep Order, and 16.2, providing that Cross Trades in Tape A, B, and C securities are not subject to transaction fees, are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act because they will remove from the NSX rule book provisions that address a System functionality that will not be supported operationally upon a resumption of trading on the System. The amendments are designed to align the Exchange's rules with the System's planned functionality. The Exchange believes that the amendments will further promote just and equitable principles of trade and the protection of investors and the public interest.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. The Exchange believes that reopening the System for the trading of equity securities will enhance competition in the national market system by providing investors with the opportunity to trade on a competitive trading venue that was available to them prior to the close of business May 30, 2014. The Exchange submits that the proposed rule amendment will thus operate to enhance rather than burden competition in the equity securities markets.

    The Exchange's proposed rule changes to: (i) Eliminate Order Delivery-related rule text; (ii) Eliminate the Auto-Ex Only and Double Play Orders; (iii) eliminate the Cross Trade rule; and (iv) make other conforming rule amendments and correct defecting numbering of certain paragraphs of NSX Rule 11.11, have no competitive impact in that they are designed to assure that the Exchange's rules and its System functionality align and to promote clarity and transparency in the Exchange's rules.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited or received comments on the proposed rule change from market participants or others.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

    (A) by order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or

    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NSX-2015-05 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2015-05. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2015-05 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.59

    59 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28811 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76384; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-131] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding NASDAQ Last Sale Plus November 6, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 30, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend NASDAQ Rule 7039 (NASDAQ Last Sale and NASDAQ Last Sale Plus Data Feeds) with language clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NASDAQ Last Sale Plus (“NLS Plus”), a comprehensive data feed offered by NASDAQ OMX Information LLC,3 will be charged solely to firms that are Internal Distributors and External Distributors (collectively, “Distributors” of the data feed) that receive a NLS Plus direct data feed.4

    3 NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is a subsidiary of Nasdaq, Inc. (formerly, The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.), separate and apart from The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC. The primary purpose of NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is to combine publicly available data from the three filed last sale products of the exchange subsidiaries of Nasdaq, Inc. and from the network processors for the ease and convenience of market data users and vendors, and ultimately the investing public. In that role, the function of NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is analogous to that of other market data vendors, and it has no competitive advantage over other market data vendors; NASDAQ OMX Information LLC performs precisely the same functions as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters, and other market data vendors.

    4 “Internal Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers within the Distributor's own entity. “External Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers outside the Distributor's own entity. Internal Distributors and External Distributors are together known as “Distributors”. Proposed NASDAQ Rule 7039(d)(1).

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of this proposal is to amend NASDAQ Rule 7039 with language clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NLS Plus will be charged solely to firms that are Distributors that receive an NLS Plus direct data feed.5

    5 Thus, the fee does not apply to persons that receive the NLS Plus data feed indirectly, through an Internal Distributor or External Distributor.

    NLS Plus 6 allows data distributors to access last sale products offered by each of Nasdaq, Inc.'s three U.S. equity exchanges.7 NLS Plus includes all transactions from these exchanges, as well as FINRA/NASDAQ TRF data that is included in the current NLS product. In addition, NLS Plus features total cross-market volume information at the issue level, thereby providing redistribution of consolidated volume information (“consolidated volume”) from the securities information processors (“SIPs”) for Tape A, B, and C securities.8 Thus, NLS Plus covers all securities listed on NASDAQ and New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) (now under the Intercontinental Exchange (“ICE”) umbrella), as well as US “regional” exchanges such as NYSE MKT, NYSE Arca, and BATS (also known as BATS/Direct Edge).9

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 75257 (June 22, 2015), 80 FR 36862 (June 26, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-055) (order approving proposed rule change regarding NLS Plus); 75600 (August 4, 2015), 80 FR 47968 (August 10, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-088) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus) (the “NLS Plus fee proposal”); 75763 (August 26, 2015), 80 FR 52817 (September 1, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-72) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding NLS Plus on PSX); 75890 (September 10, 2015), 80 FR 55692 (September 16, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-76) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus on PSX); 75709 (August 14, 2015), 80 FR 50671 (August 20, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-047) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding NLS Plus on BX); and 75830 (September 3, 2015), 80 FR 54640 (September 10, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-054) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus on BX).

    7 The NASDAQ OMX U.S. equity markets include the Exchange NASDAQ OMX BX (“BX”), and NASDAQ OMX PSX (“PSX”) (together known as the “NASDAQ OMX equity markets”). PSX and BX are filing companion proposals similar to this one. NASDAQ's last sale product, NASDAQ Last Sale, includes last sale information from the FINRA/NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility (“FINRA/NASDAQ TRF”), which is jointly operated by NASDAQ and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71350 (January 17, 2014), 79 FR 4218 (January 24, 2014) (SR-FINRA-2014-002). For proposed rule changes submitted with respect to NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale, see, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57965 (June 16, 2008), 73 FR 35178, (June 20, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-060) (order approving NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds pilot); 61112 (December 4, 2009), 74 FR 65569, (December 10, 2009) (SR-BX-2009-077) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding BX Last Sale data feeds); and 62876 (September 9, 2010), 75 FR 56624, (September 16, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-120) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding PSX Last Sale data feeds).

    8 Tape A and Tape B securities are disseminated pursuant to the Security Industry Automation Corporation's (“SIAC”) Consolidated Tape Association Plan/Consolidated Quotation System, or CTA/CQS (“CTA”). Tape C securities are disseminated pursuant to the NASDAQ Unlisted Trading Privileges (“UTP”) Plan. NLS Plus reflects real-time trading activity for Tape C securities and 15-minute delayed information for Tape A and Tape B securities.

    9 Registered U.S. exchanges are listed at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/mrexchanges.shtml.

    NLS Plus is currently codified in NASDAQ Rule 7039(d). The fees for NLS Plus are set forth in NASDAQ Rule 7039(d)(1)-(d)(3) as follows:

    (1) Firms that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus shall pay the annual administration fees for NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale,10 and a data consolidation fee of $350 per month.

    10 Annual administrative fees are in BX Rule 7035, NASDAQ Rule 7035, and NASDAQ OMX PSX Fees Chapter VIII. These remain unchanged at: $1,000 for NASDAQ, $1,000 for BX, and $1,000 for PSX. For purposes of conformity, “administration” is changed to “administrative” in NASDAQ Rule 7039(d)(1), discussed below.

    (2) Firms that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus would either be liable for NASDAQ Last Sale fees or NASDAQ Basic fees.

    (3) In the event that NASDAQ OMX BX and/or NASDAQ OMX PHLX adopt user fees for BX Last Sale and/or PSX Last Sale, firms that receive NLS Plus would also be liable for such fees.

    The Exchange now proposes to clarify how the data consolidation fee in NASDAQ Rule (d)(1) will be charged. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to clarify that firms that are Distributors that receive a NASDAQ Last Sale Plus direct data feed shall pay a data consolidation fee of $350 per month. Thus, only Distributors that receive NLS Plus would be charged the data consolidation fee. As proposed to be amended, NASDAQ Rule 7039(d)(1) would state:

    (1) Firms that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus shall pay the annual administrative fees for NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale. Additionally, Internal Distributors or External Distributors shall pay a data consolidation fee of $350 per month.11 “Internal Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers within the Distributor's own entity. “External Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers outside the Distributor's own entity.12

    11 The Exchange notes that those that have received NLS Plus directly from the Exchange have all, in fact, been firms. While the NLS Plus feed is available to all that subscribe and pay the requisite costs, the Exchange believes that in light of such costs it will continue to experience only firms receiving the feed directly from the Exchange.

    12 NASDAQ Rule 7039(d)(2) would remain unchanged. For conformity with Rule 7039 language, “NLS” in Rule 7039(d)(3) would be changed to “NASDAQ Last Sale”.

    The NLS Plus fee structure as amended continues to be designed to ensure that vendors could compete with the Exchange by creating a product similar to NLS Plus.13 The proposed fee structure reflects the cost of the data feeds underlying NLS Plus (including user fees and annual administrative fees), as well as the incremental cost of the aggregation and consolidation function (the “consolidation function”) for NLS Plus. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the fee structure would not result in charges for NLS Plus that are lower than the cost to a vendor creating a competing product, including the cost of receiving the underlying data feeds and consolidating them. The data consolidation fee recognizes that NLS Plus is created from data derived from NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, PSX Last Sale, and data from the SIPs to which a consolidation function is applied. Charging the consolidation fee will not impede an entity receiving the underlying direct data feeds from creating a competing product to the NLS Plus feed based on combining individual data feeds, and charging its clients a fee that it believes reflects the value of the consolidation function. The Exchange believes that the incremental cost of aggregation to an entity that wants to re-create NLS Plus will be factored into the entity's revenue opportunity and may be inconsequential where the vendor has in place systems to perform these functions as part of creating its proprietary market data products and allocating costs over numerous products and customer relationships. For these reasons, the Exchange believes that vendors could readily offer a product similar to the NLS Plus on a competitive basis at a similar cost.

    13 For additional discussion regarding potential competition with NLS Plus, see supra note 6 and filings cited therein.

    The amendment to clarify that the consolidation fee applies to Distributors that receive the NLS Plus data feed directly but does not apply to persons that receive NLS Plus indirectly through a Distributor is designed to ensure that the Exchange charges the fee only to those persons that directly benefit from the consolidation function. Specifically, if a person wished to combine the products that underlie NLS Plus and distribute them to customers or internal users, it would incur its own consolidation costs. By purchasing NLS Plus for distribution, a Distributor foregoes these costs and instead opts to pay the Exchange to perform the consolidation function for it. Thus, imposing this fee upon Distributors is a logical corollary to the service being provided. By contrast, imposing the fee upon persons receiving the product through Distributors would effectively impose a duplicative charge, since such persons consume the data but are not in the business of distributing it and therefore do not forego consolidation costs when receiving the product. The Exchange further notes that the consolidation fee for BATS One, an analogous product of competing exchanges, is charged solely to external distributors of that product.14

    14See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73918 (December 23, 2014), 79 FR 78920 (December 31, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-055; SR-BYX-2014-030; SR-EDGA-2014-25; SR-EDGX-2014-25) (order approving market data product called BATS One Feed being offered by four affiliated exchanges).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,15 in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,16 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities, and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. All recipients of the NLS Plus data offering continue to pay the underlying data feed fees and annual administrative fees for NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale. The Exchange is simply clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NLS Plus will be charged solely to firms that receive a NASDAQ Last Sale Plus direct data feed and are Distributors.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).

    This change is reasonable and consistent with an equitable allocation of fees because it is designed to ensure that the Exchange charges the fee only to those persons that directly benefit from the consolidation function. Specifically, if a person wished to combine the products that underlie NLS Plus and distribute them to customers or internal users, it would incur its own consolidation costs. By purchasing NLS Plus for distribution, a Distributor foregoes these costs and instead opts to pay the Exchange to perform the consolidation function for it. Thus, imposing this fee upon Distributors is a logical corollary to the service being provided. The change is also not unfairly discriminatory. Indeed, imposing the fee upon persons receiving NLS Plus indirectly through Distributors would effectively impose a duplicative charge upon them, since such persons consume the data but are not in the business of distributing it and therefore do not forego consolidation costs when receiving the product. The Exchange further notes that the consolidation fee for BATS One, an analogous product of competing exchanges, is charged solely to external distributors of that product.17 Accordingly, the exchanges that distribute BATS One take an analogous approach, in that they do not charge a consolidation fee to indirect recipients of the product, but rather charge the fee only to a subset of its distributors.

    17See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73918 (December 23, 2014), 79 FR 78920 (December 31, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-055; SR-BYX-2014-030; SR-EDGA-2014-25; SR-EDGX-2014-25) (order approving market data product called BATS One Feed being offered by four affiliated exchanges).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The change proposed herein is designed to ensure that the consolidation fee for NLS Plus is appropriately assessed to Distributors of the product that benefit from the consolidation function performed by NASDAQ OMX Information LLC in creating the product and insures that a duplicative charge is not also assessed against indirect recipients of the product. Thus, the change will avoid the imposition of fees on certain product recipients, while not increasing fees for any recipients.

    The market for data products is extremely competitive and firms may freely choose alternative venues and data vendors based on the aggregate fees assessed, the data offered, and the value provided. This rule proposal does not burden competition, which is reflected in the offerings of other exchanges that sell alternative data products 18 and in the ability of competing data feed vendors to combine underlying data feeds in direct competition with NLS Plus. NASDAQ OMX Information LLC was constructed specifically to establish a level playing field with market data vendors and to preserve fair competition between them. NASDAQ OMX Information LLC receives NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale from each NASDAQ-operated exchange in the same manner, at the same speed, and reflecting the same fees as for all market data vendors. Therefore, NASDAQ OMX Information LLC has no competitive advantage with respect to these last sale products and NASDAQ commits to maintaining this level playing field in the future. In other words, NASDAQ will continue to disseminate separately the underlying last sale products to avoid creating a latency differential between NASDAQ OMX Information LLC and other market data vendors, and to avoid creating a pricing advantage for NASDAQ OMX Information LLC.

    18Id.

    NLS Plus exists in a market for proprietary last sale data products that is currently competitive and inherently contestable because there is fierce competition for the inputs necessary to the creation of proprietary data and strict pricing discipline for the proprietary products themselves. Numerous exchanges compete with each other for listings, trades, and market data itself, providing virtually limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish to produce and distribute their own market data. This proprietary data is produced by each individual exchange, as well as other entities, in a vigorously competitive market. Similarly, with respect to the FINRA/NASDAQ TRF data that is a component of NLS and NLS Plus, allowing exchanges to operate TRFs has permitted them to earn revenues by providing technology and data in support of the non-exchange segment of the market. This revenue opportunity has also resulted in fierce competition between the two current TRF operators, with both TRFs charging extremely low trade reporting fees and rebating the majority of the revenues they receive from core market data to the parties reporting trades.

    Transaction execution and proprietary data products are complementary in that market data is both an input and a byproduct of the execution service. In fact, market data and trade execution are a paradigmatic example of joint products with joint costs. The decision whether and on which platform to post an order will depend on the attributes of the platform where the order can be posted, including the execution fees, data quality and price, and distribution of its data products. Without trade executions, exchange data products cannot exist. Moreover, data products are valuable to many end users only insofar as they provide information that end users expect will assist them or their customers in making trading decisions.

    The costs of producing market data include not only the costs of the data distribution infrastructure, but also the costs of designing, maintaining, and operating the exchange's transaction execution platform and the cost of regulating the exchange to ensure its fair operation and maintain investor confidence. The total return that a trading platform earns reflects the revenues it receives from both products and the joint costs it incurs. Moreover, the operation of the exchange is characterized by high fixed costs and low marginal costs. This cost structure is common in content and content distribution industries such as software, where developing new software typically requires a large initial investment (and continuing large investments to upgrade the software), but once the software is developed, the incremental cost of providing that software to an additional user is typically small, or even zero (e.g., if the software can be downloaded over the internet after being purchased).19 In NASDAQ's case, it is costly to build and maintain a trading platform, but the incremental cost of trading each additional share on an existing platform, or distributing an additional instance of data, is very low. Market information and executions are each produced jointly (in the sense that the activities of trading and placing orders are the source of the information that is distributed) and are each subject to significant scale economies. In such cases, marginal cost pricing is not feasible because if all sales were priced at the margin, NASDAQ would be unable to defray its platform costs of providing the joint products. Similarly, data products cannot make use of TRF trade reports without the raw material of the trade reports themselves, and therefore necessitate the costs of operating, regulating,20 and maintaining a trade reporting system, costs that must be covered through the fees charged for use of the facility and sales of associated data.

    19See William J. Baumol and Daniel G. Swanson, “The New Economy and Ubiquitous Competitive Price Discrimination: Identifying Defensible Criteria of Market Power,” Antitrust Law Journal, Vol. 70, No. 3 (2003).

    20 It should be noted that the costs of operating the FINRA/NASDAQ TRF borne by NASDAQ include regulatory charges paid by NASDAQ to FINRA.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,21 the Exchange has designated this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed on any person, whether or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization, which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing.

    21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-131 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-131. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).

    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-131 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.22

    22 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28808 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76381; File No. SR-MSRB-2015-09] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Consisting of Proposed Amendments to Rule G-20, on Gifts, Gratuities and Non-Cash Compensation, and Rule G-8, on Books and Records To Be Made by Brokers, Dealers, Municipal Securities Dealers, and Municipal Advisors, and the Deletion of Prior Interpretive Guidance November 6, 2015. I. Introduction

    On September 2, 2015, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB” or “Board”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change consisting of proposed amendments to MSRB Rule G-20 on gifts, gratuities and non-cash compensation, proposed amendments to MSRB Rule G-8, on books and records to be made by brokers, dealers, municipal securities dealers, and municipal advisors, and the deletion of prior interpretive guidance that would be codified by proposed amended Rule G-20 (the “proposed rule change”).

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on September 22, 2015.3 The Commission received three comment letters on the proposed rule change.4 On November 2, 2015, the MSRB submitted a response to these comments.5 This order approves the proposed rule change.

    3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75932 (September 16, 2015), 80 FR 57240 (September 22, 2015) (the “Notice”).

    4See Letters from Tamara K. Salmon, Senior Associate Counsel, Investment Company Institute (“ICI”), dated September 25, 2015 (“ICI Letter”); Leslie M. Norwood, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”), dated October 13, 2015 (“SIFMA Letter”); and Terri Heaton, President, National Association of Municipal Advisors (“NAMA”), dated October 16, 2015 (“NAMA Letter”).

    5See Letter from Michael L. Post, General Counsel—Regulatory Affairs, MSRB, dated November 2, 2015 (“MSRB Response Letter”).

    II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    Existing Rule G-20 is designed, in part, to minimize the conflicts of interest that arise when a dealer attempts to induce organizations active in the municipal securities market to engage in business with such dealers by means of personal gifts or gratuities given to employees of such organizations.6 According to the MSRB, the proposed rule change addresses improprieties and conflicts that may arise when municipal advisors and/or their associated persons 7 give gifts or gratuities to employees who may influence the award of municipal advisory business.8 In summary, the MSRB has proposed amendments to Rule G-20 that would:

    6See MSRB Notice 2004-17 (June 15, 2004).

    7 MSRB Rule D-11 defines “associated persons” as follows: Unless the context otherwise requires or a rule of the Board otherwise specifically provides, the terms “broker,” “dealer,” “municipal securities broker,” “municipal securities dealer,” “bank dealer,” and “municipal advisor” shall refer to and include their respective associated persons. Unless otherwise specified, persons whose functions are solely clerical or ministerial shall not be considered associated persons for purposes of the Board's rules.

    8See supra note 3 at 57240-41.

    • Extend the relevant existing provisions of Rule G-20 to municipal advisors and their associated persons and to gifts given in relation to municipal advisory activities;

    • Consolidate and codify interpretive guidance, including interpretive guidance published by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) and adopted by the MSRB and delete prior interpretive guidance that would be codified by proposed amended Rule G-20;

    • Add a new provision prohibiting a regulated entity from seeking or obtaining reimbursement of certain entertainment expenses from the proceeds of an offering of municipal securities; and

    • Make several revisions that are designed to assist brokers, dealers, and municipal securities dealers (“dealers”) and municipal advisors (dealers, together with municipal advisors, “regulated entities”) and their associated persons with their understanding of and compliance with Rule G-20.

    In summary, the MSRB has proposed amendments to Rule G-8 that would:

    • Extend to municipal advisors the recordkeeping requirements related to Rule G-20 that currently apply to dealers; and

    • Amend the rule language contained in Rule G-8(a)(xvii)(A), (B), and (C) applicable to dealers to reflect the revisions to proposed amended Rule G-20.

    Extension of Rule G-20 to Municipal Advisors and Municipal Advisory Activities

    The MSRB has proposed to extend to municipal advisors and their associated persons: (i) The general dealer prohibition of gifts or gratuities in excess of $100 per person per year in relation to the municipal securities activities of the recipient's employer (the “$100 limit”); (ii) the exclusions contained in the existing rule from that general prohibition (including certain consolidations and the codifications of prior interpretive guidance) and the addition of bereavement gifts to those exclusions; and (iii) the existing exclusion relating to contracts of employment or compensation for services. Proposed section (g) of Rule G-20, on non-cash compensation in connection with primary offerings, is not being extended to municipal advisors or to associated persons thereof.

    (i) General Prohibition of Gifts or Gratuities in Excess of $100 per Year

    The MSRB has proposed section (c) of Rule G-20 which extends to a municipal advisor and its associated persons the provision that currently prohibits a dealer and its associated persons, in certain circumstances, from giving directly or indirectly any thing or service of value, including gratuities (“gifts”), in excess of $100 per year to a person (other than an employee of the dealer). The prohibited payments or services by a regulated entity or associated persons would be those provided in relation to the municipal securities activities or municipal advisory activities of the employer of the recipient (other than an employee of the regulated entity).

    (ii) Exclusions From the $100 Limit

    The MSRB has proposed section (d) of Rule G-20 which extends to a municipal advisor and its associated persons the provision that excludes certain gifts from the $100 limit of proposed section (c) as long as the conditions articulated by proposed section (d) and the relevant subsection, as applicable, are met. Section (d) states that gifts, in order to be excluded from the $100 limit, must not give rise to any apparent or actual material conflict of interest.

    Proposed section (d) of Rule G-20 includes subsections (d)(i) through (d)(iv) and (d)(vi) which consolidate and codify interpretive guidance that the MSRB provided in MSRB Notice 2007-06 (the “2007 MSRB Gifts Notice”).9 The 2007 MSRB Gifts Notice's interpretive guidance also included FINRA guidance that the MSRB had adopted by reference.10 Further, proposed subsection (d)(v) would codify FINRA interpretive guidance relating to bereavement gifts that the MSRB previously had not adopted.11

    9See Dealer Payments in Connection with the Municipal Issuance Process, MSRB Notice 2007-06 (Jan. 29, 2007).

    10See 2007 MSRB Gifts Notice (reminding dealers of the application of Rule G-20 and Rule G-17 in connection with certain payments made and expenses reimbursed during the municipal bond issuance process, and stating that the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.'s (“NASD”) guidance provided in NASD Notice to Members 06-69 (Dec. 2006) to assist dealers in complying with NASD Rule 3060 applies as well to comparable provisions of Rule G-20).

    11See supra note 3 at 57242.

    The MSRB has proposed subsection (d)(i) of Rule G-20 which extends to a municipal advisor and its associated persons the current exclusion of a gift of meals or tickets to theatrical, sporting, and other entertainment given by a dealer or its associated persons from the $100 limit if they are a “normal business dealing.” Such exclusion is subject to the limitations as described in proposed subsection (d)(i).

    Proposed subsections (d)(ii) through (iv) establish three categories of gifts that were previously excluded from the $100 limit under the category of “reminder advertising” in the rule language regarding “normal business dealings” in existing section (b) of Rule G-20. The MSRB has proposed to delete the concept of “reminder advertising” from the “normal business dealings” exclusion under current paragraph (b). This amendment would clarify the types of gifts in the nature of reminder advertising that would be excluded from the $100 limit. These changes conform draft amended paragraph (d) with current FINRA interpretive guidance that the MSRB has stated applies to Rule G-20.12 These three categories are:

    12Id. at 57241.

    • Gifts commemorative of a business transaction, such as a desk ornament or Lucite tombstone (proposed subsection (d)(ii));

    • de minimis gifts, such as pens and notepads (proposed subsection (d)(iii)); and

    • promotional gifts of nominal value that bear an entity's corporate or other business logo and that are substantially below the $100 limit (proposed subsection (d)(iv)).

    Proposed subsection (d)(v) of Rule G-20 excludes bereavement gifts which are reasonable and customary for the circumstances from the $100 limit. According to the MSRB, proposed subsection (d)(v) of Rule G-20 codifies FINRA interpretive guidance currently applicable to dealers relating to bereavement gifts that the MSRB previously had not adopted.13

    13Id. at 57242.

    Finally, the MSRB has proposed subsection (d)(vi) of Rule G-20 which excludes personal gifts given upon the occurrence of infrequent life events, such as a wedding gift or a congratulatory gift for the birth of a child. According to the MSRB, this proposed subsection consolidates and codifies the FINRA personal gift guidance currently applicable to dealers.14

    14Id.

    The “frequency” and “extensiveness” limitations applicable to proposed subsection (d)(i) of Rule G-20 would not apply to proposed subsections (d)(ii) through (vi). The MSRB has proposed to modify those limitations to better reflect the characteristics of the gifts described in proposed subsections (d)(ii) through (vi).15 According to the MSRB, gifts described in those subsections in the proposed rule change are by their nature given infrequently and/or are of such nominal value that retaining the requirement that such gifts be “not so frequent or extensive” would be unnecessarily duplicative of the description of these gifts and could result in confusion.16

    15Id.

    16Id.

    To assist regulated entities with their understanding of the exclusions described and with their compliance with the rule, the MSRB has provided guidance in the Supplementary Material. Paragraph .03 of the Supplementary Material provides guidance regarding promotional gifts and “other business logos” including what would constitute an “other business logo.” Paragraph .04 of the Supplementary Material provides guidance regarding personal gifts including factors that should be considered when determining whether a gift is given in connection with the municipal securities or municipal advisory services of the employer of the recipient.

    (iii) Exclusion for Compensation Paid as a Result of Contracts of Employment or Compensation for Services

    The MSRB has proposed section (f) which extends to municipal advisors the exclusion from the $100 limit in existing Rule G-20(c) for contracts of employment with or compensation for services that are rendered pursuant to a prior written agreement meeting certain content requirements. The MSRB has stated that proposed section (f) would clarify that the exclusion applies only to the compensation paid as a result of certain employment contracts, and does not apply to the existence or creation of employment contracts. The MSRB further stated that proposed section (f) is only a clarification and would not alter the requirements currently applicable to dealers.17

    17Id.

    Consolidation and Codification of MSRB and FINRA Interpretive Guidance

    As discussed, the MSRB has proposed to consolidate and codify existing FINRA interpretive guidance previously adopted by the MSRB and incorporate additional relevant FINRA interpretive guidance that has not previously been adopted by the MSRB in both Rule G-20 text and the Supplementary Material. While FINRA's interpretive guidance regarding bereavement gifts was not formerly adopted by the MSRB, the MSRB believes that this guidance will be appropriate for regulated entities as it is consistent with the purpose and scope of proposed amended Rule G-20. Further, the MSRB stated its belief that the consolidation and codification of the applicable interpretive guidance will promote compliance with the rule and create efficiencies for regulated entities and regulatory enforcement agencies.18

    18Id.

    In addition to the interpretive guidance discussed above, proposed paragraphs .01, .02, and .05 of the Supplementary Material would provide guidance relating to the valuation and the aggregation of gifts and to the applicability of state laws. Proposed paragraph .01 of the Supplementary Material would state that a gift's value should be determined generally according to the higher of its cost or market value. Proposed paragraph .02 of the Supplementary Material would state that regulated entities must aggregate all gifts that are subject to the $100 limit given by the regulated entity and each associated person of the regulated entity to a particular recipient over the course of a year however “year” is selected to be defined by the regulated entity. Proposed paragraphs .01 and .02 reflect existing FINRA interpretive guidance regarding the aggregation of gifts for purposes of its gift rules, which the MSRB has previously adopted.

    Proposed paragraph .05 of the Supplementary Material would remind regulated entities that, in addition to all the requirements of proposed amended Rule G-20, regulated entities may also be subject to other duties, restrictions, or obligations under state or other laws and that proposed amended Rule G-20 would not supersede any more restrictive provisions of state or other laws applicable to regulated entities or their associated persons.

    Prohibition of Reimbursement for Entertainment Expenses

    The MSRB has also proposed section (e) of Rule G-20 which provides that a regulated entity is prohibited from requesting or obtaining reimbursement for certain entertainment expenses from the proceeds of a municipal securities offering. The MSRB stated its belief that this provision would address a matter highlighted by a recent FINRA enforcement action. Proposed section (e) provides that an entertainment expense excludes “ordinary and reasonable expenses for meals hosted by the regulated entity and directly related to the offering for which the regulated entity was retained.” The MSRB has stated that proposed section (e) is intended to allow the continuation of the generally accepted market practice of a regulated entity advancing normal travel costs to personnel of a municipal entity or obligated person for business travel related to a municipal securities issuance and obtaining reimbursement for such costs.19

    19Id.

    Additional Proposed Amendments to Rule G-20

    In addition to the previously discussed proposed amendments to Rule G-20, the MSRB proposed several amendments which it believes will assist readers with their understanding of and compliance with Rule G-20.20 These proposed amendments include (i) a revised rule title, (ii) a new provision stating the rule's purpose, and (iii) a re-ordering of existing provisions and additional defined terms.

    20Id.

    Recordkeeping Requirements

    The MSRB has proposed amendments to Rule G-8 which extend to municipal advisors the recordkeeping requirements related to Rule G-20 that currently apply to dealers. Municipal advisor recordkeeping requirements would be identical to the recordkeeping requirements to which dealers would be subject in proposed amended Rule G-8(a)(xvii)(A) and (B).

    The MSRB has proposed to amend the language contained in Rule G-8(a)(xvii)(A), (B), and (C) applicable to dealers, to reflect the revisions to proposed amended Rule G-20. Proposed amended paragraph (a)(xvii)(A) provides that a separate record of any gift or gratuity subject to the general limitation of proposed amended Rule G-20(c) must be made and kept by dealers (emphasis added to amended rule text). Paragraph (a)(xvii)(B) would be amended to clarify that dealers must make and keep records of all agreements referred to in proposed amended Rule G-20(f) and records of all compensation paid as a result of those agreements (emphasis added to proposed amended rule text). The proposed amendments would also track the reordering of sections in proposed amended Rule G-20 and provide greater specificity as to the records that a dealer must maintain by referencing the terms used in proposed amended Rule G-20.

    The proposed rule change would extend the provisions of existing Rule G-8 to require that municipal advisors as well as dealers make and keep records of: gifts given that are subject to the $100 limit; and all agreements referred to in proposed section (f) (on compensation for services) and records of compensation paid as a result of those agreements.

    Implementation Date

    The MSRB requested that the proposed rule change be approved with an implementation date six months after the Commission approval date for all changes.

    III. Summary of Comments Received and the MSRB's Response

    As noted previously, the Commission received three comment letters on the proposed rule change.21 The commenters generally support the proposed rule change.22 However, some commenters asked for further clarification and provided suggestions to the proposed rule change.23 In response to an earlier request for comment by the MSRB on the draft amendments to Rules G-20 and G-8,24 the MSRB received eight comment letters and responded to the comments in the Notice. In the MSRB Response Letter, the MSRB incorporated by reference its response to comments made in the Notice noting that the three comments received on the proposed rule change were the same or substantially similar to the comments made in response to the MSRB Request for Comment.25 The MSRB believes the proposed rule change is appropriately tailored and responded to the commenters as discussed below.

    21See supra note 4.

    22Id.

    23Id.

    24 Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to MSRB Rule G-20, on Gifts, Gratuities and Non-Cash Compensation, to Extend its Provisions to Municipal Advisors, MSRB Notice 2014-18 (Oct. 23, 2014) (“MSRB Request for Comment”).

    25See supra note 5.

    A. Application of Proposed Amended Rule G-20(c) to Certain Recipients

    NAMA commented that under the MSRB's proposed Rule G-20, the $100 limit would seem not to apply to gifts given to employees or officials of municipal entities or obligated persons because such persons, for the most part, do not engage in “municipal advisory activities.” 26 NAMA noted that the MSRB indicated in the Notice that prior interpretive guidance made clear issuer personnel are considered to engage in “municipal securities activities” and requested that the MSRB codify this guidance in Rule G-20.27 The MSRB responded to NAMA stating that the language of both existing Rule G-20 and proposed amended Rule G-20 applies to gifts given in relation to this broad term “municipal securities activities.” 28

    26See NAMA Letter.

    27Id.

    28See supra notes 5 and 24.

    NAMA also commented that many municipal official and governing board members are not employees of municipal entities or obligated persons, and therefore it appears that G-20 does not apply to gifts given to non-employee officials of municipal entities and obligated persons.29 The MSRB responded by stating that it believes for purposes of existing and proposed amended Rule G-20, elected and appointed officials are considered employees of the governmental entity on behalf of which they act as agent or representative.30

    29See NAMA Letter.

    30See supra notes 5 and 24.

    B. Changing the Amount of the $100 Limit

    In its comments, NAMA proposed that the $100 limit be raised to $250 per person per year which would aid in limiting conflicts of interest and also align Rule G-20 with MSRB Rule G-37.31 NAMA stated that in Rule G-37 the MSRB determined that the contribution level of $250 was sufficient to address the needs of individuals seeking to give political contributions while not allowing those contributions to be so excessive as to allow the contributor to gain undue influence.32 NAMA proposed that supplementary material be added to state, in effect, that occasional gifts of meals or tickets to theatrical, sporting, and other entertainments that are hosted by the regulated entity would be presumed to be so extensive as to raise a question of propriety if they exceed $250 in any year in conjunction with any gifts provided under Rule G-20(c).33 NAMA asserted that because the purposes of Rule G-20 and Rule G-37 both are meant to limit a dealer's or a municipal advisor's ability to gain undue influence through the giving of gifts or contributions that the rules should be written similarly.34

    31See NAMA Letter.

    32Id.

    33Id.

    34Id.

    The MSRB responded to NAMA by stating that Rule G-37 is designed to address potential political corruption that may result from pay-to-play practices,35 and as such, is tailored in light of First Amendment concerns. Existing Rule G-20 is designed to address commercial bribery by minimizing the conflicts of interest that arise when a dealer attempts to induce organizations active in the municipal securities market to engage in business with such dealer by means of gifts or gratuities given to employees of such organizations.36 The MSRB stated that Rules G-37 and G-20 address substantially different regulatory needs in different legal contexts, and therefore the dollar amounts are likewise justifiably different.37

    35See supra notes 5 and 24.

    36Id.

    37Id.

    C. “Normal Business Dealings”

    NAMA commented that proposed amended Rule G-20(d), which sets forth the exclusions from the $100 limit, leaves open opportunities for abuse.38 NAMA expressed specific concern regarding proposed subsection (d)(i), which would, under certain circumstances, exclude from the $100 limit the giving of occasional meals or tickets to theatrical, sporting or entertainment events.39 In NAMA's view, regulated entities would be able to engage in otherwise impermissible gift giving under the guise of “normal business dealings,” and such gift giving likely would result in the improper influence that Rule G-20 was designed to curtail.40 NAMA suggested modifying the amended rule to impose an aggregate limit of $250 on all gifts given as part of “normal business dealings” and gifts and gratuities given under proposed subsection (c) believing the aggregate limit would be consistent with the dollar threshold used in MSRB Rule G-37.41

    38See NAMA Letter.

    39Id.

    40Id.

    41Id.

    The MSRB responded that in order to curtail any abuse of the exception to the $100 limit, proposed amended Rule G-20 places conditions on the excluded gifts, including those that fall under “normal business dealings.” 42 All of the gifts described in proposed section (d) would be excluded only if they do not “give rise to any apparent or actual material conflict of interest,” and, under proposed section (d)(i), “normal business dealing” gifts would be excluded only if they are not “so frequent or so extensive as to raise any question of propriety.” 43 The MSRB further stated that dealers and municipal advisors are subject to the fundamental fair-dealing obligations of MSRB Rule G-17.44 The MSRB stated that Rule G-17 likely addresses at least some of the concerns raised by NAMA by prohibiting regulated entities from characterizing excessive or lavish expenses for the personal benefit of issuer personnel as an expense of the issue, as such behavior could possibly constitute a deceptive, dishonest or unfair practice.45

    42See supra notes 5 and 24.

    43Id.

    44Id.

    45Id.

    D. Incorporation of Applicable FINRA Interpretive Guidance

    ICI commented that the MSRB should incorporate the relevant portions of certain NASD guidance regarding the value of promotional items into Rule G-20.46 ICI also encouraged the MSRB to do so in order to ease the compliance burden on regulated entities as well as make clear that the monetary limits in Rule G-20 do not apply to “customary Lucite tombstones, plaques or other similar solely decorative items commemorating a business transaction, even when such items have a cost of more than $100.” 47

    46See ICI Letter.

    47Id.

    In response to ICI, the MSRB stated that such interpretive guidance published by NASD has been incorporated into proposed amended Rule G-20.48 The MSRB also stated that proposed Rule G-20(d)(ii) provides that the general $100 limitation does not apply to “[g]ifts that are solely decorative items commemorating a business transaction, such as a customary plaque or desk ornament (e.g., Lucite tombstone).” 49 The MSRB noted that this description does not contain a monetary limit, and therefore the provision fully addresses ICI's comment.50

    48See supra note 5.

    49Id.

    50Id.

    E. Recordkeeping Requirements

    NAMA commented that a regulated entity should be required to maintain records for gifts that are subject to either the normal business dealing exclusion under proposed amended Rule G-20(c) or Rule G-20(d)(i).51 NAMA noted that gifts that constitute normal business dealings under proposed amended Rule G-20(d)(i) require recordkeeping to comply with certain requirements of the Internal Revenue Service and of various municipalities.52 Therefore, according to NAMA, imposing a recordkeeping requirement would not be an entirely new burden, would provide protection against pay-to-play activities and would provide a means to determine whether such gifts give rise to questions of impropriety or conflicts of interest.53 NAMA also commented that to allow for meaningful enforcement the MSRB should require a regulated entity to keep records of any personal gifts given pursuant to proposed amended Rule G-20(d)(iv) that were paid for, directly or indirectly, by the regulated entity.54

    51See NAMA Letter.

    52Id.

    53Id.

    54Id.

    The MSRB responded to NAMA stating that it believes that the recordkeeping requirements of Rule G-8(h) that relate to Rule G-20 should be limited to items that are subject to the $100 limit so as to continue to align recordkeeping under Rule G-20 with existing FINRA recordkeeping requirements for dealers.55 The MSRB further stated that significant safeguards are already in place, including Rules G-27, G-44, and G-17, which weigh against imposing the additional recordkeeping burdens on regulated entities.56 The MSRB further noted that it reminded dealers in its 2007 MSRB Gifts Notice on Rule G-20 that they must have supervisory policies and procedures in place under Rule G-27 that are reasonably designed to prevent and detect violations of Rule G-20 (and of other applicable securities laws).57 The MSRB also stated that recently adopted Rule G-44, on supervision and compliance obligations of municipal advisors, imposes similar supervisory requirements on municipal advisors.58 Finally, the MSRB notes that they reminded dealers in 2007 in particular contexts that the making of payments that might not otherwise be subject to Rule G-20 could constitute separate violations of Rule G-17, which currently applies to municipal advisors and dealers.59

    55See supra notes 5 and 24.

    56Id.

    57Id.

    58Id.

    59Id.

    SIFMA commented that it objects to the requirement that brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers keep records related to Rule G-20 for a period of six years because municipal advisors only need to retain them for five years.60 The MSRB responded to SIFMA stating that this topic is addressed in MSRB Rule G-9 which was not included as part of the proposed rule change and therefore no revision to the proposed rule change is necessary.61

    60See SIFMA Letter.

    61See supra note 5.

    V. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the MSRB. In particular, the proposed rule change is consistent with Sections 15B(b)(2) and 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act. Section 15B(b)(2) of the Act provides that the MSRB shall propose and adopt rules to effect the purposes of that title with respect to transactions in municipal securities effected by brokers, dealers, and municipal securities dealers and advice provided to or on behalf of municipal entities or obligated persons by brokers, dealers, municipal securities dealers, and municipal advisors with respect to municipal financial products, the issuance of municipal securities, and solicitations of municipal entity or obligated persons undertaken by brokers, dealers, municipal securities dealers, and municipal advisors.62 Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act requires that the MSRB's rules shall be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities and municipal financial products, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities and municipal financial products, and, in general, to protect investors, municipal entities, obligated persons, and the public interest.” 63

    62 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2).

    63 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).

    The proposed rule change would help prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors, municipal entities, obligated persons, and the public interest by reducing, or at least exposing, the potential for conflicts of interests in municipal advisory activities by extending the policies embodied in existing Rule G-20 to municipal advisors and their associated persons and establishing a common standard for all regulated entities that operate in the municipal securities market. The proposed rule change would help ensure that engagements of municipal advisors, as well as engagements of dealers, are awarded on the basis of merit and not as a result of gifts made to employees controlling the award of such business. In addition, by prohibiting the reimbursement of entertainment expenses from the proceeds of a municipal securities issuance, the proposed rule change will provide regulated entities with clear notice and guidance regarding MSRB regulation of such matters. Further, codifying certain applicable MSRB interpretive guidance and adopting and codifying certain FINRA interpretive guidance will increase awareness of such guidance by regulated entities and in turn improve compliance and help prevent inadvertent violations of Rule G-20.

    In addition, the proposed amendments to Rule G-8 will assist in the enforcement of Rule G-20 by extending the relevant existing recordkeeping requirements of Rule G-8 that currently are applicable to dealers to municipal advisors. Regulated entities will be required to create and maintain records in a consistent manner which the Commission believes will allow organizations that examine regulated entities to more precisely monitor and promote compliance with the proposed rule change. Increased compliance with the proposed rule change would likely reduce the frequency and magnitude of conflicts of interests that could potentially result in harm to investors, municipal entities, or obligated persons, or undermine the public's confidence in the municipal securities market.

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iv) of the Act, in that it does not impose a regulatory burden on small municipal advisors that is not necessary or appropriate in the public interest and for the protection of investors, municipal entities, and obligated persons, provided that there is robust protection of investors against fraud.64 While the proposed rule change would affect all municipal advisors, including small municipal advisors, the Commission believes the proposed rule change is a necessary and appropriate regulatory burden in order to limit practices that could harm investors, municipal entities and obligated persons. The proposed rule change will likely reduce the frequency and severity of violations of the public trust by elected officials and others involved in the issuance of municipal securities that might otherwise have their decisions regarding the award of municipal advisory business influenced by the gifts given by regulated entities and their associated persons. Further, codifying certain interpretive guidance will help minimize compliance costs which will benefit all regulated entities, including small municipal advisors. While the proposed rule change would burden some small municipal advisors, the Commission believes that such burden is outweighed by the need to maintain the integrity of the municipal securities market and to preserve investor and public confidence in the municipal securities market, including the bond issuance process.

    64 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(L)(iv).

    In addition, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(G) of the Act which provides that the MSRB's rules shall prescribe records to be made and kept by municipal securities brokers, municipal securities dealers, and municipal advisors and the periods for which such records shall be preserved.65 The proposed rule change would extend the provisions of existing Rule G-8 to require that municipal advisors as well as dealers make and keep records related to Rule G-20 as amended by the proposed rule change.

    65 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(G).

    In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation.66 The Commission believes the proposed rule change will help promote competition. By extending the relevant current restrictions embodied in existing MSRB Rule G-20 to municipal advisors and their municipal advisory activities, the proposed rule change will promote merit-based and price-based competition for municipal advisory services and limit the selection or retention of a municipal advisor based on the receipt of gifts. A market where regulated entities compete on the basis of price and quality of services is more likely to provide a level playing field for existing regulated entities within which to operate and also encourages the entry of new providers. By extending the policies embodied in existing MSRB Rule G-20 to municipal advisors and their municipal advisory activities, the proposed rule change will also establish common standards for dealers and municipal advisors that operate in the same municipal securities market. The Commission also believes that by codifying certain interpretive guidance, the proposed rule change will clarify the obligations of dealers and municipal advisors and ease compliance burdens. The Commission believes that the effect of the proposed rule is beneficial and the proposed changes will help maintain the integrity of the municipal securities market and preserve investor and public confidence.

    66 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    As noted above, the Commission received three comment letters on the filing. The Commission believes that the MSRB through its responses has addressed commenters concerns. For the reasons noted above, including those discussed in the MSRB Response Letter, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.

    V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,67 that the proposed rule change (SR-MSRB-2015-09) be, and hereby is, approved.

    67 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.68

    68 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28806 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76385; File No. SR-FINRA-2015-045] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Rule 7640A (Data Products Offered by Nasdaq) November 6, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 29, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”)) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act,3 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 7640A (Data Products Offered By Nasdaq) to identify the Nasdaq Last Sale Plus (“NLS Plus”) data feed, which distributes FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility (“FINRA/Nasdaq TRF” or “TRF”) data to third parties.

    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in italics.

    7000. Clearing, Transaction and Order Data Requirements, and Facility Charges 7600. Data Products and Charges for Trade Reporting Facility Services 7600A. Data Products and Charges for FINRA/NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility Services 7640A. Data Products Offered by NASDAQ

    (a) through (b) No Change.

    (c) The following data products offered by Nasdaq pursuant to Nasdaq rules use covered market data:

    (1) No Change.

    (2) Nasdaq Last Sale and Nasdaq Last Sale Plus Data Feeds under Nasdaq Rule 7039; and

    (3) No Change.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    FINRA Rule 7640A describes FINRA's practices relating to the distribution of market data for over-the-counter (“OTC”) transactions in NMS stocks generated through the operation of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF by Nasdaq, Inc. (“NASDAQ”), the Business Member under the Limited Liability Company agreement governing the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF (the “LLC Agreement”),4 and its affiliate, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”). Rule 7640A was adopted pursuant to SR-FINRA-2014-002, which describes in greater detail the TRF framework and FINRA's oversight of TRF operations and use of FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data in Nasdaq market data products.5 As described in that filing, although the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF is a facility of FINRA and TRF data is OTC data for which FINRA is responsible under the Act, NASDAQ, as the Business Member, has the contractual right to develop market data products using TRF data. As such, use of FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data is conducted through Nasdaq, is subject to a separate proposed rule change filed with the Commission by Nasdaq in its capacity as a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) and must satisfy the appropriate statutory standards.

    4 As approved by its board of directors and the Commission [sic], effective September 8, 2015, NASDAQ changed its legal name from The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. to Nasdaq, Inc. See Nasdaq, Inc. Form 8-K Current Report (filed September 8, 2015) (available at www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1120193/000119312515314459/d48431d8k.htm).

    FINRA and NASDAQ are in the process of amending the LLC Agreement to reflect the name change. FINRA will file a separate proposed rule change to update the FINRA manual, including Rule 7640A, accordingly.

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71350 (January 17, 2014), 79 FR 4218 (January 24, 2014) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness; File No. SR-FINRA-2014-002).

    Paragraph (a) of Rule 7640A codifies the contractual arrangement between FINRA and NASDAQ and provides for the overall structure relating to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and the permissible use of FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data. Paragraph (b) provides that fees for market data products that use FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data are charged by Nasdaq under Nasdaq rules. Nasdaq must adopt such fees pursuant to a proposed rule change submitted to the Commission under Section 19(b) of the Act, and must demonstrate that the fees are consistent with the requirements of the Act, including that they are reasonable, equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory. Paragraph (c) identifies Nasdaq rules relating to products that use FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data, including Nasdaq Rule 7039 relating to the Nasdaq Last Sale (“NLS”) data feeds.6

    6 Pursuant to Nasdaq Rule 7039, the NLS data feeds combine both Nasdaq Market Center and FINRA/Nasdaq TRF last sale data and provide real-time execution price, volume and time information for each reported sale.

    On June 22, 2015, the Commission approved proposed rule change SR-NASDAQ-2015-055, pursuant to which Nasdaq proposed to amend Nasdaq Rule 7039 to fully reflect the NLS Plus data feed and to rename the rule “Nasdaq Last Sale and Nasdaq Last Sale Plus Data Feeds.” 7 As described in Nasdaq's filing, NLS Plus has been offered since 2010 via NASDAQ OMX Information LLC, a subsidiary of NASDAQ. As further described in Nasdaq's filing, in offering NLS Plus, NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is acting as a redistributor of the last sale products already offered by NASDAQ's three equity exchanges (Nasdaq, NASDAQ OMX BX and NASDAQ OMX PSX), as well as volume information provided by the securities information processors (“SIPs”). As such, NLS Plus includes transactions from all of NASDAQ's equity markets, as well as the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data that is included in the current NLS product, as contemplated under Rule 7640A. In other words, NASDAQ OMX Information LLC redistributes last sale data that has been the subject of a proposed rule change filed with the Commission at prices that have also been the subject of a proposed rule change filed with the Commission.

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75257 (June 22, 2015), 80 FR 36862 (June 26, 2015) (Order Approving File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-055).

    Because the NLS Plus product provides a subset of the same last sale data that is disseminated by the SIPs, the feed is structured so that data is not provided to the NLS Plus product sooner than it is provided to the SIPs. NASDAQ currently monitors for potential latency by comparing the time of the dissemination of FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data to the SIPs and to the NLS data feeds, including NLS Plus. In that regard, NASDAQ has made specific commitments and undertakings with respect to its products that use FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data, including that, consistent with the Commission's interpretation of Rule 603(a) under SEC Regulation NMS, it will not transmit any FINRA/Nasdaq TRF transactions data to a vendor or user any sooner than the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF transmits the data to the SIPs.8 Thus, FINRA believes that the NLS Plus product satisfies the requirement that FINRA/Nasdaq TRF transaction data not be disseminated to a vendor or user any sooner than such data is transmitted to the SIPs.

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71350 (January 17, 2014), 79 FR 4218 (January 24, 2014) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness; File No. SR-FINRA-2014-002).

    Accordingly, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 7640A(c)(2) to identify the NLS Plus product in the cross-reference to Nasdaq Rule 7039. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will ensure that Rule 7640A accurately reflects the Nasdaq products that use FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data.

    On July 24, 2015, Nasdaq filed proposed rule change SR-NASDAQ-2015-088 to amend Nasdaq Rule 7039 with language indicating fees for NLS Plus.9 Specifically, firms that receive the NLS Plus feed pay annual administration fees for applicable NASDAQ equity exchanges ($1,000 for Nasdaq, $1,000 for BX and $1,000 for PSX), are liable for NLS or Nasdaq Basic fees under Nasdaq Rules and, pursuant to SR-NASDAQ-2015-088, pay a data consolidation fee of $350 per month. As stated in Nasdaq's filing, the NLS Plus fee is a codification of the existing NLS Plus fee, with the addition of a monthly data consolidation fee, and as such, meets the requirements of the Act.

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75600 (August 4, 2015), 80 FR 47968 (August 10, 2015) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-088).

    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness. FINRA is proposing that the proposed rule change will be operative immediately upon filing.

    2. Statutory Basis

    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,10 which requires, among other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. FINRA believes the proposed rule change will provide greater clarity to members and the public regarding Nasdaq market data products that use FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data by specifically identifying NLS Plus under Rule 7640A. In addition, consistent with SR-NASDAQ-2015-055, NLS Plus is an additional means by which investors may access information about securities transactions, thereby providing investors with additional options for accessing information that may help inform their trading decisions. In approving the NLS Plus product, the Commission specifically determined that it is consistent with the Act.11

    10 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).

    11See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75257 (June 22, 2015), 80 FR 36862 (June 26, 2015) (Order Approving File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-055).

    FINRA also believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,12 which requires, among other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system that FINRA operates or controls. As noted above, the fees for the NLS Plus product are not charged by FINRA under FINRA rules, but rather are charged by Nasdaq under Nasdaq rules. Such fees have been adopted pursuant to a proposed rule change submitted to the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act.13 In its rulemaking, Nasdaq was required to demonstrate that the fees are consistent with the requirements of the Act, including that they are reasonable, equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory. In its filing, Nasdaq stated that the fees for the NLS Plus product are simply a codification of the existing fee structure, with the addition of the consolidation fee. Nasdaq further stated that the fees apply equally to all firms that choose to subscribe to the NLS Plus product, and no firm is required to use NLS Plus.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).

    13See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75600 (August 4, 2015), 80 FR 47968 (August 10, 2015) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-088).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As described above, use of FINRA/Nasdaq TRF data is conducted through Nasdaq, is subject to a separate proposed rule change filed with the Commission by Nasdaq in its capacity as an SRO and must satisfy the appropriate statutory standards. As such, Nasdaq has the obligation of assessing the potential impacts of the NLS Plus product in its own rulemaking. As described more fully in SR-NASDAQ-2015-055, Nasdaq's ability to offer and price NLS Plus is constrained by: (1) Competition between exchanges and other trading platforms that compete with each other in a variety of dimensions; (2) the existence of inexpensive real-time consolidated data and market-specific data and free delayed consolidated data; and (3) the inherent contestability of the market for proprietary last sale data.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.15

    14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. FINRA has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative upon filing. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is appropriate because the proposed rule change merely adds a reference to Nasdaq Last Sale Plus Data Feeds to Rule 7640A to reflect recently approved changes to NASDAQ's rules. Based on the foregoing, the Commission believes that the waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.16 The Commission hereby grants the waiver and designates the proposal operative upon filing.

    16 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-FINRA-2015-045 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments:

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2015-045. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2015-045 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.17

    17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28809 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76383; File No. SR-BX-2015-063] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding NASDAQ Last Sale Plus November 6, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 27, 2015, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (“BX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend BX Rule 7039 (BX Last Sale and NASDAQ Last Sale Plus Data Feeds) with language clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NASDAQ Last Sale Plus (“NLS Plus”), a comprehensive data feed offered by NASDAQ OMX Information LLC,3 will be charged solely to firms that are Internal Distributors and External Distributors (collectively, “Distributors” of the data feed) that receive a NLS Plus direct data feed.4

    3 NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is a subsidiary of Nasdaq, Inc. (formerly, The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.), separate and apart from The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC. The primary purpose of NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is to combine publicly available data from the three filed last sale products of the exchange subsidiaries of Nasdaq, Inc. and from the network processors for the ease and convenience of market data users and vendors, and ultimately the investing public. In that role, the function of NASDAQ OMX Information LLC is analogous to that of other market data vendors, and it has no competitive advantage over other market data vendors; NASDAQ OMX Information LLC performs precisely the same functions as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters, and other market data vendors.

    4 “Internal Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers within the Distributor's own entity. “External Distributors” are Distributors that receive NASDAQ Last Sale Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers outside the Distributor's own entity. Internal Distributors and External Distributors are together known as “Distributors”. Proposed BX Rule 7039(b)(1).

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of this proposal is to amend BX Rule 7039 with language clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NLS Plus will be charged solely to firms that are Distributors that receive an NLS Plus direct data feed.5

    5 Thus, the fee does not apply to persons that receive the NLS Plus data feed indirectly, through an Internal Distributor or External Distributor.

    NLS Plus 6 allows data distributors to access last sale products offered by each of Nasdaq, Inc.'s three U.S. equity exchanges.7 NLS Plus includes all transactions from these exchanges, as well as FINRA/NASDAQ TRF data that is included in the current NLS product. In addition, NLS Plus features total cross-market volume information at the issue level, thereby providing redistribution of consolidated volume information (“consolidated volume”) from the securities information processors (“SIPs”) for Tape A, B, and C securities.8 Thus, NLS Plus covers all securities listed on NASDAQ and New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) (now under the Intercontinental Exchange (“ICE”) umbrella), as well as US “regional” exchanges such as NYSE MKT, NYSE Arca, and BATS (also known as BATS/Direct Edge).9

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 75709 (August 14, 2015), 80 FR 50671 (August 20, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-047) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding NLS Plus on BX); 75830 (September 3, 2015), 80 FR 54640 (September 10, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-054) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus on BX); 75257 (June 22, 2015), 80 FR 36862 (June 26, 2015)(SR-NASDAQ-2015-055) (order approving proposed rule change regarding NLS Plus); 75600 (August 4, 2015), 80 FR 47968 (August 10, 2015)(SR-NASDAQ-2015-088) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus) (the “NLS Plus fee proposal”); 75763 (August 26, 2015), 80 FR 52817 (September 1, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-72) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding NLS Plus on PSX); and 75890 (September 10, 2015), 80 FR 55692 (September 16, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-76) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding fees for NLS Plus on PSX).

    7 The NASDAQ OMX U.S. equity markets include the Exchange,, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ”), and NASDAQ OMX PSX (“PSX”) (together known as the “NASDAQ OMX equity markets”). PSX and NASDAQ are filing companion proposals similar to this one. NASDAQ's last sale product, NASDAQ Last Sale, includes last sale information from the FINRA/NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility (“FINRA/NASDAQ TRF”), which is jointly operated by NASDAQ and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71350 (January 17, 2014), 79 FR 4218 (January 24, 2014) (SR-FINRA-2014-002). For proposed rule changes submitted with respect to NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale, see, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57965 (June 16, 2008), 73 FR 35178, (June 20, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-060) (order approving NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds pilot); 61112 (December 4, 2009), 74 FR 65569, (December 10, 2009) (SR-BX-2009-077) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding BX Last Sale data feeds); and 62876 (September 9, 2010), 75 FR 56624, (September 16, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-120) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness regarding PSX Last Sale data feeds).

    8 Tape A and Tape B securities are disseminated pursuant to the Security Industry Automation Corporation's (“SIAC”) Consolidated Tape Association Plan/Consolidated Quotation System, or CTA/CQS (“CTA”). Tape C securities are disseminated pursuant to the NASDAQ Unlisted Trading Privileges (“UTP”) Plan. NLS Plus reflects real-time trading activity for Tape C securities and 15-minute delayed information for Tape A and Tape B securities.

    9 Registered U.S. exchanges are listed at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/mrexchanges.shtml.

    NLS Plus is currently codified in BX Rule 7039(b). The fees for NLS Plus are set forth in BX Rule 7039(b)(1)-(b)(3) as follows:

    (1) Firms that receive NLS Plus shall pay the annual administration fees for NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale,10 and a data consolidation fee of $350 per month.

    10 Annual administrative fees are in BX Rule 7035, NASDAQ Rule 7035, and NASDAQ OMX PSX Fees Chapter VIII. These remain unchanged at: $1,000 for NASDAQ, $1,000 for BX, and $1,000 for PSX. For purposes of conformity, “administration” is changed to “administrative” in BX Rule 7039(d)(1), discussed below.

    (2) Firms that receive NLS Plus would either be liable for NLS fees or NASDAQ Basic fees.

    (3) In the event that NASDAQ OMX BX and/or NASDAQ OMX PHLX adopt user fees for BX Last Sale and/or PSX Last Sale, firms that receive NLS Plus would also be liable for such fees.

    The Exchange now proposes to clarify how the data consolidation fee in BX Rule 7039(d)(1) will be charged. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to clarify that firms that are Distributors that receive a NASDAQ Last Sale Plus direct data feed and are Distributors shall pay a data consolidation fee of $350 per month. Thus, only Distributors that receive NLS Plus would be charged the data consolidation fee. As proposed to be amended, BX Rule 7039(b)(1) would state:

    (1) Firms that receive NLS Plus shall pay the annual administrative fees for NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale. Additionally, Internal Distributors or External Distributors shall pay a data consolidation fee of $350 per month.11 “Internal Distributors” are Distributors that receive NLS Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers within the Distributor's own entity. “External Distributors” are Distributors that receive NLS Plus data and then distribute that data to one or more Subscribers outside the Distributor's own entity.12

    11 The Exchange notes that those that have received NLS Plus directly from the Exchange have all, in fact, been firms. While the NLS Plus feed is available to all that subscribe and pay the requisite costs, the Exchange believes that in light of such costs it will continue to experience only firms receiving the feed directly from the Exchange.

    12 BX Rule 7039(b)(2) and (b)(3) would remain unchanged.

    The NLS Plus fee structure as amended continues to be designed to ensure that vendors could compete with the Exchange by creating a product similar to NLS Plus.13 The proposed fee structure reflects the cost of the data feeds underlying NLS Plus (including user fees and annual administrative fees), as well as the incremental cost of the aggregation and consolidation function (the “consolidation function”) for NLS Plus. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the fee structure would not result in charges for NLS Plus that are lower than the cost to a vendor creating a competing product, including the cost of receiving the underlying data feeds and consolidating them. The data consolidation fee recognizes that NLS Plus is created from data derived from NASDAQ Last Sale, BX Last Sale, PSX Last Sale, and data from the SIPs to which a consolidation function is applied. Charging the consolidation fee will not impede an entity receiving the underlying direct data feeds from creating a competing product to the NLS Plus feed based on combining individual data feeds, and charging its clients a fee that it believes reflects the value of the consolidation function. The Exchange believes that the incremental cost of aggregation to an entity that wants to re-create NLS Plus will be factored into the entity's revenue opportunity and may be inconsequential where the vendor has in place systems to perform these functions as part of creating its proprietary market data products and allocating costs over numerous products and customer relationships. For these reasons, the Exchange believes that vendors could readily offer a product similar to the NLS Plus on a competitive basis at a similar cost.

    13 For additional discussion regarding potential competition with NLS Plus, see supra note 6 and filings cited therein.

    The amendment to clarify that the consolidation fee applies to Distributors that receive the NLS Plus data feed directly but does not apply to persons that receive NLS Plus indirectly through a Distributor is designed to ensure that the Exchange charges the fee only to those persons that directly benefit from the consolidation function. Specifically, if a person wished to combine the products that underlie NLS Plus and distribute them to customers or internal users, it would incur its own consolidation costs. By purchasing NLS Plus for distribution, a Distributor foregoes these costs and instead opts to pay the Exchange to perform the consolidation function for it. Thus, imposing this fee upon Distributors is a logical corollary to the service being provided. By contrast, imposing the fee upon persons receiving the product through Distributors would effectively impose a duplicative charge, since such persons consume the data but are not in the business of distributing it and therefore do not forego consolidation costs when receiving the product. The Exchange further notes that the consolidation fee for BATS One, an analogous product of competing exchanges, is charged solely to external distributors of that product.14

    14See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73918 (December 23, 2014), 79 FR 78920 (December 31, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-055; SR-BYX-2014-030; SR-EDGA-2014-25; SR-EDGX-2014-25) (order approving market data product called BATS One Feed being offered by four affiliated exchanges).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,15 in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,16 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities, and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. All recipients of the NLS Plus data offering continue to pay the underlying data feed fees and annual administrative fees for NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale. The Exchange is simply clarifying that the data consolidation component of the fees for NLS Plus will be charged solely to firms that receive a NASDAQ Last Sale Plus direct datafeed and are Distributors.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).

    This change is reasonable and consistent with an equitable allocation of fees because it is designed to ensure that the Exchange charges the fee only to those persons that directly benefit from the consolidation function. Specifically, if a person wished to combine the products that underlie NLS Plus and distribute them to customers or internal users, it would incur its own consolidation costs. By purchasing NLS Plus for distribution, a Distributor foregoes these costs and instead opts to pay the Exchange to perform the consolidation function for it. Thus, imposing this fee upon Distributors is a logical corollary to the service being provided. The change is also not unfairly discriminatory. Indeed, imposing the fee upon persons receiving NLS Plus indirectly through Distributors would effectively impose a duplicative charge upon them, since such persons consume the data but are not in the business of distributing it and therefore do not forego consolidation costs when receiving the product. The Exchange further notes that the consolidation fee for BATS One, an analogous product of competing exchanges, is charged solely to external distributors of that product.17 Accordingly, the exchanges that distribute BATS One take an analogous approach, in that they do not charge a consolidation fee to indirect recipients of the product, but rather charge the fee only to a subset of its distributors.

    17See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73918 (December 23, 2014), 79 FR 78920 (December 31, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-055; SR-BYX-2014-030; SR-EDGA-2014-25; SR-EDGX-2014-25) (order approving market data product called BATS One Feed being offered by four affiliated exchanges).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The change proposed herein is designed to ensure that the consolidation fee for NLS Plus is appropriately assessed to Distributors of the product that benefit from the consolidation function performed by NASDAQ OMX Information LLC in creating the product and insures that a duplicative charge is not also assessed against indirect recipients of the product. Thus, the change will avoid the imposition of fees on certain product recipients, while not increasing fees for any recipients.

    The market for data products is extremely competitive and firms may freely choose alternative venues and data vendors based on the aggregate fees assessed, the data offered, and the value provided. This rule proposal does not burden competition, which is reflected in the offerings of other exchanges that sell alternative data products 18 and in the ability of competing data feed vendors to combine underlying data feeds in direct competition with NLS Plus. NASDAQ OMX Information LLC was constructed specifically to establish a level playing field with market data vendors and to preserve fair competition between them. NASDAQ OMX Information LLC receives NLS, BX Last Sale, and PSX Last Sale from each NASDAQ-operated exchange in the same manner, at the same speed, and reflecting the same fees as for all market data vendors. Therefore, NASDAQ OMX Information LLC has no competitive advantage with respect to these last sale products and NASDAQ commits to maintaining this level playing field in the future. In other words, NASDAQ will continue to disseminate separately the underlying last sale products to avoid creating a latency differential between NASDAQ OMX Information LLC and other market data vendors, and to avoid creating a pricing advantage for NASDAQ OMX Information LLC.

    18Id.

    NLS Plus exists in a market for proprietary last sale data products that is currently competitive and inherently contestable because there is fierce competition for the inputs necessary to the creation of proprietary data and strict pricing discipline for the proprietary products themselves. Numerous exchanges compete with each other for listings, trades, and market data itself, providing virtually limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish to produce and distribute their own market data. This proprietary data is produced by each individual exchange, as well as other entities, in a vigorously competitive market. Similarly, with respect to the FINRA/NASDAQ TRF data that is a component of NLS and NLS Plus, allowing exchanges to operate TRFs has permitted them to earn revenues by providing technology and data in support of the non-exchange segment of the market. This revenue opportunity has also resulted in fierce competition between the two current TRF operators, with both TRFs charging extremely low trade reporting fees and rebating the majority of the revenues they receive from core market data to the parties reporting trades.

    Transaction execution and proprietary data products are complementary in that market data is both an input and a byproduct of the execution service. In fact, market data and trade execution are a paradigmatic example of joint products with joint costs. The decision whether and on which platform to post an order will depend on the attributes of the platform where the order can be posted, including the execution fees, data quality and price, and distribution of its data products. Without trade executions, exchange data products cannot exist. Moreover, data products are valuable to many end users only insofar as they provide information that end users expect will assist them or their customers in making trading decisions.

    The costs of producing market data include not only the costs of the data distribution infrastructure, but also the costs of designing, maintaining, and operating the exchange's transaction execution platform and the cost of regulating the exchange to ensure its fair operation and maintain investor confidence. The total return that a trading platform earns reflects the revenues it receives from both products and the joint costs it incurs. Moreover, the operation of the exchange is characterized by high fixed costs and low marginal costs. This cost structure is common in content and content distribution industries such as software, where developing new software typically requires a large initial investment (and continuing large investments to upgrade the software), but once the software is developed, the incremental cost of providing that software to an additional user is typically small, or even zero (e.g., if the software can be downloaded over the internet after being purchased).19 In NASDAQ's case, it is costly to build and maintain a trading platform, but the incremental cost of trading each additional share on an existing platform, or distributing an additional instance of data, is very low. Market information and executions are each produced jointly (in the sense that the activities of trading and placing orders are the source of the information that is distributed) and are each subject to significant scale economies. In such cases, marginal cost pricing is not feasible because if all sales were priced at the margin, NASDAQ would be unable to defray its platform costs of providing the joint products. Similarly, data products cannot make use of TRF trade reports without the raw material of the trade reports themselves, and therefore necessitate the costs of operating, regulating,20 and maintaining a trade reporting system, costs that must be covered through the fees charged for use of the facility and sales of associated data.

    19See William J. Baumol and Daniel G. Swanson, “The New Economy and Ubiquitous Competitive Price Discrimination: Identifying Defensible Criteria of Market Power,” Antitrust Law Journal, Vol. 70, No. 3 (2003).

    20 It should be noted that the costs of operating the FINRA/NASDAQ TRF borne by NASDAQ include regulatory charges paid by NASDAQ to FINRA.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,21 the Exchange has designated this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed on any person, whether or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization, which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing.

    21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-BX-2015-063 on the subject line.

    Paper comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-063. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).

    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-063 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.22

    22 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28807 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76386; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-128] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Chapter XV, Entitled “Options Pricing,” at Section 2 Governing Pricing for NASDAQ Members November 6, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 27, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's transaction fees at Chapter XV, Section 2 entitled “NASDAQ Options Market—Fees and Rebates,” which governs pricing for NASDAQ members using the NASDAQ Options Market (“NOM”), NASDAQ's facility for executing and routing standardized equity and index options.

    While these amendments are effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated the proposed amendments to be operative on November 2, 2015.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes the following change to the NOM transaction fees set forth at Chapter XV, Section 2 for executing and routing standardized equity and index options under the Penny Pilot 3 options program.

    3 The Penny Pilot was established in March 2008 and has since been expanded and extended through June 30, 2016. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57579 (March 28, 2008), 73 FR 18587 (April 4, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-026) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness establishing Penny Pilot); 60874 (October 23, 2009), 74 FR 56682 (November 2, 2009)(SR-NASDAQ-2009-091) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness expanding and extending Penny Pilot); 60965 (November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59292 (November 17, 2009)(SR-NASDAQ-2009-097) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 61455 (February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6239 (February 8, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-013) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 62029 (May 4, 2010), 75 FR 25895 (May 10, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-053) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 65969 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79268 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-169) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness [sic] extension and replacement of Penny Pilot); 67325 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 40127 (July 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-075) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through December 31, 2012); 68519 (December 21, 2012), 78 FR 136 (January 2, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-143) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through June 30, 2013); 69787 (June 18, 2013), 78 FR 37858 (June 24, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-082) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through December 31, 2013); 71105 (December 17, 2013), 78 FR 77530 (December 23, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-154) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through June 30, 2014); 79 FR 31151 [sic] (May 23, 2014), 79 FR 31151 (May 30, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-056) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through December 31, 2014); 73686 (December 2, 2014), 79 FR 71477 (November 25, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-115) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot through June 30, 2015) and 75283 (June 24, 2015), 80 FR 37347 (June 30, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-063) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Extension of the Exchange's Penny Pilot Program and Replacement of Penny Pilot Issues That Have Been Delisted.) See also NOM Rules, Chapter VI, Section 5.

    The proposed change is as follows:

    Fees for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options: the Exchange proposes to:

    1. Increase the Customer 4 Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options from $0.48 to $0.50 per contract.

    4 The term “Customer” applies to any transaction that is identified by a Participant for clearing in the Customer range at The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) which is not for the account of [sic] broker or dealer or for the account of a “Professional” (as that term is defined in Chapter I, Section 1(a)(48)).

    This rule change is described in greater detail below.

    Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options

    The Exchange proposes, beginning November 2, 2015, to increase the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options from $0.48 per contract to $0.50 per contract. The Exchange notes that the Fees for Removing Liquidity for other Participants in Penny Pilot Options will remain the same.5

    5 Non-Customers will continue to be assessed a $0.50 per contract Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.

    The purpose of the proposed fee change is to increase the transaction fee for Customers to the same fee level that is assessed today to Professionals,6 Firms,7 NOM Market Makers,8 Non-NOM Market Makers 9 and Broker-Dealers.10 With this proposal all market participants will be assessed the same Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.50 per contract. Despite the increase, the Exchange believes that Customers will continue to send order flow to NOM.

    6 The term “Professional” means any person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s) pursuant to Chapter I, Section 1(a)(48). All Professional orders shall be appropriately marked by Participants.

    7 The term “Firm” or (“F”) applies to any transaction that is identified by a Participant for clearing in the Firm range at OCC.

    8 The term “NOM Market Maker” or (“M”) is a Participant that has registered as a Market Maker on NOM pursuant to Chapter VII, Section 2, and must also remain in good standing pursuant to Chapter VII, Section 4. In order to receive NOM Market Maker pricing in all securities, the Participant must be registered as a NOM Market Maker in at least one security.

    9 The term “Non-NOM Market Maker” or (“O”) is a registered market maker on another options exchange that is not a NOM Market Maker. A Non-NOM Market Maker must append the proper Non-NOM Market Maker designation to orders routed to NOM.

    10 The term “Broker-Dealer” or (“B”) applies to any transaction which is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable within a particular category.

    2. Statutory Basis

    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,11 in general, and with Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,12 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system which Nasdaq operates or controls, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).

    Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options from $0.48 per contract to $0.50 is reasonable because all other market participants are currently assessed a fee of $0.50 per contract today. The Exchange's increase would result in all market participants being assessed the same Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options from $0.48 per contract to $0.50 is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all market participants would be uniformly assessed the same rate of $0.50 per contract.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange's proposal to increase the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options from $0.48 per contract to $0.50 will result in all market participants being uniformly assessed the same fee for transactions in Penny Pilot Options.

    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and to attract order flow. The Exchange believes that the proposal reflects this competitive environment.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.13

    13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-128 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-128. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).

    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-128 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.14

    14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28810 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76382; File No. 4-657] Order Granting Exemption From Compliance With the National Market System Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program November 6, 2015. I. Introduction

    Pursuant to Rule 608(e) 1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) may exempt from compliance with the provisions of Rule 608, either unconditionally or on specified terms and conditions, any self-regulatory organization, member thereof, or specified security, if the Commission determines that such exemption is consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, the maintenance of fair and orderly markets and the removal of impediments to, and perfection of the mechanisms of, a national market system. As discussed below, the Commission is exercising its authority under Rule 608(e) to exempt BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”), NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc., (collectively “SROs” or “Participants”), from implementing the Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program (“Tick Size Pilot”) until October 3, 2016.

    1 17 CFR 242.608(e).

    II. Background

    On May 6, 2015, the Commission approved the Tick Size Pilot and provided that the Tick Size Pilot be implemented within one year after the publication of the order.2 The Tick Size Pilot will have a two-year duration (“Pilot Period”),3 and will include exchange-listed common stocks that have the following characteristics: (1) A market capitalization of less than $3 billion; (2) a closing price of at least $2 per share on the last day of the measurement period (and a closing price of not less than $1.50 per share during the measurement period); (3) a consolidated average daily volume of one million shares or less; and (4) a volume-weighted average price of at least $2 per share (“Pilot Securities”).

    2 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74892 (May 6, 2015), 80 FR 27514 (May 13, 2015).

    3 The term Pilot Period means the operative period of the Tick Size Pilot, lasting two years from the date of implementation. See Section I.U of the Tick Size Pilot at 80 FR 27547.

    The Pilot Securities will be divided into one control group and three test groups. There will be 400 Pilot Securities per test group and the remaining Pilot Securities will be assigned to the control group. Test Group One Pilot Securities will quote in $0.05 per share increments and will trade at any currently permitted increment. Test Group Two Pilot Securities will quote in $0.05 per share increments like those in Test Group One, but will only be permitted to trade in $0.05 per share increments, subject to certain exceptions.4 Finally, Test Group Three Pilot Securities will quote in $0.05 per share increments and will trade in $0.05 per share increments consistent with Test Group Two, and in addition be subject to a Trade-At Prohibition, which would generally prevent price matching by a trading center that is not displaying a quotation at the price of the best protected quotation, unless an exception applies. Pilot Securities in the control group would continue to quote and trade in the pricing increments that are currently permitted.

    4 First, executions will be able to at the midpoint between the national (or protected) best bid and the national (or protected) best offer; second, orders involving retail investor orders will be able to trade with price improvement of at least $0.005 per share; and third, negotiated trades (such as a volume-weighted average price trade or a time-weighted average price trade) will be able to trade outside of the $0.05 increment.

    Pursuant to the Tick Size Pilot, Participants will collect data reflecting a variety of market quality metrics with respect to the Pilot Securities and transmit such data to the Commission. The collected data will be publicly available in an aggregated form. In addition, the Participants are required to conduct, and provide the Commission with, a publicly-available impact assessment.

    III. Discussion

    As discussed in the Approval Order,5 several actions need to occur prior to the implementation of the Tick Size Pilot, including: (1) The development and testing of applicable trading and compliance systems, (2) the filing and approval of SRO rules related to the Tick Size Pilot's quoting and trading requirements, and (3) the development and implementation of the written policies and procedures by Participants and their members that are reasonably designed to comply with the applicable quoting and trading increments. In addition, the Participants must develop appropriate policies and procedures for collecting and reporting to the Commission the requisite data in connection with the Tick Size Pilot, including the filing and approval of SRO rules requiring the collection and reporting of data from certain member firms. Data is to be collected by the Participants for periods beginning six months prior to the Pilot Period.6 To date, the requisite SRO rule proposals have not been filed or approved by the Commission, and there has not been an opportunity for the Participants and their members to develop and test applicable trading and compliance systems.7

    5 80 FR at 27545.

    6See Sections IV and VII of the Tick Size Pilot at 80 FR at 27548 and 27552-53.

    7 The Commission notes that the Participants anticipate filing model data collection rule proposals with the Commission no later than November 13, 2015. See Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Co-Head, Government Affairs, Intercontinental Exchange/NYSE, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated November 4, 2015. In addition, the Commission notes that the Participants issued technical specifications and FAQs related to the data collection requirements on October 12, 2015.

    Accordingly, the Commission believes additional time is needed for the Participants and their members to complete their preparations for implementation of the Tick Size Pilot. The Commission believes that extending the implementation date by approximately five months, to October 3, 2016, is sufficient to allow for a smooth yet timely implementation of the Tick Size Pilot, including the approval of applicable SRO rules and the development and testing of new compliance systems.8

    8 The Commission has received requests to extend the implementation date of the Tick Size Pilot or its data collection requirements for various periods. See Letter from Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, SIFMA, to Stephen Luparello, Director, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, dated August 31, 2015 (requesting the data collection period be extended until at least three months after the requisite SRO rules are approved by the Commission and related interpretive guidance is published); Letter from Mary Lou Von Kaenel, Managing Director, Financial Information Forum, to Stephen Luparello, Director, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, dated September 24, 2015 (requesting the data collection period be extended a minimum of six months); and Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Co-Head, Government Affairs, Intercontinental Exchange/NYSE, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated November 4, 2015 (requesting the data collection period be extended until six months after the requisite SRO rules are approved, and the implementation data of the Tick Size Pilot until six months thereafter).

    Therefore, the Commission believes that it is necessary and appropriate to issue an exemption to extend the date by which the Participants must implement the Tick Size Pilot until October 3, 2016. The Commission has determined that such an exemption is consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, the maintenance of fair and orderly markets and the removal of impediments to, and perfection of the mechanisms of, a national market system.

    IV. Conclusion

    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to Rule 608(e) of Exchange Act,9 that the Participants are exempt from implementing the Tick Size Pilot until October 3, 2016.

    9 17 CFR 242.608(e).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.10

    10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(42).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28795 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open Federal Interagency Task Force Meeting.

    Date and Time: December 10, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon.

    ADDRESSES:

    SBA Headquarters, 409 3rd Street SW., Washington, DC 20416, in the Eisenhower Conference Room B, Concourse Level.

    Purpose: This public meeting is to discuss recommendations identified by the Interagency Task Force (IATF) to further enable veteran entrepreneurship policy and programs. In addition, the Task Force will allow public comment regarding the focus areas.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), SBA announces the meeting of the Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development. The Task Force is established pursuant to Executive Order 13540 and focused on coordinating the efforts of Federal agencies to improve capital, business development opportunities and pre-established Federal contracting goals for small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans (VOB's) and service-disabled veterans (SDVOSB'S). Moreover, the Task Force shall coordinate administrative and regulatory activities and develop proposals relating to “six focus areas”: (1) Access to capital (loans, surety bonding and franchising); (2) Ensure achievement of pre-established contracting goals, including mentor protégé and matching with contracting opportunities; (3) Increase the integrity of certifications of status as a small business; (4) Reducing paperwork and administrative burdens in accessing business development and entrepreneurship opportunities; (5) Increasing and improving training and counseling services; and (6) Making other improvements to support veteran's business development by the Federal government.

    Additional Information: Advance notice of attendance is requested. Anyone wishing to attend and/or make a presentation to the Task Force must contact Cheryl Simms by November 27, 2015 by email in order to be placed on the agenda. Comments for the record should be applicable to the “six focus areas” of the Task Force and emailed prior to the meeting for inclusion in the public record. Comments will be limited to five minutes in the interest of time and to accommodate as many presenters as possible. Written comments should be emailed to Cheryl Simms, Program Liaison for the Task Force, Office of Veterans Business Development at [email protected] If participants need accommodations because of a disability or require additional information, please contact Cheryl Simms, Program Liaison at (202) 205-6773, or by email at [email protected] For more information, please visit our Web site at www.sba.gov/vets.

    Dated: November 4, 2015. Miguel J. L'Heureux, SBA Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28866 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #14532 and #14533] Texas Disaster #TX-00457 AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Texas dated 11/05/2015.

    Incident: Hidden Pines Wildfire.

    Incident Period: 10/13/2015 through 10/24/2015.

    Effective Date: 11/05/2015.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 01/04/2016.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/05/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

    Primary Counties: Bastrop. Contiguous Counties: Texas: Caldwell, Fayette, Lee, Travis, Williamson.

    The Interest Rates are:

    For Physical Damage: Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere 3.750 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere 1.875 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere 6.000 Businesses Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625 Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625 For Economic Injury: Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 14532 5 and for economic injury is 14533 0.

    The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Texas.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: November 5, 2015. Maria Contreras-Sweet, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28869 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #14534 and #14535] Alaska Disaster #AK-00034 AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Alaska (FEMA-4244-DR), dated 10/30/2015.

    Incident: Severe Storm.

    Incident Period: 08/27/2015.

    Effective Date: 10/30/2015.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/29/2015.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/01/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 10/30/2015, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

    Primary Areas: North Slope Borough.

    The Interest Rates are:

    For Physical Damage: Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625 Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625 For Economic Injury: Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.625

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 14534B and for economic injury is 14535B

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59008) James E. Rivera, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28871 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #14501 and #14502] South Carolina Disaster Number SC-00032 AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Amendment 5.

    SUMMARY:

    This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4241-DR), dated 10/15/2015.

    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.

    Incident Period: 10/01/2015 through 10/23/2015.

    Effective Date: 11/05/2015.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/14/2015.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/14/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of South Carolina, dated 10/15/2015, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

    Primary Counties: Spartanburg.

    All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Joseph P. Loddo, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28868 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #14499 and #14500] California Disaster Number CA-00240 AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Amendment 1.

    SUMMARY:

    This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of California (FEMA-4240-DR), dated 10/08/2015.

    Incident: Valley Fire and Butte Fire.

    Incident Period: 09/09/2015 through 10/30/2015.

    Effective Date: 10/30/2015.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/07/2015.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/08/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of California, dated 10/08/2015, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 09/09/2015 and continuing through 10/30/2015.

    All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59008) James E. Rivera, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28872 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The SBA is issuing this notice to announce the location, date, time, and agenda for the next meeting of the Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs. The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, December 9, 2015 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Washington, DC 20416. ROOM: Eisenhower Conference room B, located on the Concourse Level Floor.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), SBA announces the meeting of the Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs. The Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs serves as an independent source of advice and policy recommendation to the Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration.

    The purpose of this meeting is scheduled as a full committee. It will focus on strategic planning, updates on past and current events and the ACVBA's objectives for 2016. For information regarding our veterans' resources and partners, please visit our Web site at www.sba.gov/vets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The meeting is open to the public, however, advance notice of attendance is requested. Anyone wishing to attend and/or make a presentation to the Advisory Committee must contact Cheryl Simms, by November 27, 2015 by email in order to be placed on the agenda. Comments for the Record should be emailed prior to the meeting for inclusion in the public record, verbal presentations; however, will be limited to five minutes in the interest of time and to accommodate as many presenters as possible. Written comments should be emailed to Cheryl Simms, Program Liaison, Office of Veterans Business Development, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Washington, DC 20416.

    Additionally, if you need accommodations because of a disability or require additional information, please contact Cheryl Simms, Program Liaison at (202) 205-6773; or by email at [email protected]. For more information, please visit our Web site at www.sba.gov/vets.

    Dated: November 4, 2015. Miguel J. L'Heureux, SBA Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-28867 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #14474 and #14475] California; Disaster Number CA-00238 AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Amendment 3.

    SUMMARY:

    This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of California (FEMA-4240-DR), dated 09/22/2015.

    Incident: Valley Fire and Butte Fire.

    Incident Period: 09/09/2015 through 10/30/2015.

    Effective Date: 10/30/2015.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/23/2015.

    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/22/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 7615.5.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of California, dated 09/22/2015 is hereby amended to establish the incident peri