Federal Register Vol. 80, No.30,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 30 (February 13, 2015)

Page Range7967-8237
FR Document

80_FR_30
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 7977 - Television Broadcasting Services; Longview, TexasPDF
80 FR 8069 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
80 FR 8083 - Local Government Advisory Committee: Request for NominationsPDF
80 FR 8058 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
80 FR 8110 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
80 FR 7977 - Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye Rockfish, Canary Rockfish and Bocaccio; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 8119 - Contract Standard for Contractor Workforce Inclusion and Request for Public CommentPDF
80 FR 7968 - Safety Zone; Triathlon National Championships, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WisconsinPDF
80 FR 8061 - South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC); Public MeetingsPDF
80 FR 7975 - Announcement of Ruling: Implementing United States v. Windsor for Purposes of Entitlement and Enrollment in Medicare Hospital Insurance and Supplementary Medical InsurancePDF
80 FR 8081 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
80 FR 8080 - Migrant Education Program (MEP) Consortium Incentive Grants Program; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 8023 - Receipt of Approval Requests for the Operation of Pressure-Assisted Multi-Point Ground Flare TechnologyPDF
80 FR 8126 - Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and DisapprovalsPDF
80 FR 8125 - Sixty-Fifth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 135, Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne EquipmentPDF
80 FR 8133 - U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 8126 - Third Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 230, Airborne Weather Detection Systems CommitteePDF
80 FR 8126 - Third Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 232, Airborne Selective Calling EquipmentPDF
80 FR 8082 - Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Request for Nominations to the Pesticide Program Dialogue CommitteePDF
80 FR 8085 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
80 FR 8081 - Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Notice of Public WebinarPDF
80 FR 7979 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Big Skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of AlaskaPDF
80 FR 7967 - Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying BenefitsPDF
80 FR 8133 - Hazardous Materials: Information Collection ActivitiesPDF
80 FR 8136 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8076 - Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meetings for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Land-Water Interface and Service Pier Extension, Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Silverdale, WAPDF
80 FR 8104 - Renewal of Agency Information Collection for Probate of Indian EstatesPDF
80 FR 8067 - Procurement List DeletionsPDF
80 FR 8064 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council); Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 8064 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 8063 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
80 FR 8098 - National Environmental Policy Act: Implementing Procedures; Additions to Categorical Exclusions for Bureau of Indian Affairs (516 DM 10)PDF
80 FR 8085 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8109 - Community Oriented Policing Services; Public Teleconference With the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing Discussing the Task Force ReportPDF
80 FR 8080 - Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
80 FR 8014 - Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, Natural Disaster ProceduresPDF
80 FR 8086 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8130 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
80 FR 8068 - Procurement List; Proposed Additions and DeletionsPDF
80 FR 8058 - Notice of National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship MeetingPDF
80 FR 8055 - Malheur National Forest; Blue Mountain Ranger District; Grant County, Oregon; Magone Project Environmental Impact StatementPDF
80 FR 8110 - The Adams Express Company and Petroleum & Resources Corporation; Notice of ApplicationPDF
80 FR 8131 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
80 FR 8103 - Endangered Species; Recovery Permit ApplicationPDF
80 FR 8057 - Black Hills National Forest Advisory BoardPDF
80 FR 8122 - Reporting and recordkeeping requirements under OMB reviewPDF
80 FR 8065 - Marine Mammals; File No. 13430PDF
80 FR 8125 - Global Positioning System Adjacent Band Compatibility Assessment Workshop IIIPDF
80 FR 8123 - Vermont Disaster #VT-00031PDF
80 FR 8065 - Marine Mammals; File No. 14301PDF
80 FR 8060 - Marine Mammals; File No. 18881PDF
80 FR 8100 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of 5-Year Status Reviews of 133 Species in Hawaii, Oregon, Idaho, and WashingtonPDF
80 FR 8123 - Announcement of 2015 InnovateHER: Innovating for Women Business ChallengePDF
80 FR 8078 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
80 FR 8135 - Bogalusa Bayou Railroad, L.L.C. d/b/a Geaux Geaux Railroad-Operation Exemption-Geaux Geaux Railroad, LLCPDF
80 FR 8108 - Certain Laser Abraded Denim Garments; Notice of Commission Decision Amending the Notice of Investigation and Extending the Target DatePDF
80 FR 8084 - Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and BudgetPDF
80 FR 8072 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
80 FR 8087 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 8091 - Conditional Approval of New Animal Drugs; Public Meeting; Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 8071 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8092 - Regulation of Combination Drug Medicated Feeds; Public Meeting; Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 8088 - Determination That SUBUTEX (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride) Sublingual Tablets, Equivalent 2 Milligrams Base and Equivalent 8 Milligrams Base, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or EffectivenessPDF
80 FR 8093 - The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 8070 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 7980 - Regulatory Publication and Review Under the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996PDF
80 FR 7994 - Consolidated Federal Oil & Gas and Federal & Indian Coal Valuation ReformPDF
80 FR 8131 - Notice of Intent To Grant a Buy America Waiver to the Illinois Department of Transportation for the Use of Sure Close Self-Closing Force Adjustable Gate HingesPDF
80 FR 8108 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
80 FR 8096 - Announcement of a Draft NIH Policy on Dissemination of NIH-Funded Clinical Trial InformationPDF
80 FR 8094 - Bethesda Campus Master Plan Record of DecisionPDF
80 FR 8115 - Pacific Life Insurance Company, et al; Notice of ApplicationPDF
80 FR 8030 - Clinical Trials Registration and Results SubmissionPDF
80 FR 8055 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8069 - Request for Information Regarding an Initiative on Safe Student BankingPDF
80 FR 8059 - Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone-Central Pennsylvania Under Alternative Site FrameworkPDF
80 FR 8070 - Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 8089 - Identifying Potential Biomarkers for Qualification and Describing Contexts of Use To Address Areas Important to Drug Development; Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 8074 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
80 FR 7994 - Special Local Regulations and Safety Zones; Recurring Marine Events and Fireworks Displays Within the Fifth Coast Guard DistrictPDF
80 FR 8079 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application Package for Grants Under the Minority Science & Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) (1894-0001)PDF
80 FR 8107 - Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Gold Rock Mine Project, White Pine County, NVPDF
80 FR 7971 - Pyrimethanil; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
80 FR 8105 - Notice of Intent To Amend the Resource Management Plan for the Bureau of Land Management Gunnison Field Office and Prepare an Associated Environmental Impact Statement, ColoradoPDF
80 FR 8018 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: Non-interference Demonstration for Federal Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Birmingham AreaPDF
80 FR 8053 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Remove the Modoc Sucker From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened WildlifePDF
80 FR 7970 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia's Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan of the West Virginia Portion of the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 8165 - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Southwest Fisheries Science Center Fisheries ResearchPDF
80 FR 8065 - Availability of Seats for National Marine Sanctuary Advisory CouncilsPDF
80 FR 8059 - Request for Applicants for Appointment to the United States Section of the United States-Turkey Business Council; AmendmentPDF
80 FR 8139 - Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the HomelessPDF
80 FR 7986 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
80 FR 7989 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
80 FR 7992 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
80 FR 8031 - Expansion of Online Public File Obligations to Cable and Satellite TV Operators and Broadcast and Satellite Radio LicenseesPDF
80 FR 8109 - Advisory Board; Notice of MeetingPDF

Issue

80 30 Friday, February 13, 2015 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Forest Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8055 2015-02988
Army Army Department See

Engineers Corps

Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From People Who Are See

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled

Broadcasting Broadcasting Board of Governors NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 8058 2015-03148 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection NOTICES Safe Student Banking, 8069-8070 2015-02982 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Announcement of Ruling: Implementing United States v. Windsor for Purposes of Entitlement and Enrollment in Medicare Hospital Insurance and Supplementary Medical Insurance, 7975-7977 2015-03069 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8085-8086 2015-03036 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Objective Work Plan and Objective Progress Report, 8086-8087 2015-03032 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 8058 2015-03102 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Triathlon National Championships, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI, 7968-7970 2015-03074 PROPOSED RULES Special Local Regulations and Safety Zones: Recurring Marine Events and Fireworks Displays within the Fifth Coast Guard District, 7994-8014 2015-02965 Commerce Commerce Department See

Economic Development Administration

See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NOTICES Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 8067-8069 2015-03030 2015-03044 Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 8069 2015-03166 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Review, 7980-7986 2015-02998 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8070 2015-02978 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

See

Navy Department

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8070-8071 2015-02999 2015-03003 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 8072-8076 2015-02968 2015-03007
Department of Transportation See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Economic Development Economic Development Administration NOTICES Meetings: National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 8058-8059 2015-03028 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application Package for Grants under the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program, 8079-8080 2015-02963 Funding Availabilities: Migrant Education Program Consortium Incentive Grants Program; Correction, 8080 2015-03065 Energy Department Energy Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8080-8081 2015-03034 Engineers Engineers Corps PROPOSED RULES Natural Disaster Procedures: Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, 8014-8017 2015-03033 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: West Virginia; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan of the West Virginia Portion of the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Correction, 7970-7971 2015-02851 Pesticide Tolerances: Pyrimethanil, 7971-7975 2015-02949 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama; Non-interference Demonstration for Federal Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Birmingham Area, 8018-8023 2015-02942 Approval Requests: Operation of Pressure-Assisted Multi-Point Ground Flare Technology, 8023-8030 2015-03064 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc., 8081 2015-03068 Meetings: Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Webinars, 8081-8082 2015-03052 Requests for Nominations: Local Government Advisory Committee, 8083-8084 2015-03157 Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee, 8082-8083 2015-03054 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 7986-7994 2015-02535 2015-02536 2015-02537 NOTICES Meetings: RTCA Special Committee 135, Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment, 8125 2015-03061 RTCA Special Committee 230, Airborne Weather Detection Systems Committee, 8125-8126 2015-03057 RTCA Special Committee 232, Airborne Selective Calling Equipment, 8126 2015-03055 Passenger Facility Charge Approvals and Disapprovals, 8126-8130 2015-03063 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Television Broadcasting Services: Longview, TX, 7977 2015-03168 PROPOSED RULES Expansion of Online Public File Obligations to Cable and Satellite TV Operators and Broadcast and Satellite Radio Licensees, 8031-8052 2015-02531 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approval, 8084-8085 2015-03008 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Review, 7980-7986 2015-02998 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Buy American Waivers, 8130-8131 2015-03025 2015-03029 2015-03031 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 8085 2015-03053 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Buy American Waivers: Illinois Department of Transportation; Use of Sure Close Self-Closing Force Adjustable Gate Hinges, 8131-8133 2015-02996 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Review, 7980-7986 2015-02998 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Removal of the Modoc Sucker, 8053-8054 2015-02928 NOTICES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Initiation of 5-Year Status Reviews of 133 species in Hawaii, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington, 8100-8103 2015-03015 Endangered Species Recovery Permit Application, 8103-8104 2015-03016 2015-03024 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products; Export Certificates; Correction, 8087-8088 2015-03005 Determinations that Products Were Not Withdrawn from Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness: SUBUTEX (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride) Sublingual Tablets, Equivalent 2 and 8 Milligrams Base, 8088-8089 2015-03001 Identifying Potential Biomarkers for Qualification and Describing Contexts of Use to Address Areas Important to Drug Development, 8089-8091 2015-02976 Meetings: Conditional Approval of New Animal Drugs, 8091-8092 2015-03004 Regulation of Combination Drug Medicated Feeds, 8092-8093 2015-03002 The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee, 8093-8094 2015-03000 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Proposed Trade Zones under the Alternative Site Framework: Central Pennsylvania, 8059 2015-02980 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Magone Project; Malheur National Forest, Blue Mountain Ranger District, Grant County, OR, 8055-8057 2015-03027 Meetings: Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board, 8057 2015-03023 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

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 8140-8163 2015-02688 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Probate of Indian Estates, 8104-8105 2015-03045 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Office of Natural Resources Revenue

NOTICES National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures: Additions to Categorical Exclusions for Bureau of Indian Affairs, 8098-8100 2015-03039
Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8135-8136 2015-03047 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Appointment to the U.S. Section of U.S.-Turkey Business Council; Amendment, 8059-8060 2015-02721 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications and Rulings, etc.: Certain Laser Abraded Denim Garments, 8108-8109 2015-03010 Justice Department Justice Department See

National Institute of Corrections

NOTICES Meetings: President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing Discussing the Task Force Report; Teleconference, 8109 2015-03035
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Gold Rock Mine Project, White Pine County, NV, 8107-8108 2015-02950 Gunnison Field Office, Colorado; Resource Management Plan Amendment, 8105-8107 2015-02946 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 8110 2015-03112 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Meetings: U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors, 8133 2015-03059 National Institute Corrections National Institute of Corrections NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Board, 8109-8110 2015-02428 National Institute National Institutes of Health PROPOSED RULES Clinical Trials Registration and Results Submission, 8030-8031 2015-02990 NOTICES Bethesda Campus Master Plan Record of Decision, 8094-8096 2015-02993 Gudiance: Dissemination of NIH-Funded Clinical Trial Information, 8096-8098 2015-02994 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Endangered and Threatened Species: Designation of Critical Habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye and Canary Rockfish and Bocaccio; Correction, 7977-7979 2015-03087 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Big Skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska, 7979 2015-03051 PROPOSED RULES Taking and Importing Marine Mammals: Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Southwest Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Research, 8166-8237 2015-02831 NOTICES Applications: Marine Mammals; File No. 18881, 8060-8061 2015-03017 Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 8064-8065 2015-03041 2015-03043 Pacific Fishery Management Council, 8063-8064 2015-03040 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 8061-8063 2015-03071 Permits: Marine Mammals; File No. 13430, 8065 2015-03021 Marine Mammals; File No. 14301, 8065 2015-03018 Requests for Nominations: Seats for National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Councils, 8065-8067 2015-02792 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places; Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 8108 2015-02995 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Land-Water Interface and Service Pier Extension, Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Silverdale, WA; Meetings, 8076-8078 2015-03046 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 8078-8079 2015-03012 Natural Resources Office of Natural Resources Revenue PROPOSED RULES Consolidated Federal Oil and Gas and Federal and Indian Coal Valuation Reform, 7994 2015-02997 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying Benefits, 7967-7968 2015-03050 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Hazardous Materials, 8133-8134 2015-03049 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: Pacific Life Insurance Co., et al., 8115-8118 2015-02992 The Adams Express Co., Petroleum and Resources Corp., 8110-8115 2015-03026 Contract Standard for Contractor Workforce Inclusion, 8118-8122 2015-03082 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8122 2015-03022 Disaster Declarations: Vermont, 8122-8123 2015-03019 InnovateHER: Innovating for Women Business Challenge, 8123-8124 2015-03013 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Operation Exemptions: Bogalusa Bayou Railroad, LLC d/b/a Geaux Geaux Railroad from Geaux Geaux Railroad, LLC, 8135 2015-03011 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Maritime Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

See

Surface Transportation Board

NOTICES Meetings: Global Positioning System Adjacent Band Compatibility Assessment Workshop III, 8124-8125 2015-03020
Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

Internal Revenue Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 8135 2015-03009
U.S. China U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission NOTICES Meetings: U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 8136-8137 2015-02979 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Housing and Urban Development Department, 8140-8163 2015-02688 Part III Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 8166-8237 2015-02831 Reader Aids

Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, 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 30 Friday, February 13, 2015 Rules and Regulations 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 March 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 March 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 March 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 March 2015 interest assumptions under the benefit payments regulation will be 0.50 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 February 2015, these interest assumptions represent a decrease of 0.50 percent in the immediate annuity rate and are otherwise 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 March 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 257, 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
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 257 3-1-15 4-1-15 0.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 257, 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
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 257 3-1-15 4-1-15 0.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    Issued in Washington, DC, on this 6th day of February 2015. Judith Starr, General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03050 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2014-0751] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Triathlon National Championships, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone within Milwaukee Harbor in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of Milwaukee Harbor due to the 2015 Olympic and Sprint Distance National Championships. This safety zone is necessary to protect the surrounding public and vessels from the hazards associated with the 2015 Olympic and Sprint Distance National Championships.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective from August 1, 2015, until August 30, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket USCG-2014-0751. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, contact MST1 Joseph McCollum, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747-7148 or by email at [email protected] If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

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

    On December 30, 2014, The Coast Guard published an NPRM entitled Safety Zone; Triathlon National Championships, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin in the Federal Register (79 FR 78369). We did not receive any comments in response to the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held.

    B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish safety zones: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    In 2014, the Coast Guard was informed that the Olympic and Sprint Distance National Championships are scheduled to return to Milwaukee Harbor in 2015. Within and around Milwaukee Harbor at Lakeshore inlet, this event is expected to involve thousands of participants competing in a swim race surrounded by thousands of spectators. The swim portion of this event is anticipated to occur on three days during the second week of August, 2015. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined that the likelihood of transiting watercraft during the swim competition involving a large number of competitors presents a significant risk of serious injuries or fatalities.

    C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined that a safety zone is necessary to mitigate the aforementioned safety risks. Thus, this rule establishes a safety zone that encompasses all waters of Milwaukee Harbor, including Lakeshore inlet and the Marina at Pier Wisconsin, west of an imaginary line across the entrance to the Marina at Pier Wisconsin connecting coordinates 43°02.253′ N., 087°53.623′ W. and 43°01.737′ N., 087°53.727′ W. (NAD 83).

    This rule will be effective from August 1, 2015, until August 30, 2015. Additionally, the Coast Guard anticipates that this safety zone will be enforced from 10:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m. on August 7; from 6:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on August 8, and from 6:30 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. on August 9, 2015. This 2015 enforcement schedule may change, and in the event of a change, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will issue a Notice of Enforcement with an updated enforcement schedule.

    The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will notify the public that the zone in this rule is or will be enforced by all appropriate means to the affected segments of the public including publication in the Federal Register as practicable, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of notification may also include, but are not limited to Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners.

    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    D. Regulatory Analyses

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

    1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. Overall, we expect the economic impact of this rule to be minimal and that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.

    2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have considered whether this rule would have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor within the waters of the marina at Pier Wisconsin or Lakeshore inlet during the times in which the safety zone is enforced in August of 2015.

    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This rule will be enforced for a limited time during the month of August; further, this safety zone has been designed to allow traffic to pass safely around the zone whenever possible, and vessels will be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port.

    3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

    5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

    6. Protest Activities

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

    7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    8. Taking of Private Property

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

    9. Civil Justice Reform

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

    10. Protection of Children

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

    11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

    12. Energy Effects

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

    13. Technical Standards

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

    14. Environment

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.T09-0751 to read as follows:
    § 165.T09-0751 Safety Zone; Triathlon National Championships, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Milwaukee Harbor, including Lakeshore inlet and the marina at Pier Wisconsin, west of an imaginary line across the entrance to the Marina at Pier Wisconsin connecting coordinates 43°02.253′ N, 087°53.623′ W and 43°01.737′ N, 087°53.727′ W (NAD 83).

    (b) Effective period. This safety zone is effective from August 1, 2015, until August 30, 2015. The Coast Guard anticipates that this safety zone will be enforced from 10:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m. on August 7; from 6:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on August 8, and from 6:30 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. on August 9, 2015. This 2015 enforcement schedule may change, and in the event of a change, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will issue a Notice of Enforcement with an updated enforcement schedule.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative.

    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic except as permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative.

    (3) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to act on her behalf. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her designated on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or her on-scene representative.

    Dated: January 30, 2014. A.B. Cocanour, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03074 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81 [EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0690; FRL-9921-31-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia's Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan of the West Virginia Portion of the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Correction AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correcting amendments.

    SUMMARY:

    This document corrects an error in the rule language of a final rule pertaining to West Virginia's request to redesignate to attainment the West Virginia portion of the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD nonattainment area for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), which was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70099).

    DATES:

    This document is effective on February 13, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182 or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70099), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rulemaking action announcing the approval of West Virginia's request to redesignate to attainment the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    Need for Correction

    As published, the final redesignation contains an error. EPA inadvertently added the word “Moderate” in the table for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The intent of the final rule was to redesignate the Area to attainment. Moderate is a classification for nonattainment areas. This action corrects the table of 40 CFR part 81 for West Virginia's 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution, National Parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: January 28, 2015. William C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.

    Accordingly, 40 CFR part 81 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:

    PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    2. Section 81.349 is amended by revising the entry for “Martinsburg, WV-Hagerstown, MD: Berkeley County” at the end of the table titled “West Virginia—1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS” to read as follows:
    § 81.349 West Virginia. West Virginia—1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary] Designated Area Designation a Date 1 Type Classification Date 2 Type *         *         *         *         *         *         * Martinsburg, WV-Hagerstown, MD: Berkeley County 11/25/14 Attainment *         *         *         *         *         *         * a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 2 This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02851 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530; FRL-9922-07] Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of pyrimethanil in or on pomegranate at 5.0 parts per million (ppm). Janssen PMP requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective February 13, 2015. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before April 14, 2015, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before April 14, 2015. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of December 17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL-9918-90), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 3F8213) by Janssen PMP, Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, 1125 Trenton-Harbourton Rd Titusville, NJ 08560-0200. The petition requested that the 40 CFR 180.518 be amended by establishing a tolerance for residues of the fungicide pyrimethanil in or on pomegranate at 5.0 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Janssen PMP, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. Pyrimethanil is of low acute lethality by the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes. It is a slight eye irritant, is not irritating to the skin, and it is not a dermal sensitizer. A single oral dose of 1,000 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg) produced a number of acute signs of neurotoxicity, including ataxia, dilated pupils, and decreases in motor activity, hind limb grip strength, and body temperature. However, there was no evidence of neurotoxicity with repeated dosing in a subchronic neurotoxicity study in rats. The major target organs of repeated oral exposure were the liver, kidney, and the thyroid. These effects were accompanied by decreased body weight. Reproductive toxicity was not observed, and developmental effects (e.g., decreased fetal weight, retarded ossification, extra ribs) were observed only at maternally toxic doses. Special short-term exposure studies demonstrated increased liver uridine diphosphate glucuronosyl transferase (UDPGT) activity leading to decreases in thyroid hormones (T3, T4) and compensatory increases in thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) in adult rats.

    Thyroid adenomas were seen in rats following long-term exposure, and it was concluded that they were mediated via disruption of the thyroid/pituitary axis. There were no concerns for mutagenicity. The EPA has classified pyrimethanil as “Not Likely To Be Carcinogenic To Humans At Doses That Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone Homeostasis.” This decision was based on the following:

    1. There were treatment-related increases in thyroid follicular cell tumors in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats at doses which were considered adequate to assess carcinogenicity; however, rats are substantially more sensitive than humans are to the development of thyroid follicular cell tumors in response to thyroid hormone imbalance.

    2. There were no treatment-related tumors seen in male or female CD-1 mice at doses which were considered adequate to assess carcinogenicity.

    3. There is no mutagenicity concern and there is no evidence for thyroid carcinogenesis mediated through a mutagenic mode of action.

    4. The non-neoplastic toxicological evidence (i.e., thyroid growth, thyroid hormonal changes) indicated that pyrimethanil was inducing a disruption in the thyroid-pituitary hormonal status. The overall weight-of-evidence was considered sufficient to indicate that pyrimethanil induced thyroid follicular tumors through a non-linear, antithyroid mode of action.

    For these reasons, EPA determined that quantification of carcinogenic risk is not required and that the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) (17 mg/kg/day) established for deriving the chronic reference dose (cPAD) would be protective of cancer effects. Due to the non-linear mode of action of pyrimethanil, exposure at the NOAEL is not expected to alter thyroid hormone homeostasis nor result in thyroid tumor formation.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by pyrimethanil as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rule published in the Federal Register of August 1, 2012 (77 FR 45499) (FRL-9354-7).

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

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

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyrimethanil used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III. B. of the final rule published in the Federal Register of August 1, 2012 (77 FR 45500) (FRL-9354-7).

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to pyrimethanil, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing pyrimethanil tolerances in 40 CFR 180.518. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyrimethanil in food as follows:

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

    Such effects were identified for pyrimethanil. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed default processing factors (as necessary), empirical processing factors for orange and apple juice, tolerance-level residues, and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 2003-2008 NHNES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed default processing factors (as necessary), empirical processing factors for orange and apple juice, tolerance-level residues, and 100 PCT for all commodities.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that pyrimethanil should be classified as “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans at Doses That Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone Homeostasis”. Therefore a separate cancer exposure assessment was not performed.

    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment for pyrimethanil. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for pyrimethanil in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of pyrimethanil. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.

    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of pyrimethanil for acute exposures are estimated to be 86.5 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 4.8 ppb for ground water. For chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments, they are estimated to be 29.4 ppb for surface water and 4.8 ppb for ground water. Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model.

    For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 86.5 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 29.4 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

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

    Pyrimethanil is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.

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

    EPA has not found pyrimethanil to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and pyrimethanil does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyrimethanil does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

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

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal toxicology database for pyrimethanil includes rat and rabbit developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity study in rats. As discussed in Unit III.A., there was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of fetuses or offspring following exposure to pyrimethanil in these studies.

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

    i. The toxicity database for pyrimethanil is complete.

    ii. Although there is evidence of neurotoxicity in the acute neurotoxicity study, concern is low since effects were only seen at the limit dose, effects are well-characterized with clearly established NOAEL/LOAEL values, and the selected endpoints are protective for the observed effects. The thyroid has been shown to be one of the target organs in adult animals for pyrimethanil-induced toxicity thus raising a potential concern for thyroid toxicity in the young. EPA, however concluded that there is no concern for thyroid toxicity in the young based on the following weight of evidence considerations: The effects seen on the thyroid and the liver database, while treatment-related, are not severe in nature; and in each of the studies that show an effect on thyroid hormone levels, as well as in all studies chosen for PODs selection, there is a wide dose spread (~10-fold difference between NOELs and LOAELs) which provides a measure of protection for any potential effects linked to decreased thyroid hormone levels in offspring.

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

    iv. The exposure databases are sufficient to determine the nature/magnitude of the residue in food and dietary analyses are unlikely to underestimate risk of exposure from pyrimethanil.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

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

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to pyrimethanil will occupy 38% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to pyrimethanil from food and water will utilize 78% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. There are no residential uses for pyrimethanil.

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

    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The Agency determined that the thyroid tumors seen in rat studies arise through a non-linear mode of action and the NOAEL (17 mg/kg/day) established for deriving the cRfD is not expected to alter thyroid hormone homeostasis nor result in thyroid tumor formation. Thus, the chronic risk assessment addresses any cancer risk. Based on the results of chronic risk assessment, EPA concludes that aggregate exposure to pyrimethanil will not cause a cancer risk.

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

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

    B. International Residue Limits

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

    The Codex has not established a MRL for pyrimethanil in or on pomegranate.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of pyrimethanil, in or on pomegranate at 5.0 ppm.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Daniel J. Rosenblatt, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.518, alphabetically add the commodity “Pomegranate” to the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    § 180.518 Pyrimethanil; tolerance for residues.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per million *    *    *    *    * Pomegranate 5.0 *    *    *    *    *
    [FR Doc. 2015-02949 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Parts 406, 407, and 408 [CMS-4176-NR] Announcement of Ruling: Implementing United States v. Windsor for Purposes of Entitlement and Enrollment in Medicare Hospital Insurance and Supplementary Medical Insurance AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of CMS ruling.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces a CMS Ruling that states the CMS policies for implementing United States v. Windsor (“Windsor”), in which the Supreme Court held that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted in 1996, is unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA defined “marriage” and “spouse” as excluding same-sex marriages and same-sex spouses, and effectively precluded the Federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and spouses.

    DATES:

    The CMS ruling announced in this document is applicable beginning February 9, 2015, with respect to appeals pending on, initiated, or reopened in accordance with applicable rules after February 9, 2015, for entitlement and enrollment determinations made on or after June 26, 2013. This ruling does not apply to appeals of entitlement and enrollment determinations made before June 26, 2013.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patty Helphenstine (410) 786-0622.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In “Windsor,” (570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), the Supreme Court held that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted in 1996 (codified at 1 U.S.C. 7), is unconstitutional.

    The CMS Administrator signed Ruling CMS-4176-R on February 9, 2015. This CMS Ruling, as well as other CMS Rulings are available at http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Rulings/index.html. For the readers' convenience, the text of the CMS Ruling 4176-R is set forth in the Appendix to this notice of CMS ruling.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, Medicare—Supplementary Medical Insurance Program) Dated: February 9, 2015. Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. APPENDIX CMS Rulings Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Ruling No.: CMS-4176-R Date: February 9, 2015

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Rulings are decisions of the Administrator of CMS that serve as precedential final opinions, orders and statements of policy and interpretation. They provide clarification and interpretation of complex provisions of the law or regulations relating to Medicare, Medicaid, Utilization and Quality Control Peer Review, private health insurance, and related matters. They are published under the authority of the Administrator.

    CMS Rulings are binding on all CMS components, Part A and Part B Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs), Qualified Independent Contractors (QICs), the Provider Reimbursement Review Board, the Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board, and on the Medicare Appeals Council and Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) who hear Medicare appeals. Rulings promote consistency in interpretation of policy and adjudication of disputes.

    This Ruling states the CMS policies for implementing United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) (“Windsor”), in which the Supreme Court held that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted in 1996 (codified at 1 U.S.C. 7), is unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA defined “marriage” and “spouse” as excluding same-sex marriages and same-sex spouses, and effectively precluded the Federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and spouses.

    MEDICARE PROGRAM

    Entitlement and Enrollment in Medicare Hospital Insurance (Part A) and Medicare Supplementary Medical Insurance (Part B)

    CITATIONS: Sections 216(h), 226, 226A, 1818(c)-(d), 1837(i) and 1839 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sections 416, 426, 426-1, 1395i-2, 1395p and 1395r); 42 CFR 406.5, 406.10, 406.13, 406.24, 406.32(c)-(d), 406.33, 406.34, 407.20, 407.22(a)(5), 407.25(c), 407.27(b), 408.22 and 408.24.

    BACKGROUND

    Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted in 1996 (codified at 1 U.S.C. 7), defined “marriage” and “spouse” as follows: “The word `marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.” However, in June 2013, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional. United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) (“Windsor”). After the Supreme Court's opinion in Windsor, section 3 of DOMA no longer prohibits the Federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages when administering Federal statutes and programs and no longer controls the definition and recognition of a marital relationship in that context.

    Marital status is relevant to certain Medicare entitlements, premiums, benefits, and enrollment provisions. This Ruling provides binding CMS policy for the application of these provisions in the context of a same-sex marriage.

    RULING

    This Ruling states the CMS policies for implementing United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) for purposes of certain entitlement, eligibility and enrollment provisions for Medicare. Note that the rules for recognizing a same-sex marriage (and treatment of a same-sex relationship that is not a marriage) for purposes of eligibility and entitlement controlled by Title II of the Social Security Act (the Act) are different than the rules for recognizing a same-sex marriage (and treatment of a same-sex relationship that is not a marriage) for benefits provided under Title XVIII of the Act.

    POLICY

    Because section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional, it no longer defines or controls the recognition of a marital relationship by the Federal government. In the absence of controlling law to the contrary, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has adopted a policy of treating same-sex marriages on the same terms as opposite-sex marriages to the greatest extent reasonably possible and of recognizing marriages between individuals of the same sex who were lawfully married under the law of the state, territory, or foreign jurisdiction where the marriage was entered into (“celebration rule”), regardless of where the couple resides. As a general matter, for determinations made solely under Title II of the Act, we note that rules applicable specifically to Title II of the Act apply. In addition, for determinations made under Title XVIII, we note that rules applicable specifically to Title XVIII of the Act apply.

    Title II Provisions

    Title II determinations within the scope of this Ruling are eligibility for Medicare based on age or end-stage renal disease under sections 226 and 226A of the Act. Section 216 of the Act explicitly provides the definitions of terms describing the marital relationship and directs recognition and deeming of marital relationships for all of Title II of the Act. As a result, section 216 of the Act is the controlling provision in determining family and marital status for purposes of eligibility for Medicare when eligibility is based on a provision under Title II of the Act. Section 216(h)(1)(A)(i) explicitly controls recognition of a marriage:

    An applicant is the wife, husband, widow, or widower of a fully or currently insured individual for purposes of this subchapter if the courts of the State in which such insured individual is domiciled at the time such applicant files an application, or, if such insured individual is dead, the courts of the State in which he was domiciled at the time of death, or, if such insured individual is or was not so domiciled in any State, the courts of the District of Columbia, would find that such applicant and such insured individual were validly married at the time such applicant files such application or, if such insured individual is dead, at the time he died.

    The Social Security Administration (SSA) has issued policies interpreting and implementing section 216 of the Act in the context of same-sex marriages and other relationships. Generally, such policies look to the law of the domicile of the social security number holder to determine whether to recognize a marriage. Such interpretations of section 216(h) are applicable for purposes of entitlement and eligibility determinations under sections 226 and 226A. The SSA has interpreted and directed the application of section 216(h) in the following Program Operations Manual System (POMS) sections issued by SSA:

    • GN 00210.002: Same-Sex Marriage—Determining Marital Status for Title II and Medicare Benefits.

    • GN 00210.003: Same-Sex Marriage—Dates States Permitted or Recognized Same-Sex Marriage.

    • GN 00210.004: Non-Marital Relationships (Such as Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships).

    • GN 00210.006: Same-Sex Marriages Celebrated in Foreign Jurisdictions.

    CMS follows SSA interpretations on the application of section 216(h) to same sex marriages and same sex spouses for purposes of Title II. CMS policy illustrating the application of these policies to determinations made under sections 226 and 226A is articulated in the following POMS sections issued by SSA:

    Entitlement under section 226 and 42 CFR 406.5 and 406.10:

    • GN 00210.100: Same-Sex Marriage and Non-Marital Legal Relationships—Benefits for Aged Spouses.

    • GN 00210.400: Same-Sex Marriage—Benefits for Surviving Spouses.

    Entitlement under section 226A and 42 CFR 406.5 and 406.13:

    • GN 00210.705: Same-Sex Marriage—Medicare Based on End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD).

    Title XVIII Provisions

    There are no controlling provisions in Title XVIII of the Act or regulations implementing the Title XVIII provisions within the scope of this Ruling that define or direct recognition or deeming of marital relationships. Therefore, CMS has adopted a policy of interpreting sections 1818(d), 1837(i) and 1839 of the Act in a manner that treats same-sex marriages on the same terms as opposite-sex marriages to the greatest extent reasonably possible and uses a celebration rule where possible. “Celebration rule” means that a same-sex marriage is recognized and treated as a lawful marriage (where marital status is relevant to a determination of entitlement) if the same-sex marriage was lawful where and when it occurred. Individuals in non-marital same-sex relationships (such as domestic partnerships or civil unions that are not marriages) are not considered married.

    The SSA processes applications and initial eligibility determinations under these statutes by applying CMS policy. CMS policy for the implementation of Windsor in the context of these Title XVIII provisions is articulated in the POMS sections issued by the SSA as follows:

    Calculation of hospital insurance (Part A) premium under section 1818(d) and 42 CFR 406.32(c):

    • GN 00210.706: Same-Sex Marriage—HI Premium Reduction for Aged and Disabled Individuals.

    Eligibility for a special enrollment period based on enrollment in a group health plan by reason of a spouse's current employment under sections 1818(c) and 1837(i) and 42 CFR 406.24, 407.20, 407.22, 407.25, and 407.27:

    • GN 00210.700: Same-Sex Marriage—Eligibility for Medicare Special Enrollment Period (SEP).

    Calculation of late enrollment penalty for premium hospital insurance (Premium Part A) and supplemental medical insurance (Part B) under section 1818(c) and 1839 and 42 CFR 406.32(d), 406.33, 406.34, 408.22, and 408.24:

    • GN 00210.701: Same-Sex Marriage—Premium Surcharge Rollback.

    EFFECTIVE DATE

    This Ruling is effective on February 9, 2015, with respect to appeals on, initiated, or reopened in accordance with applicable rules after February 9, 2015, for entitlement and enrollment determinations made on or after June 26, 2013. This ruling does not apply to appeals of entitlement and enrollment determinations made before June 26, 2013.

    Dated: February 9, 2015

    Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03069 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [MB Docket No. 14-245, RM-11740; DA 15-150] Television Broadcasting Services; Longview, Texas AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    A petition for rulemaking was filed by KCEB License Company, LLC (“KCEB License”), the licensee of KCEB(TV), channel 51, Longview, Texas, requesting the substitution of channel 26 for channel 51 at Longview. KCEB License filed comments reaffirming its interest in the proposed channel substitution and explained that the channel substitution will replicate KCEB(TV)'s current coverage area on channel 51 and serve 34,104 more persons than the current channel 51 facility. This will eliminate any potential interference with wireless operations in the Lower 700 MHz A Block and facilitate the clearing of the adjacent television band as expeditiously as possible.

    DATES:

    Effective February 13, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeremy Miller, [email protected], Media Bureau, (202) 418-1507.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 14-245, adopted February 9, 2015, and released February 9, 2015. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/). To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).

    This document does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding.

    The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

    List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television.

    Federal Communications Commission. Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows:

    PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.

    § 73.622 [Amended]
    2. Section 73.622(i), the Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments under Texas is amended by removing channel 51 and adding channel 26 at Longview.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03168 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 [Docket No. 130404330-5117-03] RIN 0648-BC76 Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye Rockfish, Canary Rockfish and Bocaccio; Correction AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Correcting amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This action corrects an omission in the final rule to designate critical habitat for three DPSs of rockfish from the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin. The final rule for “Designation of Critical Habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye Rockfish, Canary Rockfish and Bocaccio” failed to update the columns labeled “Critical habitat,” in the tables of threatened and endangered species to cross reference these new rules. Therefore, this document corrects the tables by citing the critical habitat designations in the columns of the tables.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective February 11, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Information regarding this final rule may be obtained by contacting NMFS, Endangered Species Division, 1315 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Dwayne Meadows, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources (301) 427-8403.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Need for Correction

    In a final rule NMFS published on November 13, 2014 (79 FR 68041) to designate critical habitat for 3 DPSs of rockfishes, we did not update the columns labeled “Critical habitat” in the tables of threatened and endangered species in 50 CFR 223.102(e) and 50 CFR 224.101(h), respectively, to cross reference these new rules.

    List of Subjects 50 CFR Part 223

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Transportation.

    50 CFR Part 224

    Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 223 and 224 are amended to read as follows:

    PART 223—THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES 1. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; subpart B, § 223.201-202 also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for § 223.206(d)(9).

    2. In § 223.102(e), under the subheading “Fishes”, revise the table entries for “Rockfish, canary (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS)”, and “Rockfish, yelloweye (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS)” to read as follows:
    § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species.

    (e) * * *

    Species 1 Common name Scientific name Description of listed entity Citation(s) for listing
  • determination(s)
  • Critical
  • habitat
  • ESA rules
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Fishes *         *         *         *         *         *         * Rockfish, canary (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS) Sebastes pinniger Canary rockfish originating from Puget Sound and the Georgia Basin 75 FR 22276, Apr 28, 2010 226.224 NA. Rockfish, yelloweye (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS) Sebastes ruberrimus Yelloweye rockfish originating from Puget Sound and the Georgia Basin 75 FR 22276, Apr 28, 2010 226.224 NA. *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
    PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES 3. The authority citation for part 224 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

    4. In § 224.101, paragraph (h), under the subheading “Fishes”, revise the table entry for “Bocaccio (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS)” to read as follows:
    § 224.101 Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous species.

    (h) * * *

    Species 1 Common name Scientific name Description of listed entity Citation(s) for listing
  • determination(s)
  • Critical
  • habitat
  • ESA rules
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Fishes Bocaccio (Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS) Sebastes paucispinis Bocaccio originating from Puget Sound and the Georgia Basin 75 FR 22276, Apr 28, 2010 226.224 NA. *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
    Dated: February 10, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03087 Filed 2-11-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 130925836-4174-02] RIN 0648-XD761 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Big Skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is prohibiting retention of big skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary because the 2015 total allowable catch of big skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA will be reached.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), February 11, 2015, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    The 2015 total allowable catch (TAC) of big skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA is 1,532 metric tons (mt) as established by the final 2014 and 2015 harvest specifications for groundfish of the GOA (79 FR 12890, March 6, 2014).

    In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that the 2015 TAC of big skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA will be reached. Therefore, NMFS is requiring that big skate caught in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA be treated as prohibited species in accordance with § 679.21(b).

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay prohibiting the retention of big skate in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of February 9, 2015.

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

    This action is required by § 679.20 and § 679.21 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03051 Filed 2-10-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 30 Friday, February 13, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Chapter I [Docket ID FFIEC-2014-0001 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Chapter II [Docket No. R-1510] FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Chapter III Regulatory Publication and Review Under the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 AGENCY:

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board); and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

    ACTION:

    Notice of regulatory review; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The OCC, Board, and FDIC (we or Agencies) are conducting a review of the regulations we have issued in order to identify outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulatory requirements imposed on insured depository institutions, as required by the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA). In this notice, the Agencies are seeking public comment on regulations in the following categories: Banking Operations, Capital, and the Community Reinvestment Act.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received by no later than May 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: “Regulations.gov.” You can reach this portal through the Agencies' EGRPRA Web site, http://egrpra.ffiec.gov. On this site, click “Submit a Comment” and follow the instructions. Alternatively, go to http://www.regulations.gov, enter “FFIEC-2014-0001” in the Search Box, click “Search,” and click “Comment Now.” Those who wish to submit their comments by an alternate means may do so as indicated below.

    OCC:

    We encourage commenters to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, Regulations.gov, in accordance with the previous paragraph. Alternatively, comments may be emailed to [email protected] or sent by mail to Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Mail Stop 9W-11, 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219. Comments also may be faxed to (571) 465-4326 or hand delivered or sent by courier to 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219. For comments submitted by any means other than Regulations.gov, you must include “OCC” as the agency name and “Docket ID FFIEC-2014-0001” in your comment.

    In general, the OCC will enter all comments received into the docket and publish them without change on Regulations.gov. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, as well as any business or personal information you provide, such as your name and address, email address, or phone number, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Therefore, please do not include any information with your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

    You may inspect and photocopy in person all comments received by the OCC at 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219. For security reasons, the OCC requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect or photocopy comments. You may make an appointment by calling (202) 649-6700. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and submit to a security screening.

    Board

    We encourage commenters to submit comments regarding the Board's regulations by any of the following methods:

    Agency Web site: http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/proposedregs.aspx. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Agency Web site.

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal, in accordance with the directions above.

    Email: [email protected] Include “EGRPRA” and Docket No. R-1510 in the subject line of the message.

    FAX: (202) 452-3819.

    Mail: Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20551.

    In general, the Board will enter all comments received into the docket and publish them without change on Regulations.gov. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, as well as any business or personal information you provide, such as your name and address, email address, or phone number, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Therefore, please do not enclose any information with your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

    You may inspect and photocopy in person all comments received by the Board at 20th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20551. For security reasons, the Board requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect comments. You may make an appointment by calling (202) 452-3000. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and submit to a security screening.

    FDIC

    We encourage commenters to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, “Regulations.gov,” in accordance with the directions above. Alternatively, you may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Agency Web site: http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal. Follow instructions for submitting comments on the Agency Web site.

    Email: [email protected] Include “EGRPRA” in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, Attention: Comments, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street Building (located on F Street) on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. (EST).

    We will post all comments received to http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal without change, including any personal information provided. Comments may be inspected and photocopied in the FDIC Public Information Center, 3501 North Fairfax Drive, Room E-1002, Arlington, VA 22226, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. (EST) on business days. Paper copies of public comments may be ordered from the Public Information Center by calling (877) 275-3342.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    OCC: Karen McSweeney, Counsel (202) 649-6295; Heidi Thomas, Special Counsel (202) 649-6286; for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY (202) 649-5597.

    Board: Walter McEwen, Senior Counsel (202) 452-3321; Claudia Von Pervieux, Counsel (202) 452-2552; Matthew Bornfreund, Attorney (202) 452-3818; for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, TDD (202) 263-4869.

    FDIC: Ruth R. Amberg, Assistant General Counsel (202) 898-3736; Ann Taylor, Supervisory Counsel (202) 898-3573; for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY (800) 925-4618.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Introduction

    Section 2222 of EGRPRA 1 requires that not less frequently than once every 10 years, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC),2 along with the Agencies,3 conduct a review of their regulations to identify outdated or otherwise unnecessary requirements imposed on insured depository institutions.4 The EGRPRA regulatory review provides an opportunity for the public and the Agencies to look at groups of related regulations and to identify opportunities for burden reduction. For example, the EGRPRA review may facilitate the identification of statutes and regulations that share similar goals or complementary methods where one or more Agencies could eliminate overlapping requirements. Alternatively, commenters may identify regulations or statutes that impose requirements that are no longer consistent with the way that business is conducted and that, therefore, the Agencies might eliminate.

    1 Public Law 104-208 (1996), codified at 12 U.S.C. 3311.

    2 The FFIEC is an interagency body empowered to prescribe uniform principles, standards, and report forms for the Federal examination of financial institutions and to make recommendations to promote uniformity in the supervision of financial institutions. The FFIEC does not issue regulations that impose burden on financial institutions and, therefore, we have not separately captioned the FFIEC in this notice.

    3 The FFIEC is comprised of the OCC, Board, FDIC, National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and State Liaison Committee. Of these, only the OCC, Board, and FDIC are statutorily required to undertake the EGRPRA review. The NCUA elected to participate in the first EGRPRA review ten years ago, and the NCUA Board again has elected to participate in this review process. Consistent with its approach during the first EGRPRA review, NCUA will separately issue notices and requests for comment on its rules. The CFPB is required to review its significant rules and publish a report of its review no later than five years after they take effect. See 12 U.S.C. 5512(d). This process is separate from the EGRPRA process.

    4 Insured depository institutions also are subject to regulations that are not required to be reviewed under the EGRPRA process. Examples include rules for which rulemaking authority has transferred to the CFPB and anti-money laundering regulations issued by the Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, among others.

    The EGRPRA review also provides the Agencies and the public with an opportunity to consider how to reduce burden in general, but especially on community banks and other small, insured depository institutions or holding companies. We are keenly aware of the role that these institutions play in providing consumers and businesses across the nation with essential financial services and access to credit, and we are concerned about the impact of regulatory burden on these smaller institutions. We understand that when an Agency issues a new regulation or amends a current regulation, smaller institutions may have to devote considerable resources to determine if and how the regulation will affect them. Through the public comment process, the EGRPRA review can help the Agencies identify and target regulatory changes to reduce unnecessary burden on these smaller institutions.

    Burden reduction must be consistent with the Agencies' statutory mandates, many of which require the issuance of regulations. This includes ensuring the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions, their affiliates, and the financial system as a whole. EGRPRA recognizes that effective burden reduction may require legislative change. Accordingly, as part of this review, we specifically ask the public to comment on the relationships among burden reduction, regulatory requirements, and statutory mandates.

    In addition, we note that the Agencies also consider the burden imposed each time we propose, adopt, or amend a rule. For example, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Agencies assess each rulemaking with respect to the burdens the rule might impose. Furthermore, we invite the public to comment on every rule we propose, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

    II. The EGRPRA Review Process

    Taken together for purposes of EGRPRA, the Agencies' regulations covering insured depository institutions encompass more than 100 subjects.5 Consistent with the EGRPRA statute, the Agencies have grouped these regulations into the following 12 regulatory categories:

    5 Consistent with EGRPRA's focus on reducing burden on insured depository institutions, the Agencies have not included their internal, organizational, or operational regulations in this review. These regulations impose minimal, if any, burden on insured depository institutions. Furthermore, we have not included in this review those rules that will go into effect during the EGRPRA review, new regulations that have only recently gone into effect, or rules that we have yet to fully implement. As previously noted, the Agencies were required to take burden into account in adopting these regulations.

    Applications and Reporting; Banking Operations; Capital; Community Reinvestment Act; Consumer Protection;6 Directors, Officers and Employees; International Operations; Money Laundering; Powers and Activities; Rules of Procedure; Safety and Soundness; and Securities. To determine these categories, we divided the regulations by type and sought to have no category be too large or broad.

    6 The Agencies are seeking comment only on those consumer protection regulations for which they retain rulemaking authority for insured depository institutions, and regulated holding companies following passage of section 1061 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203 (2010) (Dodd-Frank Act), codified at 12 U.S.C. 5581(b).

    To carry out the EGRPRA review, the Agencies plan to publish four Federal Register notices, each addressing one or more categories of rules. Each Federal Register notice will have a 90-day comment period. On June 4, 2014, the Agencies published the first such notice, seeking comment on three categories of rules: Applications and Reporting, Powers and Activities, and International Operations.7 Today, we are publishing the second notice, addressing the Banking Operations, Capital, and the Community Reinvestment Act categories of regulations. We invite the public to identify outdated, otherwise unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulatory requirements imposed on insured depository institutions and their holding companies in these three categories.

    7 79 FR 32172 (First Notice).

    To assist the public's understanding of how we have organized the EGRPRA review, the Agencies have included a table in Section IV that lists the three categories of regulations for which we are requesting comments. On the table, the left column divides the categories into specific subject-matter areas. The headings at the top of the table identify the types of institutions affected by the regulations.

    After comments have been received, the Agencies will review the comments and decide whether further action is appropriate with respect to the regulations. The Agencies will make this decision jointly in the case of rules that we have issued on an interagency basis. Similarly, we will undertake any rulemaking to amend or repeal those rules on an interagency basis. For rules issued by a single agency, the issuing agency will review the comments received and independently determine whether amendments to or repeal of its rules are appropriate. If so, that Agency will initiate a rulemaking to effect such change. In all cases, the Agencies will provide the public with an opportunity to comment on any proposed amendment to or repeal of a regulation, as required by the APA.

    Further, as part of the EGRPRA review, the Agencies are holding a series of outreach meetings to provide an opportunity for bankers, consumer and community groups, and other interested persons to present their views directly to senior management and staff of the Agencies on any of the categories of regulations in the EGRPRA review.8 More information about the outreach meetings can be found on the Agencies' EGRPRA Web site, http://egrpra.ffiec.gov.

    8 See 79 FR 70474 (Nov. 26, 2014).

    Finally, EGRPRA also requires the FFIEC or the Agencies to publish in the Federal Register a summary of the comments received, identifying significant issues raised and commenting on these issues. It also directs the Agencies to eliminate unnecessary regulations to the extent that such action is appropriate. The statute additionally requires the FFIEC to submit to Congress a report that summarizes any significant issues raised in the public comments and the relative merits of such issues. The report also must include an analysis of whether the Agencies are able to address the regulatory burdens associated with such issues or whether these burdens must be addressed by legislative action.

    III. Public Response to the First Notice

    In response to the First Notice, the Agencies received approximately 40 comments from financial institutions, industry trade groups, consumer advocacy groups, and other members of the public. The Agencies will carefully consider those comments, including the issues raised and the suggestions made, and discuss them in the EGRPRA report to Congress and as part of any rulemaking to which they relate.

    In addition to comments regarding the regulations contained in the First Notice, the Agencies also received comments about the EGRPRA Review Process. First, we received comments concerning which of the Agencies' rules are included in the review. As explained above, we have not included in this review those rules that will go into effect during the EGRPRA review, new regulations that have only recently gone into effect, or rules that we have yet to implement fully. The Agencies consider burden when adopting regulations. In addition, the Agencies, financial institutions, and the public need the benefit of experience with these regulations in order to assess their effect on insured depository institutions.

    We also received comments on which agencies participate in the EGRPRA review. As explained above, only the OCC, Board, and FDIC are statutorily required to undertake this review. Although other agencies may undertake regulatory reviews, those reviews are separate and distinct from this review. Finally, we received comments about whether the consumer regulations transferred to the CFPB by the Dodd-Frank Act are included in the EGRPRA review. The Agencies will seek comment only on those consumer regulations for which they retain rulemaking authority following passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, such as the fair housing advertising and recordkeeping, flood insurance, safeguarding customer information, and identity theft rules.9

    9 If, during the EGRPRA review, the Agencies receive a comment about a regulation that is not subject to the EGRPRA review, we will forward that comment to the appropriate agency.

    IV. Request for Burden Reduction Comments on Regulations in the Banking Operations, Capital, and the Community Reinvestment Act Categories

    As noted previously, the Agencies are asking the public to comment on regulations in the Banking Operations, Capital, and the Community Reinvestment Act categories to identify outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulatory requirements imposed on insured depository institutions and their regulated holding companies. Where possible, we ask commenters to cite to specific regulatory language or provisions. We also welcome suggested alternative provisions or language in support of a comment, where appropriate. Where implementation of a suggestion would require modification of a statute, we ask the commenter to identify the statute and the needed change, where possible.

    The Agencies note that recently promulgated rules 10 amended, directly or by reference, several rules listed in the Capital category of the table published with the First Notice. The changes either went into effect in 2014 or will go into effect during 2015. Consistent with the above-described EGRPRA Review Process,11 the Capital category in the table clarifies the specific regulations on which we are requesting comment. Where the table in the First Notice listed general subject-matter areas in the Capital category, the table in this notice provides citations to the specific sections that the Agencies are including in this review.

    10 78 FR 62017 (Oct. 11, 2013) (Agencies jointly); 79 FR 71630 (Dec. 3, 2014) (OCC); 79 FR 69365 (Nov. 21, 2014) (FDIC); 79 FR 64026 (Oct. 27, 2014) (Board). These regulations include capital adequacy, prompt corrective action, implementation of Basel III, standardized and risk-based approaches, market risk, and stress testing.

    11See supra note 5, at 8.

    Specific issues for commenters to consider. The Agencies specifically invite comment on the following issues as they pertain to the Agencies' Banking Operations, Capital, and Community Reinvestment Act rules addressed in this notice.

    Need for statutory change. (1) Do any statutory requirements underlying the rules in these categories impose outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulatory requirements? (2) If so, please identify the statutes and indicate how they should be amended.

    Need and purpose of the regulations. (1) Have there been changes in the financial services industry, consumer behavior, or other circumstances that cause any regulations in these categories to be outdated or otherwise unnecessary? (2) If so, please identify and indicate how they should be amended. (3) Do any of these regulations impose burdens not required by their underlying statutes? (4) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Overarching approaches/flexibility. (1) With respect to the regulations in these categories, could an Agency use a different approach to lessen the burden imposed by the regulations and achieve statutory intent? (2) Do any of these rules impose unnecessarily inflexible requirements? (3) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Effect on competition. (1) Do any of the regulations or underlying statutes create competitive disadvantages for one part of the financial services industry compared to another or for one type of insured depository institution compared to another? (2) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Reporting, recordkeeping and disclosure requirements. (1) Do any of the regulations or underlying statutes in these categories impose outdated or otherwise unnecessary reporting, recordkeeping, or disclosure requirements on insured depository institutions or their holding companies? (2) Could a financial institution fulfill any of these requirements electronically (if they are not already permitted to do so) and experience burden reduction? (3) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Unique characteristics of a type of institution. (1) Do any of the regulations or underlying statutes in these categories impose requirements that are unwarranted by the unique characteristics of a particular type of insured depository institution or holding company? (2) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Clarity. (1) Are the regulations in these categories clear and easy to understand? (2) Are there specific regulations for which clarification is needed? (3) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Burden on community banks and other smaller, insured depository institutions. (1) Are there regulations or underlying statutes in these categories that impose outdated or otherwise unnecessary requirements on a substantial number of community banks or other smaller, insured depository institutions or holding companies? (2) Have the Agencies issued regulations pursuant to a common statute that, as applied by the Agencies, create redundancies or impose inconsistent requirements? (3) Should any of these regulations be amended or repealed in order to minimize this impact? (4) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    Scope of rules. (1) Is the scope of each rule in these categories consistent with the intent of the underlying statute(s)? (2) Could we amend the scope of a rule to clarify its applicability or reduce burden, while remaining faithful to statutory intent? (3) If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.

    BILLING CODE 6510-01-P EP13FE15.000 EP13FE15.001 EP13FE15.002

    12 On Dec. 18, 2014, the OCC issued an interim final rule with request for comment (IFR) amending 12 CFR 5.47. 79 FR 75417. The effective date of the IFR was Jan. 1, 2015. In an effort to provide the fullest opportunity for public comment, the OCC invites comment on the IFR through both the process outlined in the IFR and the EGRPRA Review Process outlined above.

    Dated: January 20, 2015. Thomas J. Curry, Comptroller of the Currency. By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 6, 2015. Robert DeV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board. Dated: January 21, 2015.

    By order of the Board of Directors.

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02998 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-33-P; 6510-01-P; 6714-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-0085; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-078-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A330-243, A330-243F, A330-341, A330-342, and A330-343 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports indicating that certain hinge sleeves on the cowl doors of the thrust reverser units (TRUs) were not heat treated. This proposed AD would require replacing the sleeves of certain hinges on the cowl doors of the TRUs with new parts. We are proposing this AD to prevent, in the event of a fan-blade-off event due to high vibration, in-flight loss of TRU heavy components, which might damage airplane structure or control surfaces, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 30, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0085; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1138; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-0085; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-078-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0062, dated March 11, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-243, A330-243F, A330-341, A330-342, and A330-343 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A manufacturing discrepancy (lack of heat treatment) on a batch of the N°3 and N°4 hinge sleeves installed on [a] Thrust Reverser Unit (TRU) was identified. Those parts are only installed on A330 aeroplanes equipped with Rolls-Royce (RR) Trent 700 engines.

    This condition, if not corrected, in case of a Fan Blade Off event due to high vibration level, could cause in-flight loss of some heavy components of the TRU, possibly resulting in injury to persons on the ground [or damage to airplane structure or control surfaces, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane].

    As current hinge sleeves are not serialized, it is not possible to identify the TRU hinge sleeves which did not receive the heat treatment. The part supplier has developed an identification procedure for these TRU hinge sleeves in order to identify the affected hinge sleeves, and to allow a better part traceability in the future.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires identification and replacement of the affected TRU hinge sleeves.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0085.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 03, dated October 15, 2014. Aircelle has issued Service Bulletin 78-AG924, dated September 26, 2012. This service information describes procedures for modifying and marking the sleeves for hinges number 3 and number 4 on the cowl doors of Rolls-Royce Trent 700 engines. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Explanation of “RC” Procedures and Tests in Service Information

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for annotating which procedures and tests in the service information are required for compliance with an AD. Differentiating these procedures and tests from other tasks in the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. The actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 03, dated October 15, 2014, include procedures and tests that are identified as RC (required for compliance) because these procedures have a direct effect on detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an identified unsafe condition.

    As specified in a NOTE under the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 03, dated October 15, 2014, procedures and tests identified as RC must be done to comply with the proposed AD. However, procedures and tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operators' maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC), provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC will require approval of an AMOC.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 24 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 29 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $59,160, or $2,465 per product.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on action would take up to 1 work-hour and require parts costing $0, for a cost of $85 per product. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this action.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2015-0085; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-078-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 30, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A330-243, A330-243F, A330-341, A330-342, and A330-343 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78, Exhaust.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports indicating that certain hinge sleeves on the cowl doors of the thrust reverser units were not heat treated. We are issuing this AD to prevent, in the event of a fan-blade-off event due to high vibration, in-flight loss of thrust reverser unit (TRU) heavy components, which might damage airplane structure or control surfaces, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Identification of TRU Part Number

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD: Identify the part number of the TRUs, in accordance with Aircelle Service Bulletin 78-AG924, dated September 26, 2012.

    (h) Replacement of Thrust Reverser Unit Hinge Sleeves

    If the results of the part identification required by paragraph (g) of this AD reveal that the TRUs are affected: Within the compliance time defined in paragraph (g) of this AD, replace hinge sleeves numbers 3 and 4 of each TRU cowl door, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 03, dated October 15, 2014.

    Note 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD:

    Rolls-Royce Alert Service Bulletin RB.211-78-AG924, dated September 26, 2012, is an additional source of guidance for replacing the TRUs.

    (i) Optional Terminating Action for Paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD

    Modifying an airplane by incorporating Airbus Modification 202463 in production terminates the requirements specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD for that airplane.

    (j) Parts Installation Limitations

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a TRU on any airplane unless it has been determined, using Aircelle Service Bulletin 78-AG924, dated September 26, 2012, that the cowl door hinge sleeves installed on the TRU are not affected by the requirements of this AD.

    (k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using the service information identified in paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD, which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.

    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, dated October 17, 2012.

    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 01, dated July 30, 2013.

    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 02, dated April 17, 2014.

    (l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227 1138; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    (2) Required for Compliance (RC): Where Airbus Service Bulletin A330-78-3021, Revision 03, dated October 15, 2014, contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures and tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operators' maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (3) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0062, dated March 11, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0085.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 30, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02537 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-0083; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-131-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, and A330-300 series airplanes; and all A340-200 and A340-300 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports that a bracket that attaches the cockpit instrument panel to the airplane structure, does not sustain the fatigue loads of the design service goal. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of that bracket for cracking and to determine if both lugs are fully broken, an inspection for cracking of an adjacent bracket, if necessary, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD would also provide an optional modification, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking on a bracket of the cockpit instrument panel, which, combined with failure of the horizontal beam, could lead to collapse of the cockpit panel, and reduced controllability of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 30, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0083; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1138; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-0083; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-131-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0127, dated May 15, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, and A330-300 series airplanes; and all A340-200, and A340-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During flight tests, high stress levels have been measured on the bracket No 6 which attaches the cockpit instrument panel to the aeroplane structure, apparently introduced through the nose landing gear due to bumps on the runway. Airbus determined that the bracket does not sustain the fatigue loads during the Design Service Goal (DSG). This condition, if not detected and corrected, combined with failure of the horizontal beam, could lead to collapse of the cockpit panel, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus developed a program to inspect the condition of the affected cockpit instrument panel bracket No 6, and designed a stronger (reinforced titanium undrilled) bracket. The new bracket can be installed in-service through Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A330-25-3548 or SB A340-25-4354, as applicable to aeroplane type.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive inspections of the cockpit instrument panel bracket No 6 and, depending on findings, the accomplishment of applicable corrective actions. This [EASA] AD also provides the installation of the stronger bracket as optional terminating action for the repetitive actions required by this [EASA] AD.

    The corrective actions include replacing bracket No. 6 and bracket No. 7 with serviceable parts, and repair, as applicable.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0083.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014, which provides procedures for inspection of cockpit instrument panel bracket 6.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3548, dated October 31, 2013, which provides procedures for reinforcement of cockpit instrument panel bracket 6.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014, which provides procedures for inspection of cockpit instrument panel bracket 6.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4354, dated October 31, 2013, which provides procedures for reinforcement of cockpit instrument panel bracket 6.

    The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs.

    Explanation of “RC” Procedures and Tests in Service Information

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for annotating which procedures and tests in the service information are required for compliance with an AD. Differentiating these procedures and tests from other tasks in the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. The actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; and Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; include procedures and tests that are identified as RC (required for compliance) because these procedures have a direct effect on detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an identified unsafe condition.

    As specified in a NOTE under the Accomplishment Instructions of the specified service information, procedures and tests identified as RC must be done to comply with the proposed AD. However, procedures and tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC), provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC will require approval of an AMOC.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 76 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 8 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $51,680, or $680 per product.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the follow-on repairs specified in this AD.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on replacements would take about 23 work-hours and require parts costing $0, for a cost of $1,955 per product. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these actions.

    We estimate that the optional modification would take about 9 work hours and require parts costing $1,770, for a cost of $2,535.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2015-0083; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-131-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 30, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category.

    (1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -223F, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -313 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers except those on which Airbus Modification 203287 has been embodied in production.

    (2) Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/Furnishings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that a bracket that attaches the cockpit instrument panel to the airplane structure, does not sustain the fatigue loads of the design service goal. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking on a bracket of the cockpit instrument panel, which, combined with failure of the horizontal beam, could lead to collapse of the cockpit panel, and reduced controllability of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection of Bracket No. 6 of the Cockpit Instrument Panel

    At the latest of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel for cracking and to determine if both bracket lugs are fully broken, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; as applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,600 flight cycles.

    (1) Prior to accumulating 17,200 total flight cycles since the airplane's first flight.

    (2) Prior to bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel accumulating 17,200 total flight cycles since installation on an airplane.

    (3) Within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.

    (h) Inspection and Corrective Actions

    (1) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any cracking of bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel is found, but both bracket lugs are not fully broken: Within 2,600 flight cycles after that inspection, replace bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel with a serviceable part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; as applicable. Replacement of bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any cracking of bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel is found and both bracket lugs are fully broken: Before further flight, do a detailed inspection of bracket No. 7 of the cockpit instrument panel for cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; as applicable.

    (i) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, no cracking is found in bracket No. 7 of the cockpit instrument panel: Before further flight, replace bracket No. 6 and bracket No. 7 of the cockpit instrument panel with serviceable parts, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; as applicable. Replacement of bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (ii) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, any cracking is found in bracket No. 7 of the cockpit instrument panel: Although Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; and Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; specify to contact Airbus for repair instructions, and specify that action as “RC” (Required for Compliance), repair the cracking before further flight using a repair method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

    (i) Optional Terminating Modification for Paragraph (g) of This AD

    Modifying an airplane by replacing bracket No. 6 of the cockpit instrument panel with a new, reinforced bracket, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3548, dated October 31, 2013; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4354, dated October 31, 2013; as applicable; terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using the service information identified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of this AD, which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.

    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, dated September 10, 2013.

    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 01, dated April 24, 2014.

    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, dated September 10, 2014.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1138; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this AD, if Airbus Service Bulletin A330-25-3538, Revision 02, dated April 24, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-25-4351, Revision 01, dated January 31, 2014; contain procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures and tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from, using accepted methods in accordance with the operators maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0127, dated May 15, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0083.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 30, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02536 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-0084; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-181-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; Airbus Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes; and Airbus Model A300 B4-600R series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports indicating that, on airplanes that received a certain repair following crack findings, cracks can re-initiate. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking of the frame (FR) 40 forward fittings for airplanes previously repaired. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking on the FR 40 forward fittings, which could result in rupture of the forward fittings and reduction of in-flight structural strength.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 30, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0084; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-0084; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-181-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0199, dated September 05, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; Airbus Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes; and Airbus Model A300 B4-600R series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During routine inspection on an A300-600 aeroplane, a crack was found in the right-hand frame (FR) 40 forward fitting between stringer (STRG) 32 and STRG 33. The subject aeroplane had previously been modified, as a crack prevention measure, in accordance with Airbus SB A300-57-6053 (mod 10453).

    To ensure the structural integrity of FR 40, pending completion of the full root cause analysis using a refined Finite Element Model (FEM), EASA issued AD 2009-0094 [dated April 21, 2009, http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2009-0094], to require, a one-time Detailed Visual Inspection (DVI) of A300 and A300-600 aeroplanes on which Airbus SB A300-53-0297 or SB A300-57-6053, as applicable, was embodied as a crack prevention measure.

    Thereafter, cracks were found during maintenance check in the FR 40 forward fitting on two aeroplanes, one A300 with Airbus SB A300-53-0297 embodied and one A300-600 with Airbus SB A300-57-6053 embodied. EASA AD 2009-0094 had been accomplished on both aeroplanes.

    Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011-0163 [dated August 30, 2011, http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2011-0163], superseding EASA AD 2009-0094, to require, for aeroplanes modified preventively, repetitive DVI of the FR 40 forward fitting (without nut removal), accomplishment of a one-time Eddy Current (EC) inspection or liquid penetrant inspection of this area (with nut removal) and, depending on findings, the accomplishment of associated corrective actions.

    A detailed FEM study was recently completed which demonstrated that, on aeroplanes repaired following crack findings in accordance with the instructions of Airbus SB A300-53-0297 or SB A300-57-6053 at any revision, as applicable, cracks can re-initiate.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive inspections of the FR 40 forward fitting for aeroplanes repaired in accordance with the instructions of Airbus SB A300-53-0297 or SB A300-57-6053 following crack findings.

    The corrective actions include a repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0084.

    Relevant Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following Airbus service information:

    • Airbus A300 Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53W002-14, dated April 02, 2014.

    • Airbus A300 AOT A57W003-14, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014.

    Airbus A300 Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53W002-14, dated April 02, 2014, describes procedures for repetitive inspections of the FR40 forward fitting on A300 aircraft post MOD 10453S20571. Airbus A300 AOT A57W003-14, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014, describes procedures for repetitive inspections of the FR40 forward fitting on A300-600 aircraft pre MOD 10221S20394 and post MOD 10453S20571. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 26 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $6,630, or $255 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2015-0084; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-181-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 30, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None

    (c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this AD, certificated in any category.

    (i) Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers (MSN), on which modification 10453 has been embodied as a repair following a crack finding, as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0297 (modification 10453).

    (ii) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, and B4-622R airplanes, all MSN as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6053.

    (2) This AD does not apply to airplanes that have been modified, as a preventive measure, as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0297 or A300-57-6053 (modification 10453), as applicable to airplane model.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports indicating that, on airplanes that received a certain repair following crack findings, cracks can re-initiate. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking on the frame (FR) 40 forward fittings, which could result in rupture of the forward fittings and reduction of in-flight structural strength.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repetitive Inspections

    Within 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the forward fitting at FR 40 without nut removal to detect cracks on both left-hand and right-hand sides of the airplane, in accordance with Airbus A300 Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53W002-14, dated April 2, 2014 (for Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes); or Airbus A300AOT A57W003-14, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014 (for Airbus Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes, and Airbus Model A300 B4-600R series airplanes); as applicable. If any crack is detected, repair before further flight using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 300 flight cycles.

    (h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0199, dated September 5, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0084.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 30, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02535 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Natural Resources Revenue 30 CFR Parts 1202 and 1206 [Docket No. ONRR-2012-0004; DS63610000 DR2PS0000.CH7000 156D0102R2] RIN 1012-AA13 Consolidated Federal Oil & Gas and Federal & Indian Coal Valuation Reform AGENCY:

    Office of Natural Resources Revenue, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register on January 6, 2015, (80 FR 608). ONRR invited the public to submit written comments by March 9, 2015. ONRR is granting a 60-day extension to the comment period in response to stakeholder requests.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments on or before May 8, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments to ONRR on the proposed rulemaking, as follows: (1) Electronically go to www.regulations.gov and enter “ONRR-2012-0004” in “Enter Keyword or ID,” then click “Search;” (2) mail comments to Armand Southall, Regulatory Specialist, P.O. Box 25165, MS 61030A, Denver, Colorado 80225; or (3) hand-carry comments, or use an overnight courier service, to ONRR, Building 85, Room A-614, Denver Federal Center, West 6th Ave. and Kipling St., Denver, Colorado 80225. Please refer to the Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1012-AA13 in your comments. ONRR will post all comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Armand Southall, ONRR, telephone (303) 231-3221 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The current Federal oil valuation regulations have been in effect since 2000, with a subsequent amendment relating, primarily, to the use of index pricing in some circumstances. The current Federal gas valuation regulations have been in effect since March 1, 1988, with various subsequent amendments relating, primarily, to the transportation allowance provisions. The current Federal and Indian coal valuation regulations have been in effect since March 1, 1989, with minor subsequent amendments relating, primarily, to the Federal black lung excise taxes, abandoned mine lands fees, State and local severance taxes, and washing and transportation allowance provisions. In the years since we wrote these regulations, the Secretary of the Interior's (Secretary) responsibility to determine the royalty value of minerals produced has not changed, but the industry and marketplace have changed dramatically. ONRR proposes these amendments to our valuation regulations to permit the Secretary to discharge the Department of the Interior's (Department) royalty valuation responsibility in an environment of continuing and accelerating change in the industry and in the marketplace. The Secretary's responsibilities regarding oil and gas production from Federal leases and coal production from Federal and Indian leases require the development of flexible valuation methodologies that lessees can accurately comply with in a timely manner.

    To increase the effectiveness and efficiency of our rules, ONRR is proposing proactive and innovative changes. We intend for this proposed rulemaking to provide regulations that (1) offer greater simplicity, certainty, clarity, and consistency in product valuation for mineral lessees and mineral revenue recipients; (2) are more understandable; (3) decrease industry's cost of compliance and ONRR's cost to ensure industry compliance; and (4) provide early certainty to industry and to ONRR that companies have paid every dollar due. Therefore, ONRR proposes to amend the current regulations at 30 CFR part 1202, subpart F, and part 1206, subparts C, D, F, and J, governing the valuation, for royalty purposes, of oil, gas, and coal produced from Federal leases and coal produced from Indian leases.

    ONRR received requests for an extension to the comment deadline for this proposed rule. This action extends the comment period until May 8, 2015. ONRR believes that this extension allows adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. ONRR will review and carefully consider all comments that we receive on the proposed rule.

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Gregory J. Gould, Director, Office of Natural Resources Revenue.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02997 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4335-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Parts 100 and 165 [Docket Number USCG-2014-1011] RIN 1625-AA00, AA08 Special Local Regulations and Safety Zones; Recurring Marine Events and Fireworks Displays Within the Fifth Coast Guard District AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to amend the regulations established for recurring marine events and fireworks displays that take place within the Fifth Coast Guard District area of responsibility. Under that rule, the list of recurring marine events requiring special local regulations or safety zones is updated with revisions, additional events, and removal of events that no longer take place in the Fifth Coast Guard District. When these regulations are enforced, certain restrictions are placed on marine traffic in specified areas. This rulemaking project promotes efficiency by eliminating the need to produce a separate rule for each individual recurring event, and serves to provide notice of the known recurring events requiring a special local regulation or safety zone throughout the year.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number using any one of the following methods:

    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.

    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

    See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these three methods.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Dennis Sens, Fifth Coast Guard District, Prevention Division, (757) 398-6204, [email protected] If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Acronyms DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided.

    1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.

    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number [USCG-2014-1011] in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on “Submit a Comment” on the line associated with this rulemaking.

    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the rule based on your comments.

    2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number (USCG-2014-1011) in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

    4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

    B. Regulatory History and Information

    The special local regulations listed in 33 CFR 100.501 and safety zones listed in 33 CFR 165.506 were last amended on July 21, 2014 (79 FR 42197).

    C. Basis and Purpose

    This rulemaking is authorized by 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1233; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; and DHS Delegation No. 0170.1. It updates the list of permanent special local regulations at 33 CFR 100.501 and safety zones at 33 CFR 165.506, established for recurring marine events and fireworks displays at various locations within the Fifth Coast Guard District area of responsibility (AOR). The Fifth Coast Guard District AOR is defined in 33 CFR 3.25.

    Publishing these regulatory updates in a single rulemaking promotes efficiency and provides the public with notice through publication in the Federal Register of the upcoming recurring marine events and fireworks displays and their accompanying regulations, special local regulations, and safety zones.

    D. Discussion of Proposed Rule Special Local Regulations

    This rule would add 2 new special local regulations for marine events, remove 1 regulation and revise 10 previously established regulations for marine events listed in the Table to § 100.501. Other than changes to the dates and locations of certain events, the other provisions in 33 CFR 100.501 remain unchanged.

    The Coast Guard proposes to revise regulations at 33 CFR 100.501 by adding 2 new special local regulations. The proposed special local regulations are listed in TABLE 1, including reference by section as printed in the TABLE to § 100.501.

    Table 1 [Special local regulated areas added to 33 CFR 100.501] Table to § 100.501 section Location 1 (b.) 12 Rock Hall Harbor, Rock Hall, MD. 2 (b.) 23 Nanticoke River, Bivalve channel and harbor, Bivalve, MD.

    One previously published special local regulation for marine event would be removed from 33 CFR 100.501, i.e. “Ragin on the River” power boat race that took place on the Susquehanna River, near Port Deposit, MD.

    This rule would revise 10 preexisting special local regulations that involves change to marine event date(s) and/or coordinates. These events are listed in TABLE 2, with reference by section as printed in the TABLE to § 100.501.

    Table 2 [Changes to special local regulation date(s) and coordinates] Table to § 100.501 Section Location Revision
  • (date/coordinates)
  • 1 (a.) 9 Sunset Lake, NJ dates. 2 (a.) 13 New Jersey Intra Coastal Waterway, Ocean City, NJ dates. 3 (a.) 14 New Jersey Intra Coastal Waterway, Atlantic City, NJ dates. 4 (b.) 3 Middle River, Essex, MD coordinates. 5 (b.) 6 Upper Potomac River, Washington, D.C. dates. 6 (b.) 7 Severn River, Annapolis, MD coordinates. 7 (b.) 15 Tred Avon River, Oxford, MD dates, coordinates. 8 (b.) 17 Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD dates. 9 (b.) 20 Patuxent River, Solomons, MD dates. 10 (b.) 21 North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD dates.

    Based on the nature of marine events, large number of participants and spectators, and event locations, the Coast Guard has determined that the events listed in this rule could pose a risk to participants or waterway users if normal vessel traffic were to interfere with the event. Possible hazards include risks of participant injury or death resulting from near or actual contact with non-participant vessels traversing through the regulated areas. In order to protect the safety of all waterway users including event participants and spectators, this rule establishes special local regulations for the time and location of each marine event.

    This rule prevents vessels from entering, transiting, mooring or anchoring within areas specifically designated as regulated areas during the periods of enforcement unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), or designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The designated “Patrol Commander” includes Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the COTP to act on their behalf. On-scene patrol commander may be augmented by local, State or Federal officials authorized to act in support of the Coast Guard.

    Safety Zones

    This rule would add 6 new safety zones, remove 1 safety zone and revise 11 previously established safety zones listed in the Table to § 165.506. Other than changes to the dates and locations of certain safety zones, the other provisions in 33 CFR 165.506 remain unchanged.

    The Coast Guard proposes to revise the regulations at 33 CFR 165.506 by adding 6 new safety zone locations to the permanent regulations listed in this section. The new safety zones are listed in TABLE 3, including reference by section as printed in the Table to § 165.506.

    Table 3 [Safety zones added to 33 CFR 165.506] Table to § 165.506 section Location 1 (b.) 4 Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC. 2 (c.) 22 Urbanna Creek, Urbanna, VA. 3 (c.) 23 Elizabeth River—Eastern Branch, Norfolk, VA. 4 (d.) 16 Shallowbag Bay, Manteo, NC. 5 (d.) 17 Pasquotank River, Elizabeth City, NC. 6 (d.) 18 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Bogue Inlet, Swansboro, NC.

    One safety zone would be removed from 33 CFR 165.506, specifically, the fireworks display that took place over the Potomac River, near Newburg, MD.

    The rule would revise 11 preexisting safety zones that involves change to event date(s) and coordinates. These revised safety zones are shown in Table 4, with reference by section as printed in the Table to § 165.506.

    Table 4 [Changes to safety zone date(s) and coordinates] Table to § 165.506 Section Location Revision
  • (date/coordinates)
  • 1 (a.) 1 North Atlantic Ocean, Bethany Beach, DE dates. 2 (a.) 3 North Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DE dates. 3 (a.) 4 North Atlantic Ocean, Avalon, NJ dates. 4 (a.) 6 North Atlantic Ocean, Cape May, NJ dates. 5 (a.) 7 Delaware Bay, North Cape May, NJ dates. 6 (a.) 9 Metedeconk River, Brick Township, NJ dates. 7 (a.) 10 North Atlantic Ocean, Atlantic City, NJ dates, coordinates. 8 (a.) 11 North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, NJ dates. 9 (a.) 13 Little Egg Harbor, Parker Island, NJ dates. 10 (b.) 20 Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC dates, coordinates. 11 (c.) 9 North Atlantic Ocean, Virginia Beach, VA dates.

    Each year, organizations in the Fifth Coast Guard District sponsor fireworks displays in the same general location and time period. Each event uses a barge or an on-shore site near the shoreline as the fireworks launch platform. A safety zone is used to control vessel movement within a specified distance surrounding the launch platforms to ensure the safety of persons and property. Coast Guard personnel on scene may allow boaters within the safety zone if conditions permit.

    The enforcement period for these safety zones is from 5:30 p.m. to 1 a.m. local time. However, vessels may enter, remain in, or transit through these safety zones during this time frame if authorized by the COTP or designated Coast Guard patrol commander on scene, as provided for in 33 CFR 165.23. This rule provides for the safety of life on navigable waters during the events.

    E. Regulatory Analyses

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

    1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.

    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This finding is based on the short amount of time that vessels will be restricted from regulated areas, and the small size of these areas that are usually positioned away from high vessel traffic zones. Generally vessels would not be precluded from getting underway, or mooring at any piers or marinas currently located in the vicinity of the regulated areas. Advance notifications would also be made to the local maritime community by issuance of Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Marine information and facsimile broadcasts so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Notifications to the public for most events will typically be made by local newspapers, radio and TV stations. The Coast Guard anticipates that these special local regulated areas and safety zones will only be enforced one to three times per year.

    2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in these regulated areas during the times the zones are enforced.

    These special local regulated areas and safety zones will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The Coast Guard will ensure that small entities are able to operate in the areas where events are occurring to the extent possible while ensuring the safety of event participants and spectators. The enforcement period will be short in duration and, in many of the areas, vessels can transit safely around the regulated area. Generally, blanket permission to enter, remain in, or transit through these regulated areas will be given, except during the period that the Coast Guard patrol vessel is present. Before the enforcement period, we will issue maritime advisories widely.

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    4. Collection of Information

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

    5. Federalism

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

    6. Protest Activities

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

    7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    8. Taking of Private Property

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

    9. Civil Justice Reform

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

    10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

    11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

    12. Energy Effects

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

    13. Technical Standards

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

    14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.

    This rule involves implementation of regulations within 33 CFR part 100 that apply to organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States. Some marine events by their nature may introduce potential for adverse impact on the safety or other interest of waterway users or waterfront infrastructure within or close proximity to the event area. The category of water activities includes but is not limited to sail boat regattas, boat parades, power boat racing, swimming events, crew racing, and sail board racing. This section of the rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are not required for this section of the rule.

    This rule involves implementation of regulations at 33 CFR part 165 that establish safety zones on navigable waters of the United States for fireworks events. These safety zones are enforced for the duration of fireworks display events. The fireworks are generally launched from or immediately adjacent to navigable waters of the United States. The category of activities includes fireworks launched from barges or at the shoreline that generally rely on the use of navigable waters as a safety buffer. Fireworks displays may introduce potential hazards such as accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. This section of the rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 100

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

    33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR parts 100 and 165 as follows:

    PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Amend § 100.501 by revising TABLE TO § 100.501 to read as follows:
    § 100.501 Special Local Regulations; Marine Events within the Fifth Coast Guard District. Table to § 100.501 [All coordinates listed in the Table to § 100.501 reference Datum NAD 1983] No. Date Event Sponsor Location (a.) Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay—COTP Zone 1 June—1st Sunday Atlantic County Day at the Bay Atlantic County, New Jersey The waters of Great Egg Harbor Bay, adjacent to Somers Point, New Jersey, bounded by a line drawn along the following boundaries: The area is bounded to the north by the shoreline along John F. Kennedy Park and Somers Point, New Jersey; bounded to the east by the State Route 52 bridge; bounded to the south by a line that runs along latitude 39°18′00″ N.; and bounded to the west by a line that runs along longitude 074°37′00″ W. 2 May—3rd Sunday; September—3rd Saturday Annual Escape from Fort Delaware Triathlon Escape from Fort Delaware Triathlon, Inc. All waters of the Delaware River between Pea Patch Island and Delaware City, Delaware, bounded by a line connecting the following points: Latitude 39°36′35.7″ N., longitude 075°35′25.6″ W., thence southeast to latitude 39°34′57.3″ N., longitude 075°33′23.1″ W., thence southwest to latitude 39°34′11.9″ N., longitude 075°34′28.6″ W., thence northwest to latitude 39°35′52.4″ N, longitude 075°36′33.9″ W, thence to point of origin. 3 June—last Saturday Westville Parade of Lights Borough of Westville and Westville Power Boat All waters of Big Timber Creek in Westville, New Jersey from shoreline to shoreline bounded on the south from the Route 130 Bridge and to the north by the entrance of the Delaware River. 4 June—4th Sunday OPA Atlantic City Grand Prix Offshore Performance Assn. (OPA) The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean, adjacent to Atlantic City, New Jersey, bounded by a line drawn between the following points: From a point along the shoreline at latitude 39°21′50″ N., longitude 074°24′37″ W., thence southeasterly to latitude 39°20′40″ N., longitude 074°23′50″ W., thence southwesterly to latitude 39°19′33″ N., longitude 074°26′52″ W., thence northwesterly to a point along the shoreline at latitude 39°20′43″ N., longitude 074°27′40″ W., thence northeasterly along the shoreline to point of origin at latitude 39°21′50″ N., longitude 074°24′37″ W. 5 July—on or about July 4th U.S. holiday celebrations City of Philadelphia The waters of the Delaware River, adjacent to Philadelphia, PA and Camden, NJ, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by the Walt Whitman Bridge and bounded on the north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. 6 August—2nd Friday, Saturday and Sunday Point Pleasant OPA/NJ Offshore Grand Prix Offshore Performance Association (OPA) and New Jersey Offshore Racing Assn The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean bounded by a line drawn from a position along the shoreline near Normandy Beach, NJ at latitude 40°00′00″ N., longitude 074°03′30″ W., thence easterly to latitude 39°59′40″ N., longitude 074°02′00″ W., thence southwesterly to latitude 39°56′35″ N., longitude 074°03′00″ W., thence westerly to a position near the Seaside Heights Pier at latitude 39°56′35″ N., longitude 074°04′15″ W., thence northerly along the shoreline to the point of origin. 7 July—3rd Wednesday and Thursday New Jersey Offshore Grand Prix Offshore Performance Assn. & New Jersey Offshore Racing Assn The waters of the Manasquan River from the New York and Long Branch Railroad Bridge to Manasquan Inlet, together with all of the navigable waters of the United States from Asbury Park, New Jersey, latitude 40°14′00″ N.; southward to Seaside Park, New Jersey latitude 39°55′00″ N., from the New Jersey shoreline seaward to the limits of the Territorial Sea. The race course area extends from Asbury Park to Seaside Park from the shoreline, seaward to a distance of 8.4 nautical miles. 8 August—3rd Friday Thunder Over the Boardwalk Air show Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean, adjacent to Atlantic City, New Jersey, bounded by a line drawn between the following points: From a point along the shoreline at latitude 39°21′31″ N., longitude 074°25′04″ W., thence southeasterly to latitude 39°21′08″ N., longitude 074°24′48″ W., thence southwesterly to latitude 39°20′16″ N., longitude 074°27′17″ W., thence northwesterly to a point along the shoreline at latitude 39°20′44″ N., longitude 074°27′31″ W., thence northeasterly along the shoreline to latitude 39°21′31″ N., longitude 074°25′04″ W. 9 September—2nd, 3rd or 4th Friday, Saturday and Sunday; October—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday Sunset Lake Hydrofest Sunset Lake Hydrofest Assn All waters of Sunset Lake, New Jersey, from shoreline to shoreline, south of latitude 38°58′32″ N. 10 October—2nd Saturday and Sunday The Liberty Grand Prix Offshore Performance Assn. (OPA) The waters of the Delaware River, adjacent to Philadelphia, PA and Camden, NJ, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by the Walt Whitman Bridge and bounded on the north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. 11 October—1st Monday (Columbus Day) U.S. holiday celebrations City of Philadelphia The waters of the Delaware River, adjacent to Philadelphia, PA and Camden, NJ, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by the Walt Whitman Bridge and bounded on the north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. 12 December 31st (New Year's Eve) U.S. holiday celebrations City of Philadelphia The waters of the Delaware River, adjacent to Philadelphia, PA and Camden, NJ, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by the Walt Whitman Bridge and bounded on the north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. 13 September—2nd or 3rd Sunday Ocean City Air Show Ocean City, NJ All waters of the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) bounded by a line connecting the following points; latitude 39°15′57″ N., longitude 074°35′09″ W. thence northeast to latitude 39°16′34″ N., longitude 074°33′54″ W. thence southeast to latitude 39°16′17″ N., longitude 074°33′29″ W. thence southwest to latitude 39°15′40″ N., longitude 074°34′46″ W. thence northwest to point of origin, near Ocean City, NJ. 14 June—4th Sunday and August 2nd or 3rd Sunday Atlantic City International Triathlon Atlantic City, NJ All waters of the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) bounded by a line connecting the following points; latitude 39°21′20″ N., longitude 074°27′18″ W. thence northeast to latitude 39°21′27.47″ N., longitude 074°27′10.31″ W. thence northeast to latitude 39°21′33″ N., longitude 074°26′57″ W. thence northwest to latitude 39°21′37″ N., longitude 074°27′03″ W. thence southwest to latitude 39°21′29.88″ N., longitude 074°27′14.31″ W. thence south to latitude 39°21′19″ N., longitude 074°27′22″ W. thence east to latitude 39°21′18.14″ N, longitude 074°27′19.25″ W thence north to point of origin, near Atlantic City, NJ. (b.) Coast Guard Sector Baltimore—COTP Zone 1 March—4th or last Saturday; or April—1st Saturday Safety at Sea Seminar. U.S. Naval Academy All waters of the Severn River from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the northwest by the Naval Academy (SR-450) Bridge and bounded to the southeast by a line drawn from U.S. Naval Academy Light at latitude 38°58′39.5″ N., longitude 076°28′49″ W. thence easterly to Carr Point, MD at latitude 38°58′58″ N., longitude 076°27′41″ W. 2 March—3rd, 4th or last Friday, Saturday and Sunday; April and May—every Friday, Saturday and Sunday USNA Crew Races U.S. Naval Academy All waters of the Severn River from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the northwest by a line drawn from the south shoreline at latitude 39°00′58″ N., longitude 076°31′32″ W. thence to the north shoreline at latitude 39°01′11″ N., longitude 076°31′10″ W. The regulated area is bounded to the southeast by a line drawn from U.S. Naval Academy Light at latitude 38°58′39.5″ N., longitude 076°28′49″ W. thence easterly to Carr Point, MD at latitude 38°58′58″ N., longitude 076°27′41″ W. 3 July—3rd, 4th or last Saturday, or Sunday Dinghy Poker Run Norris Trust Foundation The waters of Middle River, from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded to the north by a line drawn along latitude 39°19′33″ N., and bounded to the south by a line drawn from latitude 39°17′24.4″ N., longitude 076°23′53.3″ W. to latitude 39°18″06.4″ N., longitude 076°23′10.9″ W., located in Baltimore County, at Essex, MD. 4 May—1st Sunday Nanticoke River Swim and Triathlon Nanticoke River Swim and Triathlon, Inc All waters of the Nanticoke River, including Bivalve Channel and Bivalve Harbor, bounded by a line drawn from a point on the shoreline at latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 075°54′00″ W., thence westerly to latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 075°55′00″ W., thence northerly to latitude 38°20′00″ N., longitude 075°53′48″ W., thence easterly to latitude 38°19′42″ N., longitude 075°52′54″ W. 5 May—Saturday before Memorial Day Chestertown Tea Party Re-enactment Festival Chestertown Tea Party Festival All waters of the Chester River, within a line connecting the following positions: latitude 39°12′27″ N., longitude 076°03′46″ W.; thence to latitude 39°12′19″ N., longitude 076°0353 W.; thence to latitude 39°12′15″ N., longitude 076°03′41″ W.; thence to latitude 39°12′26″ N., longitude 076°03′38″ W.; thence to the point of origin at latitude 39°12′27″ N., longitude 076°03′46″ W. 6 May—3rd Friday, Saturday and Sunday. June 2nd or 3rd Friday, Saturday and Sunday Dragon Boat Races at Georgetown, Washington, DC Washington, DC Dragon Boat Festival, Inc The waters of the Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded upstream by the Francis Scott Key Bridge and downstream by the Roosevelt Memorial Bridge. 7 May—Tuesday and Wednesday before Memorial Day (observed) USNA Blue Angels Air Show U.S. Naval Academy All waters of the Severn River from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the northwest by a line drawn from the south shoreline at latitude 39°00′38.02″ N., longitude 076°31′01.49″ W. thence to the north shoreline at latitude 39°00′52.7″ N., longitude 076°30′46.01″ W., this line is approximately 1300 yards northwest of the U.S. 50 fixed highway bridge. The regulated area is bounded to the southeast by a line drawn from U.S. Naval Academy Light at latitude 38°58′39.5″ N., longitude 076°28′49″ W. thence southeast to a point 1500 yards ESE of Chinks Point, MD at latitude 38°57′41″ N., longitude 076°27′36″ W. thence northeast to Greenbury Point at latitude 38°58′27.66″ N., longitude 076°27′16.38″ W. 8 June—2nd Sunday The Great Chesapeake Bay Bridges Swim Races Great Chesapeake Bay Swim, Inc The waters of the Chesapeake Bay between and adjacent to the spans of the William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridges from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the north by a line drawn parallel and 500 yards north of the north bridge span that originates from the western shoreline at latitude 39°00′36″ N., longitude 076°23′05″ W. and thence eastward to the eastern shoreline at latitude 38°59′14″ N., longitude 076°20′00″ W., and bounded to the south by a line drawn parallel and 500 yards south of the south bridge span that originates from the western shoreline at latitude 39°00′16″ N., longitude 076°24′30″ W. and thence eastward to the eastern shoreline at latitude 38°58′38.5″ N., longitude 076°20′06″ W. 9 June—3rd, 4th or last Saturday or July—2nd or 3rd Saturday Maryland Swim for Life District of Columbia Aquatics Club The waters of the Chester River from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by a line drawn at latitude 39°10′16″ N., near the Chester River Channel Buoy 35 (LLN-26795) and bounded on the north at latitude 39°12′30″ N. by the Maryland S.R. 213 Highway Bridge. 10 June—last Saturday and Sunday or July—2nd Saturday and Sunday Bo Bowman Memorial—Sharptown Regatta Virginia/Carolina Racing Assn All waters of the Nanticoke River near Sharptown, MD, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the south by Maryland S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and bounded to the north by a line drawn from latitude 38°33′09″ N., longitude 075°42′45″ W., thence southeasterly to latitude 38°33′04″ N., longitude 075°42′37″ W. 11 June—2nd, 3rd, 4th or last Saturday and Sunday or August—1st Saturday and Sunday Thunder on the Narrows Kent Narrows Racing Assn All waters of Prospect Bay enclosed by the following points: Latitude 38°57′52″ N., longitude 076°14′48″ W., thence to latitude 38°58′02″ N., longitude 076°15′05″ W., thence to latitude 38°57′38″ N., longitude 076°15′29″ W., thence to latitude 38°57′28″ N., longitude 076°15′23″ W., thence to point of origin at latitude 38°57′52″ N., longitude 076°14′48″ W. 12 May/June—Saturday and Sunday after Memorial Day (observed); and October—1st Saturday and Sunday Rock Hall and Waterman's Triathlon Swims Kinetic Endeavors, LLC The waters of Rock Hall Harbor from shoreline to shoreline, bounded by a line drawn from latitude 39°07′59″ N., longitude 076°15′03″ W. to latitude 39°07′50″ N., longitude 076°14′41″ W., located at the entrance to Rock Hall, MD. 13 September—2nd Saturday or the Saturday after Labor Day Dragon Boat Races in the Inner Harbor Associated Catholic Charities, Inc The waters of the Patapsco River, Baltimore, MD, Inner Harbor from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the east by a line drawn along longitude 076°36′30″ W. 14 June—3rd, 4th or last Saturday or Sunday Baltimore Dragon Boat Challenge Baltimore Dragon Boat Club The waters of Patapsco River, Northwest Harbor, in Baltimore, MD, from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded on the east by a line drawn along longitude 076°35′ W. and bounded on the west by a line drawn along longitude 076°36′ W. 15 May—2nd, 3rd, 4th or last Saturday. June—1st, 2nd or 3rd Saturday Oxford-Bellevue Sharkfest Swim Enviro-Sports Productions Inc The waters of the Tred Avon River from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded on the east by a line drawn from latitude 38°42′25″ N., longitude 076°10′45″ W., thence south to latitude 38°41′37″ N., longitude 076°10′26″ W., and bounded on the west by a line drawn from latitude 38°41′58″ N., longitude 076°11′04″ W., thence south to latitude 38°41′25″ N., longitude 076°10′49″ W., thence east to latitude 38°41′25″ N., longitude 076°10′30″ W., located at Oxford, MD. 16 June—1st Sunday Swim Across the Potomac U.S. Open Water Swimming Assn.—Wave One Swimming The waters of the Potomac River, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the north by a line drawn that originates at Jones Point Park, VA at the west shoreline latitude 38°47′35″ N., longitude 077°02′22″ W., thence east to latitude 38°47′2″ N., longitude 077°00′58″ W., at east shoreline near National Harbor, MD. The regulated area is bounded to the south by a line drawn originating at George Washington Memorial Parkway highway overpass and Cameron Run, west shoreline latitude 38°47′23″ N., longitude 077°03′03″ W. thence east to latitude 38°46′52″ N., longitude 077°01′13″ W., at east shoreline near National Harbor, MD. 17 October—last Saturday; or November—1st or 2nd Saturday The MRE Tug of War Maritime Republic of Eastport The waters of Spa Creek from shoreline to shoreline, extending 400 feet from either side of a rope spanning Spa Creek from a position at latitude 38°58′36.9″ N., longitude 076°29′03.8″ W. on the Annapolis shoreline to a position at latitude 38°58′26.4″ N., longitude 076°28′53.7″ W. on the Eastport shoreline. 18 December—2nd Saturday Eastport Yacht Club Lighted Boat Parade Eastport Yacht Club The waters of Spa Creek, and the Severn River, shore to shore, bounded on the south by a line drawn from Carr Point, at latitude 38°58′58″ N., longitude 076°27′40″ W., thence to Horn Point Warning Light (LLNR 17935), at 38°58′24″ N., longitude 076°28′10″ W., thence to Horn Point, at 38°58′20″ N., longitude 076°28′27″ W., and bounded on the north by Naval Academy SR 450 Bridge. 19 Memorial Day weekend—Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday; or Labor Day weekend—Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday NAS Patuxent River Air Expo U.S. Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD All waters of the lower Patuxent River, near Solomons, Maryland, located between Fishing Point and the base of the break wall marking the entrance to the East Seaplane Basin at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, within an area bounded by a line connecting position latitude 38°17′39″ N., longitude 076°25′47″ W.; thence to latitude 38°17′47″ N., longitude 076°26′00″ W.; thence to latitude 38°18′09″ N., longitude 076°25′40″ W.; thence to latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 076°25′25″ W., located along the shoreline at U.S. Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. All waters of the lower Patuxent River, near Solomons, Maryland, located between Hog Point and Cedar Point, within an area bounded by a line drawn from a position at latitude 38°18′41″ N., longitude 076°23′43″ W.; to latitude 38°18′16″ N., longitude 076°22′35″ W.; thence to latitude 38°18′12″ N., longitude 076°22′37″ W.; thence to latitude 38°18′36″ N., longitude 076°23′46″ W., located adjacent to the shoreline at U.S. Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. 20 September—2nd, 3rd or 4th Friday, Saturday and Sunday. October—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday Chesapeake Challenge/Solomons Offshore Grand Prix Chesapeake Bay Powerboat Association All waters of the Patuxent River, within boundary lines connecting the following positions; originating near north entrance of MD Route 4 bridge, latitude 38°19′45″ N., longitude 076°28′06″ W., thence southwest to south entrance of MD Route 4 bridge, latitude 38°19′24″ N., longitude 076°28′30″ W., thence south to a point near the shoreline, latitude 38°18′32″ N., longitude 076°28′14″ W., thence southeast to a point near the shoreline, latitude 38°17′38″ N, longitude 076°27′26″ W., thence northeast to latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 076°26′41″ W., thence northwest to latitude 38°18′59″ N., longitude 076°27′20″ W., located at Solomons, MD, thence continuing northwest and parallel to shoreline to point of origin. 21 May—1st or 2nd Saturday and Sunday Ocean City Maryland Offshore Grand Prix Offshore Performance Assn. Racing, LLC The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean commencing at a point on the shoreline at latitude 38°25′42″ N., longitude 075°03′06″ W.; thence east southeast to latitude 38°25′30″ N., longitude 075°02′12″ W., thence south southwest parallel to the Ocean City shoreline to latitude 38°19′12″ N., longitude 075°03′48″ W.; thence west northwest to the shoreline at latitude 38°19′30″ N., longitude 075°05′00″ W. 22 June—1st or 2nd Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday Ocean City Air Show Town of Ocean City, Maryland All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within an area bounded by the following coordinates: Latitude 38°21′38″ N., longitude 075°04′04″ W.; latitude 38°21′27″ N., longitude 075°03′29″ W.; latitude 38°19′35″ N., longitude 075°04′19″ W.; and latitude 38°19′45″ N., longitude 075°04′54″ W., located at Ocean City, MD. 23 June—4th or last Sunday Coastal Aquatics Swim Team Open Water Summer Shore Swim Coastal Aquatics Swim Club All waters of the Nanticoke River, including Bivalve Channel and Bivalve Harbor, bounded by a line drawn from a point on the shoreline at latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 075°54′00″ W., thence westerly to latitude 38°18′00″ N., longitude 075°55′00″ W., thence northerly to latitude 38°20′00″ N., longitude 075°53′48″ W., thence easterly to latitude 38°19′42″ N., longitude 075°52′54″ W. (c.) Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads—COTP Zone 1 May—last Friday, Saturday and Sunday and/or June—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday Blackbeard Festival City of Hampton The waters of Sunset Creek and Hampton River shore to shore bounded to the north by the I-64 Bridge over the Hampton River and to the south by a line drawn from Hampton River Channel Light 16 (LL 5715), located at latitude 37°01′03″ N., longitude 76°20′26″ W., to the finger pier across the river at Fisherman's Wharf, located at latitude 37°01′01.5″ N., longitude 76°20′32″ W. Spectator Vessel Anchorage Areas—Area A: Located in the upper reaches of the Hampton River, bounded to the south by a line drawn from the western shore at latitude 37°01′48″ N., longitude 76°20′22″ W., across the river to the eastern shore at latitude 37°01′44″ N., longitude 76°20′13″ W., and to the north by the I-64 Bridge over the Hampton River. The anchorage area will be marked by orange buoys.
  • Area B: Located on the eastern side of the channel, in the Hampton River, south of the Queen Street Bridge, near the Riverside Health Center. Bounded by the shoreline and a line drawn between the following points: Latitude 37°01′26″ N., longitude 76°20′24″ W., latitude 37°01′22″ N., longitude 76°20′26″ W., and latitude 37°01′22″ N., longitude 76°20′23″ W.. The anchorage area will be marked by orange buoys.
  • 2 June—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday or 2nd Friday, Saturday and Sunday Norfolk Harborfest Norfolk Festevents, Ltd. The waters of the Elizabeth River and its branches from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the northwest by a line drawn across the Port Norfolk Reach section of the Elizabeth River between the northern corner of the landing at Hospital Point, Portsmouth, Virginia, latitude 36°50′51″ N., longitude 076°18′09″ W. and the north corner of the City of Norfolk Mooring Pier at the foot of Brooks Avenue located at latitude 36°51′00″ N., longitude 076°17′52″ W.; bounded on the southwest by a line drawn from the southern corner of the landing at Hospital Point, Portsmouth, Virginia, at latitude 36°50′50″ N., longitude 076°18′10″ W., to the northern end of the eastern most pier at the Tidewater Yacht Agency Marina, located at latitude 36°50′29″ N., longitude 076°17′52″ W.; bounded to the south by a line drawn across the Lower Reach of the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River, between the Portsmouth Lightship Museum located at the foot of London Boulevard, in Portsmouth, Virginia at latitude 36°50′10″ N., longitude 076°17′47″ W., and the northwest corner of the Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock, Berkley Plant, Pier No. 1, located at latitude 36°50′08″ N., longitude 076°17′39″ W.; and to the southeast by the Berkley Bridge which crosses the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River between Berkley at latitude 36°50′21.5″ N., longitude 076°17′14.5″ W., and Norfolk at latitude 36°50′35″ N., longitude 076°17′10″ W. 3 June—2nd or 3rd Saturday Cock Island Race Portsmouth Boat Club & City of Portsmouth, VA The waters of the Elizabeth River and its branches from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the northwest by a line drawn across the Port Norfolk Reach section of the Elizabeth River between the northern corner of the landing at Hospital Point, Portsmouth, Virginia, latitude 36°50′51″ N., longitude 076°18′09″ W. and the north corner of the City of Norfolk Mooring Pier at the foot of Brooks Avenue located at latitude 36°51′00″ N., longitude 076°17′52″ W.; bounded on the southwest by a line drawn from the southern corner of the landing at Hospital Point, Portsmouth, Virginia, at latitude 36°50′50″ N., longitude 076°18′10″ W., to the northern end of the eastern most pier at the Tidewater Yacht Agency Marina, located at latitude 36°50′29″ N., longitude 076°17′52″ W.; bounded to the south by a line drawn across the Lower Reach of the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River, between the Portsmouth Lightship Museum located at the foot of London Boulevard, in Portsmouth, Virginia at latitude 36°50′10″ N., longitude 076°17′47″ W., and the northwest corner of the Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock, Berkley Plant, Pier No. 1, located at latitude 36°50′08″ N., longitude 076°17′39″ W.; and to the southeast by the Berkley Bridge which crosses the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River between Berkley at latitude 36°50′21.5″ N., longitude 076°17′14.5″ W., and Norfolk at latitude 36°50′35″ N., longitude 076°17′10″ W. 4 June—last Saturday or July—1st Saturday RRBA Spring Radar Shootout Rappahannock River Boaters Association (RRBA) The waters of the Rappahannock River, adjacent to Layton, VA, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the west by a line running along longitude 076°58′30″ W., and bounded on the east by a line running along longitude 076°56′00″ W. 5 July—last Wednesday and following Friday; or August—1st Wednesday and following Friday Pony Penning Swim Chincoteague Volunteer Fire Department The waters of Assateague Channel from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to the east by a line drawn from latitude 37°55′01″ N., longitude 075°22′40″ W., thence south to latitude 37°54′50″ N., longitude 075°22′46″ W.; and to the southwest by a line drawn from latitude 37°54′54″ N., longitude 075°23′00″ W., thence east to latitude 37°54′49″ N., longitude 075°22′49″ W. 6 August 1st or 2nd Friday, Saturday and Sunday Hampton Cup Regatta Hampton Cup Regatta Boat Club The waters of Mill Creek, adjacent to Fort Monroe, Hampton, Virginia, enclosed by the following boundaries: To the north, a line drawn along latitude 37°01′00″ N., to the east a line drawn along longitude 076°18′30″ W., to the south a line parallel with the shoreline adjacent to Fort Monroe, and the west boundary is parallel with the Route 258—Mercury Boulevard Bridge. 7 September 1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday or 2nd Friday, Saturday and Sunday Hampton Virginia Bay Days Festival Hampton Bay Days Inc The waters of Sunset Creek and Hampton River shore to shore bounded to the north by the I-64 Bridge over the Hampton River and to the south by a line drawn from Hampton River Channel Light 16 (LL 5715), located at latitude 37°01′03″ N., longitude 076°20′26″ W., to the finger pier across the river at Fisherman's Wharf, located at latitude 37°01′01.5″ N., longitude 076°20′32″ W. 8 September—last Sunday or October—1st Sunday Poquoson Seafood Festival Workboat Races City of Poquoson The waters of the Back River, Poquoson, Virginia, bounded on the north by a line drawn along latitude 37°06′30″ N., bounded on the south by a line drawn along latitude 37°06′15″ N., bounded on the east by a line drawn along longitude 076°18′52″ W. and bounded on the west by a line drawn along longitude 076°19′30″ W. 9 June—3rd Saturday and Sunday or 4th Saturday and Sunday Mattaponi Drag Boat Race Mattaponi Volunteer Rescue Squad and Dive Team All waters of Mattaponi River immediately adjacent to Rainbow Acres Campground, King and Queen County, Virginia. The regulated area includes a section of the Mattaponi River approximately three-quarter mile long and bounded in width by each shoreline, bounded to the east by a line that runs parallel along longitude 076°52′43″ W., near the mouth of Mitchell Hill Creek, and bounded to the west by a line that runs parallel along longitude 076°53′41″ W. just north of Wakema, Virginia. (d.) Coast Guard Sector North Carolina—COTP Zone 1 June—1st Saturday and Sunday Carolina Cup Regatta Virginia Boat Racing Assn The waters of the Pasquotank River, adjacent to Elizabeth City, NC, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the west by the Elizabeth City Draw Bridge and bounded on the east by a line originating at a point along the shoreline at latitude 36°17′54″ N., longitude 076°12′00″ W., thence southwesterly to latitude 36°17′35″ N., longitude 076°12′18″ W. at Cottage Point. 2 August—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday SBIP—Fountain Powerboats Kilo Run and Super Boat Grand Prix Super Boat International Productions (SBIP), Inc The waters of the Pamlico River including Chocowinity Bay, from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by a line running northeasterly from Camp Hardee (North Carolina) at latitude 35°28′23″ N., longitude 076°59′23″ W., to Broad Creek Point at latitude 35°29′04″ N., longitude 076°58′44″ W., and bounded on the north by the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge. 3 September—3rd and or 4th or last Sunday Crystal Coast Grand Prix North Carolina East Sports, Inc. N/P The waters of Bogue Sound, adjacent to Morehead City, NC, from the southern tip of Sugar Loaf Island approximate position latitude 34°42′55″ N., longitude 076°42′48″ W., thence westerly to Morehead City Channel Day beacon 7 (LLNR 38620), thence southwest along the channel line to Bogue Sound Light 4 (LLRN 38770), thence southerly to Causeway Channel Day beacon 2 (LLNR 38720), thence southeasterly to Money Island Day beacon 1 (LLNR 38645), thence easterly to Eight and One Half Marina Day beacon 2 (LLNR 38685), thence easterly to the western most shoreline of Brant Island approximate position latitude 34°42′36″ N., longitude 076°42′11″ W., thence northeasterly along the shoreline to Tombstone Point approximate position latitude 34°42′14″ N., longitude 076°41′20″ W., thence southeasterly to the east end of the pier at Coast Guard Sector North Carolina approximate position latitude 34°42′00″ N., longitude 076°40′52″ W., thence easterly to Morehead City Channel Buoy 20 (LLNR 29427), thence northerly to Beaufort Harbor Channel LT 1BH (LLNR 34810), thence northwesterly to the southern tip of Radio Island approximate position latitude 34°42′22″ N., longitude 076°40′52″ W., thence northerly along the shoreline to approximate position latitude 34°43′00″ N., longitude 076°4125 W., thence westerly to the North Carolina State Port Facility, thence westerly along the State Port to the southwest corner approximate position latitude 34°42′55″ N., longitude 076°42′12″ W., thence westerly to the southern tip of Sugar Loaf Island the point of origin. 4 September—3rd, 4th or last Saturday; October—last Saturday; November—1st and or 2nd Saturday Wilmington YMCA Triathlon Wilmington, NC, YMCA The waters of, and adjacent to, Wrightsville Channel, from Wrightsville Channel Day beacon 14 (LLNR 28040), located at 34°12′18″ N., longitude 077°48′10″ W., to Wrightsville Channel Day beacon 25 (LLNR 28080), located at 34°12′51″ N., longitude 77°48′53″ W. 5 August—2nd Saturday The Crossing Organization to Support the Arts, Infrastructure, and Learning on Lake Gaston, AKA O'SAIL All waters of Lake Gaston, from shoreline to shoreline, directly under the length of Eaton Ferry Bridge (NC State Route 903), latitude 36°31′06″ N., longitude 077°57′37″ W., bounded to the west by a line drawn parallel and 100 yards from the western side of Eaton Ferry Bridge near Littleton, NC.
    PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 3. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    4. Amend § 165.506 by revising TABLE TO § 165.506 to read as follows:
    § 165.506 Safety Zones; Fireworks Displays in the Fifth Coast Guard District. Table to § 165.506 [All coordinates listed in the Table to § 165.506 reference Datum NAD 1983] No. Date Location Regulated area (a.) Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay—COTP Zone 1 July 3rd, 4th or 5th North Atlantic Ocean, Bethany Beach, DE, Safety Zone The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°32′08″ N., longitude 075°03′15″ W., adjacent to shoreline of Bethany Beach, DE. 2 Labor Day Indian River Bay, DE, Safety Zone All waters of the Indian River Bay within a 700 yard radius of the fireworks launch location on the pier in approximate position latitude 38°36′42″ N., longitude 075°08′18″ W. 3 July 3rd or 4th North Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DE, Safety Zone All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 360 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°43′01.2″ N., longitude 075°04′21″ W., approximately 400 yards east of Rehoboth Beach, DE. 4 July 3rd, 4th or 5th North Atlantic Ocean, Avalon, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate location latitude 39°06′19.5″ N., longitude 074°42′02.15″ W., in the vicinity of the shoreline at Avalon, NJ. 5 July 4th, or September 1st—2nd Saturday Barnegat Bay, Barnegat Township, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of Barnegat Bay within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°44′50″ N., longitude 074°11′21″ W., approximately 500 yards north of Conklin Island, NJ. 6 July 3rd, 4th or 5th North Atlantic Ocean, Cape May, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate location latitude 38°55′36″ N., longitude 074°55′26″ W., immediately adjacent to the shoreline at Cape May, NJ. 7 July 3rd, 4th or 5th Delaware Bay, North Cape May, NJ, Safety Zone All waters of the Delaware Bay within a 360 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°58′00″ N., longitude 074°58′30″ W. 8 August—3rd Sunday Great Egg Harbor Inlet, Margate City, NJ, Safety Zone All waters within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate location latitude 39°19′33″ N., longitude 074°31′28″ W., on the Intracoastal Waterway near Margate City, NJ. 9 July 3rd, 4th or 5th. August every Thursday; September 1st Thursday Metedeconk River, Brick Township, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of the Metedeconk River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch platform in approximate position latitude 40°03′24″ N., longitude 074°06′42″ W., near the shoreline at Brick Township, NJ. 10 July—3rd, 4th or 5th North Atlantic Ocean, Atlantic City, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge located at latitude 39°20′58″ N., longitude 074°25′58″ W., and within 500 yard radius of a fireworks barge located at latitude 39°21′12″ N., longitude 074°25′06″ W., near the shoreline at Atlantic City, NJ. 11 July 3rd, 4th or 5th. October—1st or 2nd Saturday North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, NJ, Safety Zone The waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate location latitude 39°16′22″ N., longitude 074°33′54″ W., in the vicinity of the shoreline at Ocean City, NJ. 12 May—4th Saturday Barnegat Bay, Ocean Township, NJ, Safety Zone All waters of Barnegat Bay within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°47′33″ N., longitude 074°10′46″ W. 13 July 3rd, 4th or 5th Little Egg Harbor, Parker Island, NJ, Safety Zone All waters of Little Egg Harbor within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°34′18″ N., longitude 074°14′43″ W., approximately 100 yards north of Parkers Island. 14 September—3rd Saturday Delaware River, Chester, PA, Safety Zone All waters of the Delaware River near Chester, PA just south of the Commodore Barry Bridge within a 250 yard radius of the fireworks barge located in approximate position latitude 39°49′43.2″ N., longitude 075°22′42″ W. 15 September—3rd Saturday Delaware River, Essington, PA, Safety Zone All waters of the Delaware River near Essington, PA, west of Little Tinicum Island within a 250 yard radius of the fireworks barge located in the approximate position latitude 39°51′18″ N., longitude 075°18′57″ W. 16 July 3rd, 4th or 5th; Columbus Day; December 31st, January 1st Delaware River, Philadelphia, PA, Safety Zone All waters of Delaware River, adjacent to Penns Landing, Philadelphia, PA, bounded from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by a line running east to west from points along the shoreline at latitude 39°56′31.2″ N., longitude 075°08′28.1″ W.; thence to latitude 39°56′29.1″ N., longitude 075°07′56.5″ W., and bounded on the north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. (b.) Coast Guard Sector Baltimore—COTP Zone 1 April—1st or 2nd Saturday Washington Channel, Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC, Safety Zone All waters of the Upper Potomac River within a 150 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°52′20″ N., longitude 077°01′17″ W., located within the Washington Channel in Washington Harbor, DC. 2 July 4th. December—1st and 2nd Saturday; December 31st Severn River and Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Severn River and Spa Creek within an area bounded by a line drawn from latitude 38°58′43.75″ N., longitude 076°28′01.42″ W.; thence to latitude 38°58′21.14″ N., longitude 076°28′22.12″ W.; thence to latitude 38°58′39.47″ N., longitude 076°28′48.72″ W.; thence to latitude 38°58′53″ N., longitude 076°28′33.74″ W., thence to latitude 38°58′57.22″ N., longitude 076°28′39.83″ W., thence to latitude 38°59′02.15″ N., longitude 076°28′34.61″ W., thence to point of origin; located near the entrance to Spa Creek and Severn River, Annapolis, MD. 3 July—4th, or Saturday before or after Independence Day holiday Middle River, Baltimore County, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Middle River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°17′45″ N., longitude 076°23′49″ W., approximately 300 yards east of Rockaway Beach, near Turkey Point. 4 July—1st, 2nd or 3rd Saturday; Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC, Safety Zone All waters of the Upper Potomac River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position 38°48′14″ N., 077°02′00″ W., located near the waterfront (King Street) at Alexandria, Virginia. 5 June 14th; July 4th; September—2nd Saturday; December 31st Northwest Harbor (East Channel), Patapsco River, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Patapsco River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position 39°15′55″ N., 076°34′33″ W., located adjacent to the East Channel of Northwest Harbor. 6 May—2nd or 3rd Thursday or Friday; July 4th; December 31st Baltimore Inner Harbor, Patapsco River, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Patapsco River within a 100 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°17′01″ N., longitude 076°36′31″ W., located at the entrance to Baltimore Inner Harbor, approximately 125 yards southwest of pier 3. 7 May—2nd or 3rd Thursday or Friday; July 4th; December 31st Baltimore Inner Harbor, Patapsco River, MD, Safety Zone The waters of the Patapsco River within a 100 yard radius of approximate position latitude 39°17′04″ N., longitude 076°36′36″ W., located in Baltimore Inner Harbor, approximately 125 yards southeast of pier 1. 8 July 4th; December 31st Northwest Harbor (West Channel) Patapsco River, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Patapsco River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°16′21″ N., longitude 076°34′38″ W., located adjacent to the West Channel of Northwest Harbor. 9 July—4th, or Saturday before or after Independence Day holiday Patuxent River, Calvert County, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Patuxent River within a 200 yard radius of the fireworks barge located at latitude 38°19′17″ N., longitude 076°27′45″ W., approximately 800 feet from shore at Solomons Island, MD. 10 July 3rd Chesapeake Bay, Chesapeake Beach, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Chesapeake Bay within a 150 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°41′36″ N., longitude 076°31′30″ W., and within a 150 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°41′28″ N., longitude 076°31′29″ W., located near Chesapeake Beach, Maryland. 11 July 4th Choptank River, Cambridge, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Choptank River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site at Great Marsh Point, located at latitude 38°35′06″ N., longitude 076°04′46″ W. 12 July—2nd or 3rd Saturday and last Saturday Potomac River, Fairview Beach, Charles County, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Potomac River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°19′57″ N., longitude 077°14′40″ W., located north of the shoreline at Fairview Beach, Virginia. 13 May—last Saturday; July 4th Potomac River, Charles County, MD—Mount Vernon, Safety Zone All waters of the Potomac River within an area bound by a line drawn from the following points: latitude 38°42′30″ N., longitude 077°04′47″ W.; thence to latitude 38°42′18″ N., longitude 077°04′42″ W.; thence to latitude 38°42′11″ N., longitude 077°05′10″ W.; thence to latitude 38°42′22″ N., longitude 077°05′12″ W.; thence to point of origin located along the Potomac River shoreline at George Washington's Mount Vernon Estate, Fairfax County, VA. 14 October—1st Saturday Dukeharts Channel, Potomac River, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Potomac River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°13′27″ N., longitude 076°44′48″ W., located adjacent to Dukeharts Channel near Coltons Point, Maryland. 15 July—day before Independence Day holiday and July 4th; November—3rd Thursday, 3rd Saturday and last Friday. December—1st, 2nd and 3rd Friday Potomac River, National Harbor, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Potomac River within an area bound by a line drawn from the following points: latitude 38°47′13″ N., longitude 077°00′58″ W.; thence to latitude 38°46′51″ N., longitude 077°01′15″ W.; thence to latitude 38°47′25″ N., longitude 077°01′33″ W.; thence to latitude 38°47′32″ N., longitude 077°01′08″ W.; thence to the point of origin, located at National Harbor, Maryland. 16 Sunday before July 4th, July 4th Susquehanna River, Havre de Grace, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Susquehanna River within a 300 yard radius of approximate position latitude 39°32′06″ N., longitude 076°05′22″ W., located on the island at Millard Tydings Memorial Park. 17 June and July—Saturday before Independence Day holiday Miles River, St. Michaels, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Miles River within a 200 yard radius of approximate position latitude 38°47′42″ N., longitude 076°12′51″ W., located at the entrance to Long Haul Creek. 18 July 3rd Tred Avon River, Oxford, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Tred Avon River within a 150 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°41′24″ N., longitude 076°10′37″ W., approximately 500 yards northwest of the waterfront at Oxford, MD. 19 July 3rd Northeast River, North East, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the Northeast River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°35′26″ N., longitude 075°57′00″ W., approximately 400 yards south of North East Community Park. 20 December 31st Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC, Safety Zone All waters of the Upper Potomac River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position 38°48′38″ N., 077°01′56″ W., located east of Oronoco Bay Park at Alexandria, Virginia. 21 March through October, at the conclusion of evening MLB games at Washington Nationals Ball Park Anacostia River, Washington, DC, Safety Zone All waters of the Anacostia River within a 150 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°52′13″ N., longitude 077°00′16″ W., located near the Washington Nationals Ball Park. 22 June—last Saturday or July—1st Saturday; July—3rd, 4th or last Saturday or Sunday Potomac River, Prince William County, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Potomac River within a 200 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°34′08″ N., longitude 077°15′38″ W., located near Cherry Hill, Virginia. 23 July 4th North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean in an area bound by the following points: latitude 38°19′39.9″ N., longitude 075°05′03.2″ W.; thence to latitude 38°19′36.7″ N., longitude 075°04′53.5″ W.; thence to latitude 38°19′45.6″ N., longitude 075°04′49.3″ W.; thence to latitude 38°19′49.1″ N., longitude 075°05′00.5″ W.; thence to point of origin. The size of the safety zone extends approximately 300 yards offshore from the fireworks launch area located at the high water mark on the beach. 24 May—Sunday before Memorial Day (observed). June 29th; July 4th and July every Sunday. August—1st Sunday and Sunday before Labor Day (observed) Isle of Wight Bay, Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone All waters of Isle of Wight Bay within a 200 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38°22′31″ N., longitude 075°04′34″ W. 25 July 4th Assawoman Bay, Fenwick Island—Ocean City, MD, Safety Zone All waters of Assawoman Bay within a 360 yard radius of the fireworks launch location on the pier at the West end of Northside Park, in approximate position latitude 38°25′55″ N., longitude 075°03′53″ W. 26 July 4th; December 31st Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore Inner Harbor, MD, Safety Zone All waters of Baltimore Harbor, Patapsco River, within a 280 yard radius of a fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 39°16′36.7″ N., longitude 076°35′53.8″ W., located northwest of the Domino Sugar refinery wharf at Baltimore, Maryland. (c.) Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads—COTP Zone 1 July 4th Linkhorn Bay, Virginia Beach, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Linkhorn Bay within a 400 yard radius of the fireworks display in approximate position latitude 36°52′20″ N., longitude 076°00′38″ W., located near the Cavalier Golf and Yacht Club, Virginia Beach, Virginia. 2 September—last Friday or October—1st Friday York River, West Point, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the York River near West Point, VA within a 400 yard radius of the fireworks display located in approximate position latitude 37°31′25″ N., longitude 076°47′19″ W. 3 July 4th York River, Yorktown, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the York River within a 400 yard radius of the fireworks display in approximate position latitude 37°14′14″ N., longitude 076°30′02″ W., located near Yorktown, Virginia. 4 July 4th, July 5th, July 6th, or July 7th James River, Newport News, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the James River within a 325 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 36°58′30″ N., longitude 076°26′19″ W., located in the vicinity of the Newport News Shipyard, Newport News, Virginia. 5 June—4th Friday; July—1st Friday; July 4th Chesapeake Bay, Norfolk, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Chesapeake Bay within a 400 yard radius of the fireworks display located in position latitude 36°57′21″ N., longitude 076°15′00″ W., located near Ocean View Fishing Pier. 6 July 4th or 5th Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Chesapeake Bay 400 yard radius of the fireworks display in approximate position latitude 36°55′02″ N., longitude 076°03′27″ W., located at the First Landing State Park at Virginia Beach, Virginia. 7 July 4th; December 31st, January—1st Elizabeth River, Southern Branch, Norfolk, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Elizabeth River Southern Branch in an area bound by the following points: latitude 36°50′54.8″ N., longitude 076°18′10.7″ W.; thence to latitude 36°51′7.9″ N., longitude 076°18′01″ W.; thence to latitude 36°50′45.6″ N., longitude 076°17′44.2″ W.; thence to latitude 36°50′29.6″ N., longitude 076°17′23.2″ W.; thence to latitude 36°50′7.7″ N., longitude 076°17′32.3″ W.; thence to latitude 36°49′58″ N., longitude 076°17′28.6″ W.; thence to latitude 36°49′52.6″ N., longitude 076°17′43.8″ W.; thence to latitude 36°50′27.2″ N., longitude 076°17′45.3″ W.; thence to the point of origin. 8 July—3rd Saturday John H. Kerr Reservoir, Clarksville, VA, Safety Zone All waters of John H. Kerr Reservoir within a 400 yard radius of approximate position latitude 36°37′51″ N., longitude 078°32′50″ W., located near the center span of the State Route 15 Highway Bridge. 9 June, July, August, September, and October—every Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday July 4th North Atlantic Ocean, Virginia Beach, VA, Safety Zone A All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 1000 yard radius of the center located near the shoreline at approximate position latitude 36°51′12″ N., longitude 075°58′06″ W., located off the beach between 17th and 31st streets. 10 September—last Saturday or October—1st Saturday North Atlantic Ocean, VA Beach, VA, Safety Zone B All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 350 yard radius of approximate position latitude 36°50′35″ N., longitude 075°58′09″ W., located on the 14th Street Fishing Pier. 11 Friday, Saturday and Sunday Labor Day Weekend North Atlantic Ocean, VA Beach, VA, Safety Zone C All waters of the North Atlantic Ocean within a 350 yard radius of approximate position latitude 36°49′55″ N., longitude 075°58′00″ W., located off the beach between 2nd and 6th streets. 12 July 4th Nansemond River, Suffolk, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Nansemond River within a 350 yard radius of approximate position latitude 36°44′27″ N., longitude 076°34′42″ W., located near Constant's Wharf in Suffolk, VA. 13 July 4th Chickahominy River, Williamsburg, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Chickahominy River within a 400 yard radius of the fireworks display in approximate position latitude 37°14′50″ N., longitude 076°52′17″ W., near Barrets Point, Virginia. 14 July—3rd, 4th and 5th Great Wicomico River, Mila, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Great Wicomico River located within a 420 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 37°50′31″ N., longitude 076°19′42″ W. near Mila, Virginia. 15 July—1st Friday, Saturday and Sunday Cockrell's Creek, Reedville, VA, Safety Zone All waters of Cockrell's Creek located within a 420 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 37°49′54″ N., longitude 076°16′44″ W. near Reedville, Virginia. 16 May—last Sunday James River, Richmond, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the James River located within a 420 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 37°31′13.1″ N., longitude 077°25′07.84″ W. near Richmond, Virginia. 17 June—last Saturday Rappahannock River, Tappahannock, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Rappahannock River located within a 400 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 37°55′12″ N., longitude 076°49′12″ W. near Tappahannock, Virginia. 18 July 4th Cape Charles Harbor, Cape Charles, VA, Safety Zone All waters of Cape Charles Harbor located within a 375 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 37°15′46.5″ N., longitude 076°01′30.3″ W. near Cape Charles, Virginia. 19 July 3rd or 4th Pagan River, Smithfield, VA, Safety Zone All waters of the Pagan River located within a 420 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 36°59′18″ N., longitude 076°37′45″ W. near Smithfield, Virginia. 20 July 4th Sandbridge Shores, Virginia Beach, VA, Safety Zone All waters of Sandbridge Shores located within a 300 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 36°43′24.9″ N., longitude 075°56′24.9″ W. near Virginia Beach, Virginia. 21 July 4th, 5th or 6th Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA, Safety Zone All waters of Chesapeake Bay located within a 600 foot radius of the fireworks display at approximate position latitude 36°54′58.18″ N., longitude 076°06′44.3″ W. near Virginia Beach, Virginia. 22 July 3rd, 4th and 5th Urbanna Creek, Urbanna, VA; Safety Zone All waters of Urbanna Creek within a 350 foot radius of the fireworks launch site at latitude 37°38′09″ N., longitude 076°34′03″ W., located on land near the east shoreline of Urbanna Creek and south of Bailey Point. 23 April—August, every Friday and Saturday; July 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th; and Friday, Saturday and Sunday of Labor day weekend Elizabeth River Eastern Branch, Norfolk, VA; Safety Zone All waters of the Eastern Branch of Elizabeth River within the area along the shoreline immediately adjacent to Harbor Park Stadium ball park and outward into the river bound by a line drawn from latitude 36°50′29.65″ N., longitude 076°16′48.9″ W., thence south to 36°50′28.79″ N., longitude 076°16′49.12″ W., thence east to 36°50′26.74″ N., longitude 076°16′39.54″ W., thence north to 36°50′27.7″ N., longitude 076°16′39.36″ W terminating at the SW corner of Harbor Park finger pier. (d.) Coast Guard Sector North Carolina—COTP Zone 1 July 4th; October—1st Saturday Morehead City Harbor Channel, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Morehead City Harbor Channel that fall within a 360 yard radius of latitude 34°43′01″ N., longitude 076°42′59.6″ W., a position located at the west end of Sugar Loaf Island, NC. 2 April—2nd Saturday; July 4th; August—3rd Monday; October—1st Saturday Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Cape Fear River within an area bound by a line drawn from the following points: latitude 34°13′54″ N., longitude 077°57′06″ W.; thence northeast to latitude 34°13′57″ N., longitude 077°57′05″ W.; thence north to latitude 34°14′11″ N., longitude 077°57′07″ W.; thence northwest to latitude 34°14′22″ N., longitude 077°57′19″ W.; thence east to latitude 34°14′22″ N., longitude 077°57′06″ W.; thence southeast to latitude 34°14′07″ N., longitude 077°57′00″ W.; thence south to latitude 34°13′54″ N., longitude 077°56′58″ W.; thence to the point of origin, located approximately 500 yards north of Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. 3 July 1st Saturday and July 4th Green Creek and Smith Creek, Oriental, NC, Safety Zone All waters of Green Creek and Smith Creek that fall within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site at latitude 35°01′29.6″ N., longitude 076°42′10.4″ W., located near the entrance to the Neuse River in the vicinity of Oriental, NC. 4 July 4th Pasquotank River, Elizabeth City, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Pasquotank River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch barge in approximate position latitude 36°17′47″ N., longitude 076°12′17″ W., located approximately 400 yards north of Cottage Point, NC. 5 July 4th, or July 5th Currituck Sound, Corolla, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Currituck Sound within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position latitude 36°22′23.8″ N., longitude 075°49′56.3″ W., located near Whale Head Bay. 6 July 4th; November—3rd Saturday Middle Sound, Figure Eight Island, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Figure Eight Island Causeway Channel from latitude 34°16′32″ N., longitude 077°45′32″ W., thence east along the marsh to a position located at latitude 34°16′19″ N., longitude 077°44′55″ W., thence south to the causeway at position latitude 34°16′16″ N., longitude 077°44′58″ W., thence west along the shoreline to position latitude 34°16′29″ N., longitude 077°45′34″ W., thence back to the point of origin. 7 June—2nd Saturday; July 4th Pamlico River, Washington, NC, Safety Zone All waters of Pamlico River and Tar River within a 300 yard radius of latitude 35°32′25″ N., longitude 077°03′42″ W., a position located on the southwest shore of the Pamlico River, Washington, NC. 8 July 4th Neuse River, New Bern, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Neuse River within a 360 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 35°06′07.1″ N., longitude 077°01′35.8″ W; located 420 yards north of the New Bern, Twin Span, high-rise bridge. 9 July 4th Edenton Bay, Edenton, NC, Safety Zone All waters within a 300 yard radius of position latitude 36°03′04″ N., longitude 076°36′18″ W., approximately 150 yards south of the entrance to Queen Anne Creek, Edenton, NC. 10 July 4th. November—Saturday following Thanksgiving Day Motts Channel, Banks Channel, Wrightsville Beach, NC, Safety Zone All waters of Motts Channel within a 500 yard radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position latitude 34°12′29″ N., longitude 077°48′27″ W., approximately 560 yards south of Sea Path Marina, Wrightsville Beach, NC. 11 July 4th Cape Fear River, Southport, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Cape Fear River within a 600 yard radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 33°54′40″ N., longitude 078°01′18″ W., approximately 700 yards south of the waterfront at Southport, NC. 12 July 4th Big Foot Slough, Ocracoke, NC, Safety Zone All waters of Big Foot Slough within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position latitude 35°06′54″ N., longitude 075°59′24″ W., approximately 100 yards west of the Silver Lake Entrance Channel at Ocracoke, NC. 13 August—1st Tuesday New River, Jacksonville, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the New River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position latitude 34°44′45″ N., longitude 077°26′18″ W., approximately one half mile south of the Hwy 17 Bridge, Jacksonville, North Carolina. 14 July 4th Pantego Creek, Belhaven, NC, Safety Zone All waters on the Pantego Creek within a 600 foot radius of the launch site on land at position 35°32′35″ N., 076°37′46″ W. 15 July 4th Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Swansboro, NC, Safety Zone All waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway within a 300 yard radius of approximate position latitude 34°41′02″ N., longitude 077°07′04″ W., located on Pelican Island. 16 September—4th or last Saturday Shallowbag Bay, Manteo, NC; Safety Zone All waters of Shallowbag Bay within a 200 yard radius of a fireworks barge anchored at latitude 35°54′31″ N., longitude 075°39′42″ W. 17 May—3rd Saturday Pasquotank River; Elizabeth City, NC; Safety Zone All waters of the Pasquotank River within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks barge at latitude 36°17′47″ N., longitude 076°12′17′ W., located north of Cottage Point at the shoreline of the Pasquotank River. 18 October—2nd Saturday Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Bogue Inlet, Swansboro, NC; Safety Zone All waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway within a 300 yard radius of the fireworks launch site at latitude 34°41′02″ N., longitude 077°07′04″ W., located at Bogue Inlet, near Swansboro, NC.
    Dated: February 2, 2015. Stephen P. Metruck, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02965 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 33 CFR Part 203 Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, Natural Disaster Procedures AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is issuing this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) to request public comment on potential revisions to its regulations. USACE is specifically requesting input on potential changes to policies related to disaster preparedness; eligibility criteria for rehabilitation assistance for flood control works; options to address complex natural resource challenges while mitigating impacts to threatened or endangered species; and non-structural alternative projects. Consideration of Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 provisions regarding resiliency for hurricane or shore protection projects, Section 3022, and the inclusion of modifications for hurricane or shore protection projects, Section 3029, are not covered by this advanced notice of proposed rulemaking and may be addressed at a later date.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before April 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number COE-2015-0004, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] and include the docket number, COE-2015-0004, in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: HQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: 33CFR203/CECW-HS/3D64, 441 G Street NW., Washington DC 20314-1000.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to security requirements, we cannot receive comments by hand delivery or courier.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE-2015-0004. All comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the commenter indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means we will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email directly to the Corps without going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, we recommend that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If we cannot read your comment because of technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic comments should avoid the use of any special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, such as CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Jeffrey D. Jensen, Office of Homeland Security, Directorate of Contingency Operations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, at (703) 428-9068 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    A. Authority. Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1941, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 701n), commonly and hereinafter referred to as Public Law 84-99, authorizes an emergency fund to be expended at the discretion of the Chief of Engineers for: Preparation for natural disasters; flood fighting and rescue operations; repair or restoration of flood control works threatened, damaged, or destroyed by flood, or nonstructural alternatives thereto; emergency protection of federally authorized hurricane or shore protection projects which are threatened, when such protection is warranted to protect against imminent and substantial loss to life and property; and repair and restoration of federally authorized hurricane and shore protection projects damaged or destroyed by wind, wave, or water of other than ordinary nature. The law includes provision of emergency supplies of clean water when a contaminated source threatens the public health and welfare of a locality, and activities necessary to protect life and improved property from a threat resulting from a major flood or coastal storm. This law authorizes the Secretary of the Army (Secretary) to construct wells and to transport water within areas determined by the Secretary to be drought-distressed. The Secretary of the Army has delegated the authority vested in the Secretary under Public Law 84-99 through the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) to the Chief of Engineers, subject to such further direction as the Secretary may provide.

    B. Need for Revision. The Code of Federal Regulations, 33 CFR part 203, details administrative policies, guidance, and operating procedures for the Public Law 84-99 program and was last revised in 2003, 68 FR 19357-01, 21 April 2003. Since then, significant disasters, including Hurricane Sandy (2012), flooding on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers (2008, 2011, and 2013) and Hurricane Katrina (2005), provided information regarding system performance and the need for improved system and community resilience that should be considered in formulating revised Pub. L. 84-99 rehabilitation policies. A more detailed understanding of the nature and severity of risk associated with flood control projects and the development of risk-informed decision making approaches and other technological advancements have influenced the outlook about how Pub. L. 84-99 activities could be implemented with a shift towards better alignment with USACE's Levee Safety and National Flood Risk Management Programs as well as the National Preparedness and Response Frameworks. Both of these USACE programs work with non-federal sponsors and stakeholders to assess, communicate and manage the risks to people, property, and the environment associated with levee systems and flood risks. Additionally, significant input from state and federal agencies, stakeholders, and other interested parties regarding the challenges of satisfying USACE vegetation management guidelines in light of the needs of listed threatened and endangered species caused USACE to reevaluate using technical criteria to determine active status in the Public Law 84-99 Rehabilitation Program.

    II. References

    The following reference material is available on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov to assist the public in reviewing this ANPR and providing comments.

    • 33 CFR part 203 • Engineer Regulation 500-1-1, “Civil Emergency Management Program”, September 30, 2001 • Engineer Pamphlet 500-1-1, “Civil Emergency Management Program Procedures”, September 30, 2001 • Engineering and Construction Bulletin, “Interim Risk Reduction Measures (IRRMs) for Levee Safety”, March 5, 2014 • HQUSACE memorandum, “Interim Policy Guidance for Eligibility Determinations”, March 21, 2014 • HQUSACE memorandum, “Policy for Development and Implementation of System-Wide Improvement Frameworks (SWIFs)”, November 29, 2011 • Levee Owner's Manual for Non-Federal Flood Control Works, March 2006 III. General Information for the Advance Notice of Public Rulemaking

    A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, but will be of particular interest to a wide variety of organizations, to include tribal, state, and local emergency management agencies, water resource agencies, environmental and fish and wildlife management agencies and organizations, floodplain and levee safety managers, and non-federal interests (this term should be understood to include “non-federal sponsors” as used in 33 U.S.C. 701n and as defined at 33 CFR 203.15) with flood control works and hurricane or shore protection projects.

    B. What Should I Consider As I Prepare My Comments for Submission? Commenters not familiar with current policy should review the references cited above available on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference a specific paragraph or subparagraph of 33 CFR part 203 or one of the questions or issues in Section IV below. If the subject of the comment is not addressed in either the current CFR or the questions and issues below, then the commenter should clearly state the issue or concern, provide or reference any supporting documentation (e.g., reports, statistical data, and studies), and make a proposal or recommendation about how to improve the current policy.

    C. What Is the Intent of USACE in this Rulemaking Effort? The intent of USACE is to revise and update 33 CFR part 203 so that it incorporates new information from recent storm events and better aligns with the current strategy of the USACE National Flood Risk Management Program and Levee Safety Program, while following these guiding principles:

    1. Effective risk management and levee safety includes working with non-federal sponsors and stakeholders to assess, communicate, and manage life-safety risks.

    2. Federal assistance under authority of Pub. L. 84-99 supplements tribal, state, and local efforts, and does not replace them.

    3. Non-federal sponsors have primary responsibility for operations and maintenance (O&M) of flood control works and risk communication activities associated with their projects.

    4. USACE will promote the use of a risk-informed decision making process to guide non-federal sponsors O&M activities and inspection activities for flood control projects.

    5. USACE will encourage a collaborative approach to address complex natural resources issues, tribal treaty rights, and complex systemic deficiencies.

    6. USACE will work to develop policies and procedures that maintain the benefits of any federal investment(s).

    IV. Questions and Issues To Shape the Revision of 33 CFR Part 203. Summary of Intended Policy Changes and Questions on Specific Activities A. Preparedness

    1. Advance Measures. USACE may undertake emergency measures in advance of imminent threats of unusual flooding. The current eligibility criteria are listed in 33 CFR 203.72.

    (a) USACE may perform Advance Measures prior to flooding or flood fighting activities to protect against loss of life and significant damages to urban areas and public facilities due to an imminent threat of unusual flooding. Advance Measures assistance may be technical and/or direct assistance. Technical assistance may include: providing personnel to inspect projects to identify problems and solutions and requirements for additional flood protection; provide existing hydraulic, hydrologic, structural and/or geotechnical analysis; provide existing information to local entities for use in evacuation or contingency flood fight plans. Typically direct assistance will be temporary in nature, using temporary construction standard and methods, technically feasible, designed to deal effectively with the specific threat, and capable of construction in time to prevent projected damages. To be eligible for Advance Measures a public sponsor must agree to execute a cooperative agreement (CA), and, at no cost to USACE, when the operation is over, remove all temporary advance measures constructed by USACE or agree to upgrade the work to standards acceptable to USACE. In addition, the public sponsor is responsible for providing the traditional lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and borrow and dredged or excavated materials disposal areas (LERRDs) necessary for the project, at its own expense, in accordance with the CA.

    • Question 1: What (if any) additional types of Advance Measures assistance should be considered?

    • Question 2: What (if any) additional eligibility or performance requirements should be considered generally for Advance Measures assistance?

    (b) Permanent structures constructed as Advance Measures are currently cost shared at 75 percent federal and 25 percent local with the LERRDs necessary for the project provided at no cost to the federal government. However, flood control works constructed under other USACE authorities have a minimum cost share of 65 percent federal and 35 percent local with credit provided for the LERRDs necessary for the project. USACE is considering changing the cost share for permanent structures constructed as part of Advance Measures to be consistent with other authorities and to encourage non-federal interests to develop permanent structures through the standard USACE planning process for new projects so that full cost and benefit analyses can be conducted and appropriate public comments considered.

    Question 3: Would changing the cost share serve as an effective incentive for promotion of the standard USACE planning process? If not, what other incentives or requirements for using the standard USACE planning process for permanent construction should be considered?

    B. Rehabilitation

    1. Eligibility for Rehabilitation Assistance. USACE is considering changing the criteria used to determine eligibility for rehabilitation assistance (commonly known as Active status under 33 CFR 203.41) for flood control projects from a strict, condition-based overall inspection rating of the project to a broader set of actions by non-federal sponsors such as emergency preparedness planning, flood risk communication, and implementation of risk-prioritized O&M activities. USACE is considering these changes to: 1) promote risk-informed, cost effective prioritization of risk management activities; 2) encourage community awareness of risks and promote a broad set of flood risk management activities to manage risk; 3) encourage dialogue and problem solving between USACE and non-federal sponsors, and 4) provide flexibility to align flood risk management activities with requirements to protect and restore natural resources.

    Question 4: What should USACE evaluate to determine if a non-federal sponsor is adequately operating and maintaining its flood control project? What should be considered adequate operations and management for eligibility purposes?

    Question 5: How should USACE evaluate a non-federal sponsor's emergency preparedness, notification, evacuation planning and exercise plan and activities to determine if they are adequate? What should USACE evaluate? What should be considered adequate?

    Question 6: How should USACE evaluate a non-federal sponsor's risk communications plan and activities for informing local officials, residents, and business owners about risks associated with the potential failure of the flood control project (e.g., a levee breach)?

    Question 7: Are there other criteria that USACE should consider using to determine eligibility for rehabilitation assistance that would assist and encourage non-federal sponsors and flood-prone communities to reduce their risks from flooding?

    2. Improving Collaboration to Address Complicated Natural Resources Challenges and System-Wide Repairs. USACE intends to incorporate the System Wide Improvement Framework (SWIF) policy into 33 CFR part 203. The SWIF allows non-federal sponsors (currently, of levees and floodwalls only) to retain eligibility for rehabilitation assistance while actively conducting longer-term, system-wide improvement activities that are beyond the scope of usual O&M activities. This includes activities related to complex, serious or systemic deficiencies, addressing complex natural resources challenges such as threatened or endangered species, undocumented encroachments, and tribal treaty rights, all of which require additional time and coordination beyond what is normally allowed under current policy. The purpose is to ensure the imperatives of public safety, tribal rights, and environmental principles are met while still reducing the risk from floods.

    Question 8: What improvements to the existing SWIF policy should be made?

    Question 9: Currently, the SWIF policy has only been used for levee projects. Should the SWIF concept be applied to other types of flood control projects like channels? If so, for what purposes and using what criteria?

    Question 10: If the eligibility for rehabilitation assistance moves away from a standards-based inspection criteria and moves toward an activities-based approach (as is considered in Section B.1 above), what role should the SWIF policy play? Under what circumstances would development of a SWIF be useful to non-federal sponsors?

    3. Mitigating Impacts to Threatened or Endangered Species and Tribal Treaty Rights During Project Rehabilitation. USACE is considering allowing additional types of features and approaches that can be incorporated into rehabilitation efforts to minimize or address impacts to threatened and endangered species and impacts on tribal treaty rights. Features currently being considered include planting berms, set back levees, and overbuilt sections.

    Question 11: Are there other types of features and approaches that USACE should allow during rehabilitation efforts to minimize or address impacts on threatened and endangered species and tribal treaty rights while still providing the intended benefits of the flood control projects and reducing the risk of loss of life and significant economic damages?

    4. Early identification of Nonstructural Alternative Projects (NSAPs). USACE currently has the authority to undertake a nonstructural alternative project in lieu of a structural rehabilitation effort at the request of the non-federal sponsor and in accordance with 33 CFR Section 203.50. However, 15 years of experience shows that NSAPs can be difficult to implement in the immediate aftermath of a flood. Challenges to NSAP implementation include difficulties in obtaining easements, land transfers, and municipal permits, as well as legal limitations of some non-federal sponsors, and a lack of public awareness. USACE is considering how to enable non-federal interests to identify viable NSAPs prior to a flood event so that the non-federal sponsors may be able to effectively implement as viable NSAPS an alternative to structural rehabilitation efforts after a flood event.

    Question 12: What advance planning activities could USACE undertake with non-federal interests to enable non-federal interests to consider NSAPs as viable alternatives to structural rehabilitation efforts if the project is damaged in a future flood event?

    Question 13: How can the current NSAP policy be improved?

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), USACE must determine whether a regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to review by OMB and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines “significant regulatory action” as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities;

    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

    After consideration of Executive Orders 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563, entitled “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review” (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this advance notice of proposed rulemaking has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866.

    Because this document does not impose or propose any requirements, and instead seeks comments and suggestions for USACE to consider in possibly developing a subsequent proposed rule, the various other review requirements that apply when an agency imposes requirements do not apply to this action. Nevertheless, as part of your comments on this ANPR, you may include any comments or information that could help the Agency to assess the potential impact of a subsequent regulatory action on small entities pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); to consider human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations pursuant to Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or to consider potential impacts to state and local governments or tribal governments. USACE will consider such comments during the development of any subsequent rulemaking.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Karen Durham-Aguilera, Director of Contingency Operations/Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03033 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0867; FRL-9922-95-Region 4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: Non-interference Demonstration for Federal Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Birmingham Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the State of Alabama's November 14, 2014, State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, submitted through the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), in support of the State's request that EPA change the Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) requirements for Jefferson and Shelby Counties (hereinafter referred to as the “Birmingham Area” or “Area”). Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision evaluates whether changing the Federal RVP requirements in this Area would interfere with the Area's ability to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Specifically, Alabama's SIP revision concludes that relaxing the Federal RVP requirement from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) to 9.0 psi for gasoline sold between June 1 and September 15 of each year in the Area would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) or with any other CAA requirement. EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision is consistent with the applicable provisions of the CAA.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before March 6, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0867 by one of the following methods:

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

    2. Email: [email protected]

    3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.

    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0867, Air Regulatory Managment Section (formerly the Regulatory Development Section), Air Planning and Implementation Branch (formerly the Air Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.

    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0867. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Richard Wong of the Air Regulatory Management Section, in the Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Wong may be reached by phone at (404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. What is being proposed? II. What is the background of the Birmingham area? III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement? IV. What are the Section 110(l) requirements? V. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal? VI. Proposed Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is being proposed?

    This rulemaking proposes to approve Alabama's noninterference demonstration, submitted on November 14, 2014, in support of the State's request that EPA relax the Federal RVP requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for gasoline sold between June 1 and September 15 of each year (i.e., during high ozone season) in the Area. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision which includes a technical demonstration that changing the federal RVP requirements in this Area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of the CAA.1 It should be noted that when Alabama requested that EPA redesignate the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the State took a conservative approach for the associated maintenance demonstrations and modeled the 9.0 psi RVP requirement for this Area rather than the 7.8 psi RVP requirement currently in place. While the State had already accounted for the use of fuel with an RVP of 9.0 psi in the maintenance plans to support those redesignation requests, the State did not, at that time, request the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area. Alabama is now requesting the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement for this Area and, as part of that request, has reevaluated whether removal of this requirement would interfere with air quality in the Area. To make this demonstration, Alabama completed a technical analysis to estimate the change in emissions that would result from a switch to 9.0 psi RVP fuel based on current conditions. EPA has reviewed this technical analysis and is proposing to find that Alabama's technical demonstration supports the conclusion that the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Birmingham Area will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

    1 A separate rulemaking is required for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Area. Today's action proposes EPA's evaluation of the approvability of Alabama's noninterference demonstration pursuant to section 110(l). The decision regarding removal of Federal RVP requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Area includes other considerations evaluated at the discretion of the Administrator. As such, the determination regarding whether to remove the Area from those areas subject to the section 211(h) requirements is made through a separate rulemaking action.

    This preamble is hereinafter organized into five parts. Section II provides the background of the Birmingham Area designation status with respect to the various ozone NAAQS. Section III describes the applicable history of federal gasoline regulation. Section IV provides the Agency's policy regarding relaxation of the volatility standards. Section V provides EPA's analysis of the information submitted by Alabama to support a change for the conventional gasoline volatility standard in the Birmingham Area.

    II. What is the background of the Birmingham Area?

    The Birmingham Area was originally designated as a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area by EPA on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). The Birmingham nonattainment area at that time was geographically defined as Jefferson County, Alabama. On November 6, 1991, by operation of law under section 181(a) of the CAA, EPA classified the Birmingham nonattainment area as a marginal nonattainment area for ozone and added Shelby County to the nonattainment area. See 56 FR 56693. Among the requirements applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain volatility standards (known as Reid Vapor Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). As discussed in section III, below, a 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirement first applied to the Area during the high ozone season given its status as a marginal nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone standard. Subsequently, in order to comply with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, Alabama opted to implement a state RVP requirement of 7.0 psi for gasoline sold in the Birmingham Area during the high ozone season. EPA incorporated the state RVP requirement of 7.0 psi for gasoline sold in the Birmingham Area into the Alabama SIP on November 7, 2001. See 66 FR 56218.

    ADEM originally requested a redesignation of the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1997. EPA disapproved this request on September 19, 1997, due to a violation of the ozone NAAQS. See 62 FR 49154. Subsequently, the Area attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and was redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone on March 12, 2004, based on 2001-2003 ambient air quality monitoring data. See 69 FR 11798. Alabama's 1-hour ozone redesignation request did not include a request to remove the 7.0 psi state RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area from the SIP nor a request to relax the 7.8 psi Federal RVP standard.

    On April 30, 2004, EPA designated and classified areas for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS that was promulgated on July 18, 1997, as unclassifiable/attainment or nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23857. The Birmingham Area was designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of 0.087 parts per million (ppm). Subsequently, the Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of 0.084 ppm using three years of quality assured data for the years of 2003-2005. The Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in a final rulemaking on May 12, 2006. See 71 FR 27631. Alabama's 1997 8-hour ozone redesignation request did not include a request for the removal of the 7.8 psi Federal RVP standard, nor did it include a request to change the 7.0 psi state RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area. However, to support its request for redesignation to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, Alabama took a conservative approach and estimated emissions using a 9.0 psi RVP in its modeling supporting the State's maintenance demonstration.

    On March 2, 2012, Alabama submitted a SIP revision requesting that EPA remove the State's 7.0 psi RVP requirement for the Area from the SIP. EPA approved Alabama's March 2, 2012, SIP revision on April 20, 2012. See 77 FR 23619. In EPA's final rulemaking to remove the State RVP requirement, EPA noted that the action did not remove the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area.

    Effective July 20, 2012, EPA designated the Birmingham Area as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088 (April 30, 2012). Although the Birmingham Area is designated as attainment, the federal 7.8 psi RVP requirement remains in place.

    Alabama is now requesting that EPA remove the federal 7.8 psi RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area, and it submitted a SIP revision on November 14, 2014, containing a noninterference demonstration to support its request.

    III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline nationwide had become increasingly volatile, causing an increase in evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment. Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people with heart and lung disease.

    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c) of CAA, EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868), that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the high ozone season. These regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of commercial gasoline during the summer ozone control season. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls as Phase II of the volatility control program. These requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the State, the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the high ozone season).

    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense, supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone season. Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from establishing a volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that EPA may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.

    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA. The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23658). A current listing of the RVP requirements for states can be found on EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.

    As explained in the December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II rulemaking, EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In order for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years after redesignation. Depending on the area's circumstances, this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, EPA will not relax the volatility standard unless the state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction of EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for ten years without the need for the more stringent volatility standard.

    As noted above, Alabama did not request relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi federal RVP standard when the Birmingham Area was redesignated to attainment for the either the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS but did take a conservative approach in estimating emissions for the maintenance plan associated with its redesignation request for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by using a level of 9.0 psi.

    IV. What are the Section 110(l) requirements?

    To support Alabama's request to relax the federal RVP requirement in the Birmingham Area, the State must demonstrate that the requested change will satisfy section 110(l) of the CAA. Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the Act. EPA's criterion for determining the approvability of Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision is whether the noninterference demonstration associated with the relaxation request satisfies section 110(l). Although the modeling associated with Alabama's maintenance plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 Annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are premised upon the 9.0 psi RVP requirements, no requests for a change in the federal RVP requirement were made at the time that EPA approved these plans. EPA's approval of the maintenance plans was based on an evaluation of the air quality monitoring data at the time of the EPA actions, the information provided in the individual maintenance plans, and the maintenance plan requirements in the CAA.

    EPA evaluates each section 110(l) noninterference demonstration on a case-by-case basis considering the circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in effect, including those that have been promulgated but for which the EPA has not yet made designations. The degree of analysis focused on any particular NAAQS in a noninterference demonstration varies depending on the nature of the emissions associated with the proposed SIP revision. EPA's analysis of Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision pursuant to section 110(l) is provided below.

    EPA notes that in today's action, it is only proposing to approve the State's technical demonstration that the Area can continue to attain and maintain the NAAQS and meet other CAA requirements after switching to the sale of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi in the Birmingham Area during the high ozone season and to amend the SIP to include this demonstration. Consistent with CAA section 211(h) and the Phase II volatility regulations, EPA will initiate a separate rulemaking to relax the current federal requirement to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Birmingham Area.

    V. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal? a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions Regarding Alabama's Noninterference Analyses

    On November 14, 2014, ADEM submitted a noninterference demonstration to support the State's request to modify the RVP summertime gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the Birmingham Area. This demonstration includes an evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards and on the maintenance of the other NAAQS.2 Alabama focused its analysis on the impact of the change in RVP to attainment and maintenance of the ozone, PM,3 and NO2 NAAQS because RVP requirements do not affect lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), or carbon monoxide (CO) emissions; because VOC and NOX emissions are precursors for ozone 4 and PM; and because NO2 is a component of NOX.

    2 The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare based standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and SO2.

    3 PM is composed of PM2.5 and PM10.

    4 EPA notes that the Birmingham Area is located within a NOX-limited region. A NOX-limited region is one in which the concentration of ozone is limited by the amount of NOX emissions. NOX and VOC are precursors to the formation of ozone in the atmosphere. In a NOX-limited area, high prevailing concentrations of VOC from naturally-occurring sources are present in the atmosphere to contribute to ozone formation. Consequently, reduction of manmade, or anthropogenic, sources of VOC emissions generally do not generally result in reduced ozone formation. Instead, reductions of NOX emissions provide a more effective ozone reduction strategy because reduced emissions of manmade NOX emissions limit the amount of NOX available in the atmosphere for ozone formation. See, e.g., The State of the Southern Oxidants Study (SOS) Policy Relevant Findings in Ozone and PM 2.5 Pollution Research 1995-2003 (June 30, 2004), http://www.ncsu.edu/sos/pubs/sos3/State_of_SOS_3.pdf.

    ADEM's noninterference analysis utilized EPA's 2010b Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emission modeling system to estimate emissions for mobile sources.5 These mobile source emissions are used as part of the evaluation of the potential impacts to the NAAQS that might result exclusively from changing the high ozone season RVP requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. As summarized in Table 1, below, the MOVES model predicted minor increases in mobile source NOX and VOC emissions from the switch to 9.0 psi RVP fuel and much larger decreases in emissions resulting from fleet turnover.6 When considered together, these changes are projected to decrease mobile source NOX and VOC emissions. The modeling results summarized in Table 1 also demonstrate that the projected increase in mobile source NOX and VOC emissions due to relaxation of the RVP requirement is negligible when compared with total NOX and VOC emissions in the Area projected for 2015 (approximately 0.1% and 0.7%, respectively).

    5 The 2010b MOVES model was the latest EPA mobile source model available to the State at the time that it developed its SIP revision. ADEM's modeling using 2010b MOVES conforms with EPA's modeling guidance.

    6 Fleet turnover refers to the phenomenon where older vehicles built to less stringent emission standards are replaced in the fleet by newer vehicles built in compliance with more stringent standards. ADEM estimated mobile source emissions using the fleet turnover assumptions included in EPA's 2010b MOVES model.

    Table 1—Effects on NOX and VOC Emissions From RVP Relaxation and Fleet Turnover for Jefferson and Shelby Counties Mobile emissions increase (2015) with RVP change of 7.8 to 9.0
  • (tons) *
  • Mobile emissions decrease from 2014 to 2015 fleet turnover
  • (tons) *
  • Net mobile emissions
  • (tons) *
  • 2015
  • Emissions from all sources
  • (tons)
  • Percent emissions from RVP change compared from all emissions sources
    NOX 24 −489 −465 16,857 0.14 VOC 80 −156 −76 11,791 0.68 * Emissions increases with RVP change are estimated for the period June 1 through September 15, 2015.

    Tables 2 and 3, below, show that overall 24-hour and annual mobile emissions of NOX and VOC are projected to continue to decrease in the Birmingham Area using a 9.0 psi RVP for years 2015 through 2024 and the fleet turnover assumptions contained in EPA's 2010b MOVES model.

    Table 2—24-Hour NOX and VOC Mobile Emissions [tons per year (tpy)] County 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 Jefferson: NOX 59.26 46.31 35.62 28.05 23.46 20.75 VOC 25.94 20.82 16.92 13.97 12.25 10.76 Shelby: NOX 12.72 10.14 7.60 5.98 5.01 4.40 VOC 4.85 3.97 3.15 2.60 2.28 1.99 Table 3—Annual Mobile NOX and VOC Emissions [(tpy)] County 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 Jefferson: NOX 20364.40 15957.15 12237.62 9631.63 8053.95 7140.21 VOC 8974.65 7243.40 5882.42 4869.55 4232.64 3771.41 Shelby: NOX 4428.17 3518.57 2641.41 2079.50 1741.02 1532.55 VOC 1687.59 1382.34 1100.43 909.52 789.92 701.11 b. Noninterference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS

    As discussed above, the Birmingham Area is currently designated as attainment for both the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.7 Although the Area was previously designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Birmingham Area was redesignated to attainment for that NAAQS on May 12, 2006. See 71 FR 27631. Because the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is more stringent than the 1997 8-hour standard, Alabama's November 14, 2014, noninterference demonstration for the ozone NAAQS is focused on the 2008 8-hour standard. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration, averaged over 3 years is 0.075 ppm or less. As shown in Table 4, all ozone monitors in the Birmingham Area are currently well below the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

    7 EPA redesignated the Area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard on March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11798), and revoked the 1-hour ozone standard on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858).

    8 The Pinson and Providence monitors shut down after the 2012 monitoring season. There was not enough data at these locations to calculate a 3-year average design value.

    Table 4—Birmingham Area Ozone Design Values Monitor 2007-2009 DV 2008-2010 DV 2009-2011 DV 2010-2012 DV 2011-2013 DV 2012-2014 DV Corner 0.076 0.070 0.070 0.073 0.070 0.065 Fairfield 0.074 0.069 0.070 0.075 0.071 0.068 Helena 0.081 0.074 0.072 0.075 0.073 0.068 Hoover 0.080 0.075 0.075 0.077 0.073 0.067 Leeds 0.072 0.069 0.071 0.076 0.074 0.069 McAdory 0.078 0.073 0.075 0.077 0.074 0.068 North Birmingham 0.079 0.072 0.071 0.075 0.071 0.067 Pinson 0.074 0.072 0.070 0.074 8 — Providence 0.074 0.070 0.070 0.074 Tarrant 0.079 0.073 0.074 0.080 0.076 0.070 — indicates no data available.

    Table 4 also shows that there is an overall downward trend in ozone concentrations in the Birmingham Area. This decline can be attributed to federal and State programs that have led to significant emissions reductions in ozone precursors. Given this downward trend, the current ozone concentrations in the Area, and the results of Alabama's mobile source modeling, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the Birmingham Area would not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 or 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Area.

    c. Noninterference Analysis for the PM NAAQS

    Over the course of several years, EPA has reviewed and revised the PM2.5 NAAQS a number of times. On July 16, 1997, EPA established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 65 μg/m3, based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. See 62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997). On September 21, 2006, EPA retained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 μg/m3 but revised the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 μg/m3, based again on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. See 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). On December 14, 2012, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 μg/m3 but revised the annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS to 12.0 μg/m3, based again on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).

    EPA promulgated designations for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844). Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their entireties, and a portion of Walker County (hereinafter referred to as the “1997 Annual PM2.5 Birmingham Area”) were designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standards, and all other counties (or portions thereof) in Alabama were designated unclassifiable/attainment.9 On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA designated the same counties (or portions thereof) in the State that were nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standards as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards (hereinafter referred to as the “2006 24-hour PM2.5 Birmingham Area”). On January 22, 2013, EPA redesignated the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.10 See 78 FR 4341. Additionally, on January 25, 2013, EPA redesignated the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 Birmingham Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 78 FR 5306.

    9 Walker County is not subject to the Federal RVP requirement because it is not part of the ozone Area.

    10 In anticipation of a future request to change the Federal RVP requirement, Alabama used an RVP of 9.0 psi in its modeling to support the maintenance plans for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

    As mentioned above, EPA revised the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in December 2012. EPA completed designations for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for most areas on December 14, 2015, and designated the Birmingham Area as unclassifiable/attainment. See 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).

    The main precursor pollutants for PM2.5 are NOX, SO2, VOC, and ammonia. As mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, the Federal RVP requirements only result in emissions benefits for VOC and NOX. Therefore, Alabama focused on these two PM2.5 precursors in its analysis of the potential impact of changing the RVP requirements for the Birmingham Area on the PM2.5 NAAQS.

    The PM2.5 monitoring data summarized in Table 5 shows that the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour design values are well below the NAAQS and have been decreasing overall since 2008.

    Table 5—PM2.5 Design Values Year 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013 Annual Design Values Jersey 12.7 12.0 12.0 11.1 Leeds 11.9 11.6 11.6 11.0 McAdory 11.5 11.3 11.2 10.5 North Birmingham 13.7 12.9 13.0 11.9 24-Hour Design Values Jersey 28 26 25 23 Leeds 22 23 23 22 McAdory 23 23 23 22 North Birmingham 29 27 26 24 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS: 15 μg/m3. 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS: 35 μg/m3.

    Given the current PM2.5 concentrations and downward trend of these concentrations in the Area and the results of Alabama's mobile source modeling, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the Birmingham Area would not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area.11

    11 EPA has also preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the Birmingham Area would not interfere with maintenance of the Annual PM10 NAAQS of 150 μg/m3 given the results of Alabama's mobile source modeling and the fact that the Area is currently attaining the PM10 standard. Because PM2.5 is a component of PM10, this preliminary determination is further supported by the downward trend in PM2.5 identified above.

    d. Noninterference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS

    On February 17, 2012, EPA designated all counties in Alabama as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. See 77 FR 9532. Based on the technical analysis in Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision, the potential increase in NOX emissions associated with the change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the Birmingham Area is approximately 24 tons during high ozone season. As discussed in section V.a, above, the slight projected increase in mobile source NOX emissions due to the fuel switch will be negated by a decrease in tailpipe emissions due to fleet turnover. Given the current unclassifiable/attainment designation and the results of Alabama's mobile source modeling, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the Birmingham Area would not interfere with maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in the Area.

    VI. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the State of Alabama's noninterference demonstration, submitted on November 14, 2014, in support of the State's request that EPA change the Federal RVP requirements for the Birmingham Area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. Specifically, EPA is proposing to find that this change in the RVP requirements for the Birmingham Area will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

    EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's November 14, 2014, SIP revision, containing the noninterference demonstration associated with the State's request for the change of the Federal RVP requirements is consistent with the applicable provisions of the CAA. EPA is not proposing action today to remove the Birmingham Area from the Federal 7.8 psi RVP requirement. Any such proposal will occur in a separate and subsequent rulemaking.

    VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

    • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7, 1999);

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

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

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

    • does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 4, 2015. V. Anne Heard, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02942 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738; FRL 9922-91-OAR] Receipt of Approval Requests for the Operation of Pressure-Assisted Multi-Point Ground Flare Technology AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 5, 2014, The Dow Chemical Company (Dow) requested an Alternative Means of Emission Limitation (AMEL) under the Clean Air Act (CAA) in order to operate pressure-assisted multi-point ground flares at its Propane Dehydrogenation Plant and its Light Hydrocarbons Plant at its Texas Operations site located in Freeport, Texas. On October 21, 2014, ExxonMobil Chemical Company (ExxonMobil) requested an AMEL under the CAA for its pressure-assisted multi-point ground flares at its' Olefins Plant in Baytown, Texas, and its' Plastics Plant in Mont Belvieu, Texas. In this document, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is soliciting comment on all aspects of the AMEL requests and the resulting alternative operating conditions that are necessary to achieve a reduction in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) at least equivalent to the reduction in emissions required by various standards in 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63 that apply to emission sources controlled by these pressure-assisted multi-point ground flares. These standards point to the operating requirements for flares in the General Provisions to parts 60 and 63, respectively, to comply with the emission reduction requirements. Because pressure-assisted multi-point ground flares cannot meet the velocity requirements in these General Provisions, Dow and ExxonMobil are seeking an AMEL.

    DATES:

    Comments. Written comments must be received on or before March 30, 2015.

    Public Hearing. If requested by February 18, 2015, we will hold a public hearing on March 2, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard Time] to 5:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard Time] at EPA's Campus located in Research Triangle Park, NC. We will provide details on the public hearing on our Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/groundflares/groundflarespg.html. To be clear, a public hearing will not be held unless someone specifically requests that the EPA hold a public hearing regarding these requests. Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt of the Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-0832; email address: [email protected]; to request a public hearing, to register to speak at the public hearing or to inquire as to whether or not a public hearing will be held. The last day to pre-register in advance to speak at the public hearing will be February 25, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA OAR- 2014-0738, by one of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738.

    Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738.

    Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738. All documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA WJC West Building, Room 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 EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions about this proposed action, contact Ms. Brenda Shine, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3608; fax number: (919) 541-0246; and email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Acronyms and Abbreviations

    We use multiple acronyms and terms in this document. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this document and for reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here:

    AMEL alternative means of emission limitation BOP Baytown Olefins Plant Btu/scf British thermal units per standard cubic feet LFL lower flammability limit LFLcz combustion zone lower flammability limit LHC Light Hydrocarbons Unit LRGO Linear relief gas oxidizer MACT maximum achievable control technology MBPP Mont Belvieu Plastics Plant MPGF multi-point ground flare NESHAP national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants NHV net heating value NHVcz combustion zone net heating value NSPS new source performance standards OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards PDH Propylene Dehydrogenation Unit PFTIR passive fourier transform infrared SKEC steam-assisted kinetic energy combustor

    Organization of This Document. The information in this document is organized as follows:

    I. Statutory and Regulatory Background A. Flare Operating Requirements B. Alternative Means of Emission Limitation II. Requests for Alternative Means of Emission Limitation A. Dow AMEL B. ExxonMobil AMEL C. EPA's Analysis of MPGF Burner Emission Tests III. AMEL for Pressure-Assisted MPGF IV. Request for Comments I. Statutory and Regulatory Background A. Flare Operating Requirements

    In their requests, Dow and ExxonMobil cite various regulatory requirements in 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63 that will apply to the different vent gas streams that will be collected and routed to their pressure-assisted multi-point ground flares (MPGF) at each plant. These requirements are included in Table 1.1 In all cases, these rules reference the flare operating requirements located in 40 CFR 60.18 and 40 CFR 63.11.

    1 EPA prepared Table 1 using the information provided in the requests, corrected as appropriate based on its own review of the regulations. However, the EPA has not independently verified whether Table 1 includes all of the regulatory requirements with which these plants must comply.

    Table 1—Summary of Applicable Rules That May Apply to Vents Streams Controlled by Pressure-Assisted Multi-Point Ground Flares Applicable rules with vent streams going to
  • control
  • device
  • Dow propane
  • dehydrogenation (PDH) plant
  • Dow light
  • hydro-carbons (LHC) plant
  • Exxon-Mobil
  • Baytown Olefins
  • plant
  • Exxon-Mobil Mont Belvieu plastics plant Emission reduction
  • required and
  • rule citation
  • Provisions for
  • alternative means
  • of emission
  • limitation
  • NSPS Subpart Kb X X 60.112b(a)(3)(ii)—Reduce VOC inlet emissions by 95%; If a flare is used as a control device, flare must meet requirements of 60.18 60.114b allows for AMEL. NSPS Subparts VV/Vva X X X 60.482-10a—Reduce VOC emissions by 95% or greater; flare used to comply with subpart must meet requirements of 60.18
  • *Note—Under Dow PDH Plant column, NSPS subpart VVa applies, but DOW is opting to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart H (as referenced by Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP(MON) which should satisfy requirements in subpart VVa
  • 60.484(a) allows for AMEL
    NSPS Subpart DDD X 60.562-1—Reduce emissions of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) by 98%, or combust in a flare that meets the requirements of 60.18 CAA section 111(h)(3) allows for AMEL. NSPS Subpart NNN X X X X 60.662- Reduce emissions of TOC by 98%, or combust in a flare that meets the requirements of 60.18 CAA section 111(h)(3) allows for AMEL. NSPS Subpart RRR X X X X 60.702—Reduce emissions of TOC by 98%, or combust in a flare that meets the requirements of 60.18 CAA section 111(h)(3) allows for AMEL. NESHAP Subpart V X 61.242-11(d)—flares used to comply with subpart V must comply with 60.18 61.244 allows for AMEL; also see 61.12(d). NESHAP Subpart FF X X 61.349(a)—reduce organic emissions vented to control device by 95%; a flare shall comply with the requirements of 60.18 61.353 allows for AMEL; also see 61.12(d). NESHAP Subparts F, G X 63.102, 63.113, 63.126—Reduce emissions of Total Organic HAP (TOHAP) by 98%, or combust in a flare that meets the requirements of 63.11(b)
  • 63.120—Combust in flare meeting 63.11. 63.139—Reduce emissions of TOHAP by 95%, or combust in a flare that meets the requirements of 63.11(b). 63.145(j)—Points to sections of 63.11(b) for flare control
  • 63.102(b) allows for AMEL.
    NESHAP Subpart H X X 63.172—Reduce organic HAP or VOC by 95%; flares used to comply must meet requirements of 63.11(b) 63.177 allows for AMEL. NESHAP Subpart SS X X X X 63.982(b) and 63.987(a) require that a flare meets the requirements in 63.11(b) CAA section 112(h)(3) allows for AMEL. NESHAP Subpart UU X 63.1034—Nonflare control devices shall reduce emissions by 95%; flares shall comply with subpart SS 63.1021 allows for AMEL. NESHAP Subpart XX X 63.1091 requires compliance with subpart FF, which requires compliance with 60.18 61.353 allows for AMEL; also see 61.12(d). NESHAP Subpart YY X X Table 7 references subpart SS, which requires compliance with 60.18 63.1113 allows for AMEL. NESHAP Subpart EEEE X X 63.2378(a) references subpart SS, which requires compliance with 60.18 63.2346(g) allows for AMEL; also see Table 12 which makes 63.6(g) applicable to this subpart. NESHAP Subpart FFFF X X 63.2450 requires compliance with limits in Tables 1-7, which include reducing total organic HAP in vent streams by either 95% or 98%, and provide an option for control using a flare meeting requirements of 63.982(b) which requires meeting 63.987, which requires a flare to meet the requirements of 63.11(b) 63.2540 and Table 12 allow for AMEL by making 63.6(g) applicable to this subpart.

    As shown in Table 1, the applicable rules require that control devices achieve destruction efficiencies of either 95 percent or 98 percent either directly, or by reference, or allow control by flares meeting the flare operating requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 or 63.11. The flare operating requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 63.11 specify that flares shall be: (1) Steam-assisted air-assisted, or non-assisted; 2 (2) operated at all times when emissions may be vented to them; (3) designed for and operated with no visible emissions (except for periods not to exceed a total of 5 minutes during any 2 consecutive hours); and (4) operated with the presence of a pilot flame at all times. The flare operating requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 63.11 also specify requirements for both the minimum heat content of gas combusted in the flare and the maximum exit velocity at the flare tip.3 These provisions specify maximum flare tip velocities based on flare type (non-assisted, steam-assisted or air-assisted) and the net heating value of the flare vent gas (see 40 CFR 60.18(c)(3), 63.11(b)(6)). These maximum flare tip velocities are required to ensure that the flame does not “lift off” or separate from the flare tip, which could cause flame instability and/or potentially result in a portion of the flare gas being released without proper combustion. Proper combustion for flares is considered to be 98 percent destruction efficiency or greater for HAPs and VOCs, as discussed in our recent proposal titled ”Petroleum Refinery Sector Risk and Technology Review and New Source Performance Standards,” 79 FR 36,880, 36,904-36,912 (June 30, 2014).

    2 While Dow and ExxonMobil describe their flares as “pressure-assisted,” these flares qualify as “non-assisted” flares under 40 CFR 60.18(b) or 63.11(b) because they do not employ assist gas.

    3 These requirements are not all inclusive. There are other requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 63.11 relating to monitoring and testing that are not described here.

    The MPGF proposed by both Dow and ExxonMobil are conceptually similar yet inherently different in both flare head design and operation than the more traditional steam-assisted, air-assisted and non-assisted flare types currently able to comply with the flare operating requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 or 63.11. The MPGF technology operates by using the pressure upstream of each individual flare tip burner to enhance mixing with air at the flare tip due to high exit velocity, which allows the MPGF to operate with smokeless burning. The MPGF are constructed differently than normal elevated flares in that they consist of many rows of individual flare tips which are approximately 8 feet above ground level. The ground flare staging system opens and closes staging valves according to gas pressure such that stages containing multiple burners are activated as the flow and pressure increase or decrease in the header. While information supplied by Dow, and relied on by both Dow and ExxonMobil, indicates that the flare tips operate smokelessly and achieve high destruction efficiencies, the MPGF cannot meet the exit velocity requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 40 CFR 63.11, which limit the exit velocity at the flare tip to a maximum of 400 feet per second. The exit velocities from MPGF typically range from 600 feet per second up to sonic velocity (which ranges from 700 to 1,400 feet per second for common hydrocarbon gases), or Mach =1 conditions. As a result, Dow and ExxonMobil are seeking an alternative means of complying with the flare operating requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 63.11; specifically, the exit velocity requirements in 40 CFR 60.18(c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) and in 40 CFR 63.11(b)(6),(b)(7) and (b)(8).

    B. Alternative Means of Emission Limitation

    As noted in Table 1, the specific rules in 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63, or the General Provisions for parts 60, 61 and 63 of the CAA 4 allow a facility to request an AMEL. These provisions allow the Administrator to permit the use of an alternative means of complying with an applicable standard, if the requestor demonstrates that the alternative achieves at least an equivalent reduction in emissions. The EPA must provide notice of the request and an opportunity for a public hearing on the request. After considering comments received, the EPA will issue a notice permitting the use of an alternative means of emission limitation, if the Administrator determines that the alternative will achieve an equivalent reduction in emissions.

    4 CAA section 111(h)(3) states: “If after notice and opportunity for public hearing, any person establishes to the satisfaction of the Administrator that an alternative means of emission limitation will achieve a reduction in emissions of any air pollutant at least equivalent to the reduction in emissions of such air pollutant achieved under the requirements of paragraph (1), the Administrator shall permit the use of such alternative by the source for purposes of compliance with this section with respect to such pollutant.” Section 112(h)(3) contains almost identical language.

    II. Requests for Alternative Means of Emission Limitation A. Dow AMEL

    In its August 5, 2014, request, Dow indicates that it plans to construct and operate two new MPGFs at its Texas Operations site in Freeport, TX. One MPGF would be located at Dow's Propane Dehydrogenation Plant (PDH-1), scheduled to start-up in early 2015 and whose primary product is propylene. The other MPGF would be located at Dow's Light Hydrocarbons Plant (LHC-9), scheduled to start-up in early 2017 and whose primary product is ethylene.

    The flare systems proposed for use by Dow at both plants consist of a staged design concept. The first stage, which is not at issue nor specifically part of the notice requesting an AMEL because it can meet the flare operating requirements of 40 CFR of 60.18 and 63.11, is a steam-assisted ground flare which has the primary function of controlling waste gases during periods of normal operation. The remaining stages consist of arrays of pressure-assisted flare tips (the MPGFs) and will control waste gases during periods of upset, maintenance, startup and shutdown (high-pressure, high flow periods). Pressure-assisted flares are also known as sonic flares because the exit velocity during periods of high-pressure feeds is at sonic velocities.

    At Dow, Stage 1 is the low pressure stage in which the flare acts as a steam-assisted flare. Stages 2 and beyond are activated for high-pressure/high exit velocity flows. The flare system is surrounded by a panel type fence to protect nearby workers from the radiant heat from the flare system. At various times ranging from 2 hours for startup of processing equipment to 160 hours for a complete plant shutdown, Dow will have emissions from the MPGF for the following maintenance, start-up and shutdown (MSS) activities: Perform plant start-up and shutdown, process equipment startup and shutdown, off-spec flaring, non-routine clearing and commissioning of process equipment and piping, fuel purging and flaring to maintain pressure of the net-gas system.

    Dow conducted testing on the two types of individual flare tips in its MPGF design to demonstrate that the MPGF can achieve good combustion efficiency under certain conditions and has proposed operating requirements for these MPGF that can achieve the emissions standards in the applicable NSPS and NESHAP. These proposed operating requirements are contained in Dow's request dated August 5, 2014, located in the docket for this document. A summary of test data and a complete copy of the emission testing report and appendices are available in the docket. The tests were conducted on individual flare tips because it is not possible to test the full field of MPGF because of the size and configuration of the full-scale MPGF installation (there are approximately 300 flare tips in the proposed array pattern that cover the size approximately equivalent to that of a football field in the actual installations). Although two flare tip types were tested during the effort, the results of one burner type, a steam-assisted flare burner, John Zink model SKEC, are not discussed further as Dow is not seeking an AMEL for this burner because it operates at lower velocity and, thus, can meet the existing flare operating requirements.

    B. ExxonMobil AMEL

    In its October 21, 2014, request, ExxonMobil indicates it plans to construct and operate two MPGFs, one at its Baytown Olefins Plant (BOP) in Baytown, TX, and the other at its Mont Belvieu Plastics Plant (MBPP) in Mont Belview, TX. Both of the proposed control strategies will be designed such that vent gases are routed to either a low pressure system, or in infrequent cases where high-pressure/high flow events occur, the high pressure MPGF. Both low pressure control systems at the BOP and MBPP consist of an elevated flare, but the MBPP low pressure control system also consists of three flameless thermal oxidizers. The elevated flares at both the BOP and MBPP will comply with 40 CFR 60.18 and/or 40 CFR 63.11, as applicable.

    ExxonMobil did not supply any additional test data, but rather is relying on a series of publically available MPGF emissions tests, among them the 2013 test submitted by Dow, a 2012 test done by Marathon Petroleum Corporation, LP, a 2006 pipeline burner test done by Dow, and two earlier tests conducted by the EPA in the 1980s. ExxonMobil indicates that the BOP and MBPP burner tip designs will have comparable performance to the burners recently tested and submitted December 14, 2014, supplemental application containing additional information on plans to use the John Zink LRGO burners for the MPGF installation at the MBPP, and ZEECO burners at the BOP. ExxonMobil asserts that the ZEECO burner design provides equivalent combustion efficiency and flame stability as that of the John Zink burners tested, although ExxonMobil has not supplied any data or information that could confirm this assertion of equivalency. We are requesting comment on this assertion as well as specifically soliciting data and comments from the public on burner design and performance of these MPGF burners.

    C. EPA's Analysis of MPGF Burner Emission Tests

    Dow and ExxonMobil are proposing to follow all of the flare operating requirements contained in either 40 CFR 60.18 or 63.11, except for the exit velocity requirements. They are proposing to operate their high pressure MPGFs at higher velocity than the current requirements because their data indicate that these burners can operate with a stable flame at higher velocities and still achieve good combustion and destruction efficiencies. Instead of complying with the exit velocity requirements in 40 CFR 60.18 and 63.11, Dow and ExxonMobil are requesting that EPA grant their AMEL requests to allow them to operate the high pressure sections of their MPGFs such that the vent gas flowing to the flare tips is maintained with a net heating value that has been demonstrated to be equal to or greater than the values that were determined to achieve a reduction in emissions of pollutants being controlled by a steam-assisted, air-assisted or non-assisted flare complying with the requirements of either 40 CFR 63.11(b) or 40 CFR 60.18(b) during the burner emission tests.

    In the emission tests, the high pressure burners were subjected to a number of different operating conditions, and each set of conditions represented a separate test series. For purposes of this discussion, the relevant test results are those from Dow's 2013 test report, which are comprised of runs from test series P1 through P4 and were tested on John Zink's pressure assisted flare burner model LRGO-HC, as well as emissions data reported in Marathon's 2012 test report, which are from test series PA1 and PA2 and were tested on John Zink's pressure assisted flare burner model LRGO-D. These tests used the analytical technique of passive fourier transform infrared (PFTIR) spectroscopy to assess combustion efficiency. Dow's 2013 test report also presents data collected using an extractive method where flue gas was extracted from a collection hood that was suspended above the burner tip and analyzed using standard EPA methods. The Marathon 2012 test report (see “Performance Test of Steam-Assisted and Pressure-Assisted Ground Flare Burners with Passive FTIR—Garyville”) and the Dow 2013 test report (see “Report on Emissions Testing of Pressure Assisted LRGO-HC and Steam Assisted SKEC Burners”) are provided in the docket.

    The results of the PFTIR testing indicated that when a flame was present on the pressure-assisted flare burners tested that an average combustion efficiency of 99 percent or greater was always achieved. Each set of operating conditions tested by both Dow and Marathon for both combustion efficiency and flame stability generally consisted of a series of triplicate runs. In all, a total of 34 test runs were analyzed from these two tests (21 from Dow's P1 through P3 test series and 13 from Marathon's PA1 and PA2 test series). For test series P4, which was conducted as part of Dow's 2013 test using a 90 volume percent hydrogen/10 volume percent natural gas mixture, no combustion efficiency test was conducted; instead, a qualitative indication that the flame was stable at the conditions tested was made. We note that in Dow's 2013 test report that three of the 21 test runs were aborted because of loss of flame (which we refer to as flameout); only two of the three test runs (one in the P2H series and one in the P2L series) produced enough information before flameout to be analyzed in more detail. We requested more detailed information from Dow on the conditions that resulted in this loss of flame as it informs us of the conditions that would create a failure of the burners to sustain a stable flame and achieve good combustion. This document is included in the docket titled “Supplement 1 to Dow report.” Additionally, we also note that in Marathon's 2012 test report that two of the 13 test runs also experienced loss of flame (test PA1 Runs 4(2) and 4(4)). The results of all of these test runs are discussed in the memorandum titled “Review of Available Test Data on Multipoint Ground Flares,” located in the docket.

    There are two general conclusions from these test reports that are consistent with the earlier EPA 1985 study done on pressure-assisted flares (see conclusions on pages 2-19 and 2-22 in September 1985 EPA report titled “Evaluation of the efficiency of industrial flares: Flare head design and gas composition”). The first is that “flare head design can influence the flame stability curve.” This is evident in Figures 2-3 and 2-5 of the 1985 EPA report where different stability curves were generated for the different flare heads (burners) tested over a range of differing exit velocities and flare gas net heating values. When comparing the current maximum flare tip velocity requirements in the general provisions with those tested on pressure-assisted flare burners, this conclusion still holds true. The agency's current requirements would require that flares meet an increasing minimum net heating value with increasing velocity, all the way up to a minimum waste gas net heating value of 1,000 BTU/scf and maximum velocity of 400 feet per second. However, the recent test reports on pressure-assisted burners show that flame stability can be achieved at significantly higher velocities (i.e., sonic velocity) with waste gas net heating values below 1,000 BTU/scf. The second general conclusion made from EPA's 1985 study is that “stable flare flames and high (>98-99) combustion and destruction efficiencies are attained when flares are operated within operating envelopes specific to each flare burner and gas mixture tested. Operation beyond the edge of the operating envelope can result in rapid flame de-stabilization and a decrease in combustion and destruction efficiencies.” The data where flameout of the burners occurred from test runs in both the Marathon 2012 test report and the Dow 2013 test report showed that the flare operating envelope was different for the different gas mixtures tested. Additionally, it was observed that combustion degradation beyond the edge of the operating envelope for pressure-assisted MPGF burners was so rapid that when a flame was present, the flare would still achieve a high level of combustion efficiency right up until the point of flameout.

    In order to assess the proper operating envelope for these flare types, the EPA evaluated both the net heating value (in BTU/scf), which is how the 40 CFR part 60 and 63 General Provisions currently address combustion zone properties, as well as the lower flammability limit (LFL) because the LFL may be a better indicator of performance than net heating value for some flare vent gas streams, notably those with the potential for high hydrogen content. Hydrogen is relatively flammable, but its net heating value is low on a BTU/scf basis when compared to other hydrocarbons. By using LFL, we eliminate the need to correct the hydrogen heat content or to select a lower BTU/scf limit for high hydrogen cases. Although Dow has requested operating limits in the form of BTU/scf and has presented the test data in BTU/scf, we believe it is important to consider both types of operating limits.

    Our review indicates that the LRGO burners tested achieve a high level of combustion efficiency when the lower flammability limit of waste gases burned in the flare is less than 6.5 volume percent (vol%) LFL or above 800 BTU/scf. We suggest the 6.5 vol% LFL based on the flammability of the stream during the flame out conditions experienced during the high pressure test run P2H1 (at 6.6 vol% LFL). The corresponding BTU content of the waste gas at this value was 789 BTU/scf (according to Dow, the gas chromatograph analysis indicated this value was 746 BTU/scf, although the John Zink report based on measured flow rates indicated it was 789 BTU/scf). Dow's proposed operating conditions included startup/shutdown cases where the waste gas heat content could be as low as 690 BTU/scf and as high as 6.9 vol% LFL, and data from these tests indicate that good combustion can occur at these conditions. However, to establish the alternative operating requirements at a level that ensures good combustion and flame stability at all times under all operating conditions, we believe it is reasonable to establish the heat content requirements for BTU/scf above which there were no flame out observations. For LFL, that level would be set below which there are no flame out observations. This is because gas mixtures with a relatively high LFL are less flammable when released to the air than mixtures with a relatively low LFL. A gas mixture with a relatively high LFL requires a larger volume of the mixture to burn in a specific volume of air, than would a mixture of gases with a relatively low LFL being combusted in that same volume of air. We believe the flame out observations establish the limiting case because a flameout is a complete failure of the burner, indicating zero-percent combustion. Because of the quantity of waste gases potentially flared in the high-pressure zones of these MPGF, we believe it would be prudent to establish limits on the conservative side to prevent air emissions of unburned waste gas.

    We also reviewed whether we should consider velocity or burner operating pressure in describing conditions that should be met during the MPGF operation and whether we should require some testing to ensure that the individual burners will ignite properly when a new stage goes into service. Dow provided information on its process control system and indicated that cross-light testing (testing of burner ignition from pilots) of individual burners at its off-site test facility has been conducted and the burners performed as expected. This discussion, titled “Process control system overview-multipoint ground flare system,” is in the docket for this action. At this time, we are not considering any requirements for additional process control or ignition testing. However, we believe it would be important to require that cameras are installed and operated such that operators have a visual indication of flames from the flare at all times that the MPGF is operating and that this footage be available for inspection by the permitting agency, along with operational records of the waste gas flowrate, pressure in header and stages, pilot and waste gas composition.

    Because these flares are located at ground level, it is possible that ambient concentrations of pollutants could be higher than they would be under an alternative scenario where waste gases would be flared in an elevated flare, enabling greater dispersion and potentially lessening the impact to neighboring communities. To that end, we are soliciting comment on whether additional ambient monitoring is warranted to provide for immediate notification to emergency planning officials and the community during significant events and malfunctions of the system.

    III. AMEL for Pressure-Assisted MPGF

    Considering the above requests from both Dow and ExxonMobil, we are seeking the public's input on the operating requirements for the proposed pressure-assisted MPGFs that would be used by both companies which would establish an AMEL that will achieve a reduction in emissions at least equivalent to the reduction in emissions being controlled by a steam-assisted, air-assisted or non-assisted flare complying with the requirements of either 40 CFR 63.11(b) or 40 CFR 60.18(b). Information provided in the AMEL requests and the available emissions test data from the test reports described above indicate that the following list of operating requirements for pressure-assisted MPGF result in destruction efficiencies at least equivalent to destruction efficiencies expected from complying with the requirements of 40 CFR 63.11(b) and 40 CFR 60.18(b) for the pressure-assisted MPGF being proposed for use by both Dow and ExxonMobil:

    1. The flare system must be designed and operated such that the net heating value of the combustion zone gas (NHVcz) for the pressure assisted flare burners meets a minimum heating value of 800 BTU/scf or a lower flammability limit of the combustion zone gas (LFLcz) of less than or equal to 6.5 percent by volume under all conditions. We would expect owners or operators to calculate NHVcz and LFLcz in a manner similar to those in the currently proposed requirements of 79 FR 36980-40 CFR 63.670(l)-(m).

    2. The flare system must be operated with a flame present at all times when in use. Each row of flare burners must have at least one pilot with a constant pilot flame. The pilot flame(s) must be continuously monitored by a thermocouple. The time, date and duration of any loss of pilot flame must be recorded. Each monitoring device must be maintained or replaced at a frequency in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.

    3. The flare system must be operated with no visible emissions except for periods not to exceed a total of 5 minutes during any 2 consecutive hours. A video camera can be used in order to conduct visible emission observations since operating personnel cannot enter the fenced area while the MPGF is operating.

    4. The operator must install and operate an on-line vent gas flow meter and an on-line gas chromatograph to measure the flow and composition of the vent gas to each flare. We would expect the operator to comply with similar monitoring and testing requirements and recordkeeping and reporting requirements for these monitoring systems as currently proposed in 79 FR 36980-40 CFR 63.670(i)-(j) and (l)-(m).

    5. The operator should install and operate pressure and/or flow monitors on each stage of the flare. We would expect the operator to comply with similar applicable monitoring and testing requirements and recordkeeping and reporting requirements for these monitoring systems as currently proposed in 79 FR 36980-40 CFR 63.670(i).

    IV. Request for Comments

    We solicit comments on all aspects of these requests for an AMEL. We specifically seek comment regarding whether or not the potential alternative operating requirements listed in section III above would be adequate for ensuring that the MPGF will achieve good combustion at all times and enable the facilities to meet their applicable emission standards. Additionally, several other entities have indicated to us that they intend to make similar requests for the ability to operate pressure-assisted MPGFs. We are also soliciting comment on whether the requirements listed above, if followed by these other entities, could enable these other facilities to receive approval of their own AMELs. As noted in section II.B above, we also solicit comment and data on other pressure-assisted flare burner types. Commenters should include data or specific examples in support of their comments.

    Dated: February 3, 2015. Janet G. McCabe, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03064 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health 42 CFR Part 11 [Docket Number NIH-2011-0003] RIN 0925-AA52 Clinical Trials Registration and Results Submission AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is extending the public comment period for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Clinical Trials Registration and Results Submission. The proposed rule was published on November 21, 2014 (79 FR 69566) with a deadline for public comments of February 19, 2015. The comment period is being extended to provide additional time for commenters to prepare their responses. The comment period will close at 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) on March 23, 2015.

    DATES:

    Comments on the NPRM must be received before 5 p.m. EST on March 23, 2015 in order to ensure we will be able to consider the comments when preparing the final rule and policy.

    ADDRESSES:

    Individuals and organizations interested in submitting comments on the NPRM, identified by RIN 0925-AA52 and Docket Number NIH-2011-0003, may do so by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions: Use Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. NIH is no longer accepting comments submitted directly by email. The NIH encourages you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Written Submissions: You may submit written submissions by Fax at 301-402-0169, or by Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (For paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions) to: Jerry Moore, NIH Regulations Officer, Office of Management Assessment, 6011 Executive Boulevard, Suite 601, MSC 7669, Rockville, MD 20852-7669.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Regulatory Process: Jerry Moore, NIH Regulations Officer, Office of Management Assessment, Telephone (301-496-4607) (not a toll-free number), Fax (301-402-0169), or by email at [email protected]

    Technical Information: Jerry Sheehan, Assistant Director for Policy Development, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Telephone (301-496-6221) (not a toll-free number), Fax (301-402-2586), or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    HHS published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Clinical Trials Registration and Results Submission in the Federal Register on November 21, 2014 (79 FR 69566). The NPRM proposes requirements for submitting registration and summary results information, including adverse event information, for specified clinical trials of drugs (including biological products) and devices and for pediatric postmarket surveillances of a device to ClinicalTrials.gov, the clinical trial registry and results data bank operated by the National Library of Medicine. The proposed rule provides for the expanded registry and results data bank specified in Title VIII of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) to enhance patient enrollment, provide a mechanism to track subsequent progress of clinical trials, provide more complete results information, and enhance patient access to and understanding of the results of clinical trials. The deadline for written comments was originally established as February 19, 2015. Since the NPRM was published, the Department has received requests to extend the period for the public submission of comments. Effective with this notice, we are extending the comment period with a deadline of 5 p.m. EST on March 23, 2015.

    NIH published a related request for public comments on a draft NIH Policy on Dissemination of NIH-Funded Clinical Trial Information in the NIH Guide for Contracts and Grants (NOT-OD-15-019) on November 19, 2014. See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-15-019.html. The draft NIH Policy aims to promote broad and responsible dissemination of information on clinical trials funded by the NIH through registration and submission of summary results information to ClinicalTrials.gov. The original deadline for written comments on the draft NIH Policy was February 19, 2015, but the deadline is also being extended until 5 p.m. EST on March 23, 2015.

    Instructions for Submitting Comments: We welcome comments from the public on all issues set forth in the proposed rule, and on specific issues identified in the document. All submissions received must include the agency name, the Docket No., and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All comments received at http://www.regulations.gov may be posted without change, including any personal information provided. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means NIH will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. You can assist us in considering your comment by referencing the number assigned to each key issue discussed in section III.C of the preamble or the number of the section of this proposed rule to which your comment relates. For access to background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number found in the brackets in the heading of this document into the “Search” box and follow the prompts.

    Dated: January 16, 2015. Francis S. Collins, Director, National Institutes of Health. Approved: February 5, 2015. Sylvia Mathews Burwell Secretary, HHS.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02990 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 25, 73, and 76 [MB Docket No. 14-127; FCC 14-209] Expansion of Online Public File Obligations to Cable and Satellite TV Operators and Broadcast and Satellite Radio Licensees AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Commission proposes to expand to cable operators, satellite TV providers, broadcast radio licensees, and satellite radio licensees the requirement that public inspection files be posted to the FCC's online database. In 2012, the Commission adopted online public file rules for broadcast television stations that required them to post public file documents to a central, FCC-hosted online database rather than maintaining the files locally at their main studios. Now that television broadcasters have completed their transition to the online file, the Commission believes it is appropriate to commence the process of expanding the online file to other media entities to extend the benefits of improved public access to public inspection files and, ultimately, reduce the burden of maintaining these files.

    DATES:

    Comments may be filed on or before March 16, 2015, and reply comments may be filed April 14, 2015. Written comments on the proposed information collection requirements, subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13, should be submitted on or before April 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by MB Docket No. 14-127, by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

    People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: (202) 418-0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.

    In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection requirements contained herein should be submitted to the Federal Communications Commission via email to [email protected] and to [email protected] and also to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via email to [email protected] For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the supplementary information section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kim Matthews, Media Bureau, Policy Division, 202-418-2154, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 14-209, adopted on December 17, 2014 and released on December 18, 2014. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document will also be available via ECFS at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. Alternative formats are available for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) by sending an email to [email protected] or calling the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This NPRM contains proposed new and modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments should address: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; (d) 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 (e) ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks specific comment on how it might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web page called “Currently Under Review,” (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the “Select Agency” box below the “Currently Under Review” heading, (4) select “Federal Communications Commission” from the list of agencies presented in the “Select Agency” box, (5) click the “Submit” button to the right of the “Select Agency” box, (6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for the Title of this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC submission to OMB will be displayed.

    OMB Control Numbers: 3060-xxxx.

    Title: Sections 25.701, Other DBS Public Interest Obligations, and 25.702, Other SDARS Public Interest Obligations.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: New collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 3 respondents and 3 responses.

    Estimated Hours per Response: 18 hrs.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement, Recordkeeping requirement, Third party disclosure requirement.

    Total Annual Burden: 54 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $592.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to be obtained or retained for benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 319, 332, 605, and 721 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Privacy Act Assessment: The Commission prepared a system of records notice (SORN), FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” that covers the PII contained in the broadcast station public inspection files located on the Commission's Web site. The Commission will revise appropriate privacy requirements as necessary to include any entities and information added to the online public file in this proceeding.

    Needs and Uses: In FCC 14-209, the Commission proposes to expand the requirement that public inspection files be posted to the FCC-hosted online public file database to Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) providers and Satellite Digital Audio Radio Services (SDARS) licensees, among other entities. The Commission's goal is to make information that these entities are already required to make publicly available more accessible, by placing this information online, while also reducing costs both for the government and the public sector. The public and FCC use the information in the public file to evaluate information about the DBS or SDARS entity's performance and to ensure that the entity is operating pursuant to the FCC's rules. In addition, maintenance of political files by DBS and SDARS entities enables the public to assess money expended and time allotted to a political candidate and to ensure that equal access was afforded to other legally qualified candidates for public office.

    OMB Control Numbers: 3060-0214.

    Title: Sections 73.3526 and 73.3527, Local Public Inspection Files; Sections 76.1701 and 73.1943, Political Files.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for profit entities; Not for profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal government; Individuals or households.

    Number of Respondents/Responses: 24,961 respondents; 59,902 responses.

    Estimated Hours per Response: 1-52 hours per response.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement, Recordkeeping requirement, Third party disclosure requirement.

    Total Annual Burden: 1,860,656 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $3,653,372.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Privacy Act Assessment: The Commission prepared a system of records notice (SORN), FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” that covers the PII contained in the broadcast station public inspection files located on the Commission's Web site. The Commission will revise appropriate privacy requirements as necessary to include any entities and information added to the online public file in this proceeding.

    Needs and Uses: In FCC 14-209, the Commission proposes to expand the requirement that public inspection files be posted to the FCC-hosted online public file database to commercial and noncommercial broadcast radio licensees, among other entities. The Commission's goal is to make information that these entities are already required to make publicly available more accessible, by placing this information online, while also reducing costs both for the government and the public sector. Among other things, the public and FCC use the information in the public file to evaluate information about the broadcast licensee's performance and to ensure that the station is addressing issues concerning the community which it is licensed to serve. In addition, maintenance of political files by broadcast and cable entities enables the public to assess money expended and time allotted to a political candidate and to ensure that equal access was afforded to other legally qualified candidates for public office.

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0316.

    Title: 47 CFR Sections 76.1700, Records to be maintained locally by Cable System Operators; 76.1702, Equal Employment Opportunity; 76.1703, Commercial Records on Children's Programs; 76.1707, Leased Access; 76.1711, Emergency Alert System (EAS) Tests and Activation.

    Form Number: Not applicable.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for profit entities.

    Number of Respondents/Responses: 3,000 respondents; 3,000 responses.

    Estimated Hours per Response: 18 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement.

    Total Annual Burden: 54,000 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $591,840.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in Sections 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, and 573 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Privacy Act Assessment: The Commission prepared a system of records notice (SORN), FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” that covers the PII contained in the broadcast station public inspection files located on the Commission's Web site. The Commission will revise appropriate privacy requirements as necessary to include any entities and information added to the online public file in this proceeding.

    Needs and Uses: In FCC 14-209, the Commission proposes to expand the requirement that public inspection files be posted to the FCC-hosted online public file database to cable operators, among other entities. The Commission's goal is to make information that these entities are already required to make publicly available more accessible, by placing this information online, while also reducing costs both for the government and the public sector. Among other things, the public and FCC use the information in the public file to evaluate information about the broadcast licensee's performance and to ensure that the station is addressing issues concerning the community which it is licensed to serve. In addition, maintenance of political files by broadcast and cable entities enables the public to assess money expended and time allotted to a political candidate and to ensure that equal access was afforded to other legally qualified candidates for public office. Section 76.1700 contains the recordkeeping requirements applicable to cable systems, including public inspection file requirements. This NPRM proposes to revise Section 76.1700 to reflect the requirement that cable operators maintain their public inspection file online on the Web site hosted by the FCC. In addition, this NPRM proposes a reorganization of Section 76.1700 to more clearly address which records must be maintained in the public inspection file versus those that must be made available to the Commission or franchising authority upon request. Among other changes, the Commission proposes to clarify that proof-of-performance test data and signal leakage logs and repair data must be made available only to the Commission and, in the case of proof-of-performance test data, also to the franchisor, and not to the public. Accordingly, this information would not be required to be included in the public inspection file or in the online public inspection file.

    Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking I. Introduction

    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”), we propose to expand to cable operators, satellite TV (also referred to as “Direct Broadcast Satellite” or “DBS”) providers, broadcast radio licensees, and satellite radio (also referred to as “Satellite Digital Audio Radio Services” or “SDARS”) licensees the requirement that public inspection files be posted to the FCC's online database. In 2012, we adopted online public file rules for broadcast television stations that required them to post public file documents to a central, FCC-hosted online database rather than maintaining the files locally at their main studios. Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations, Second Report and Order, 77 FR 27631 (May 11, 2012) (“Second Report and Order”). Our goal was to modernize the procedures television broadcasters use to inform the public about how they are serving their communities, to make information concerning broadcast service more accessible to the public and, over time, to reduce the cost of broadcasters' compliance. We initiate this proceeding to extend our modernization effort to include the public file documents that cable operators, DBS providers, and broadcast and satellite radio licensees are required to maintain. While the Commission first included only television broadcasters in its public file database to “ease the initial implementation of the online public file,” television broadcasters have successfully transitioned to the online file over the past two years. Accordingly, we now believe it is appropriate to commence the process of expanding the online file to other media entities in order to extend the benefits of improved public access to public inspection files and, ultimately, reduce the burden on these other entities of maintaining these files.

    II. Background

    2. One of a broadcaster's fundamental public interest obligations is to air programming responsive to the needs and interests of its community of license. To ensure that stations meet this obligation, the Commission relies on viewers and listeners as an important source of information about the nature of a station's programming, operations, and compliance with Commission rules. To provide the public with access to information about station operations, the Commission's rules have long required television and radio broadcast stations to maintain a physical public inspection file, including a political file, at their respective stations or headquarters and to place in the file records that provide information about station operations. The purpose of the public inspection file requirement is to “make information to which the public already has a right more readily available, so that the public will be encouraged to play a more active part in dialogue with broadcast licensees.”

    3. The Commission promulgated its first political file rule in 1938. That initial rule was essentially identical to our current political file regulation in its requirement that the file be available for public inspection and include both candidate requests for time and the disposition of those requests, including the “charges made” for the broadcast time. In 1965, following action by Congress to allow greater public participation in the broadcast licensing process, the Commission adopted a broader public inspection file rule to enable local inspection of broadcast applications, reports, and related documents. The Commission noted that Congress' actions “zealously guarded the rights of the general public to be informed” and that the Commission's goal was to make “practically accessible to the public information to which it is entitled.”

    4. Cable, DBS, and SDARS entities also have public and political file requirements modeled, in large part, on the longstanding broadcast requirements. In 1974, the Commission adopted a public inspection file requirement for cable, noting that “[i]f the public is to play an informed role in the regulation of cable television, it must have at least basic information about a local system's operations and proposals.” The Commission also noted that “[r]equiring cable systems to maintain a public file merely follows our policy for broadcast licensees and is necessary for similar reasons” and that “[t]hrough greater disclosure we hope to encourage a greater interaction between the Commission, the public, and the cable industry.” With respect to DBS providers, the Commission adopted public and political inspection file requirements in 1998 in conjunction with the imposition of certain public interest obligations, including political broadcasting requirements, on those entities. DBS providers were required to “abide by political file obligations similar to those requirements placed on terrestrial broadcasters and cable systems” and were also required to maintain a public file with records relating to other DBS public interest obligations. Finally, the Commission imposed equal employment opportunity and political broadcast requirements on SDARS licensees in 1997, noting that the rationale behind imposing these requirements on broadcasters also applies to satellite radio.

    5. In 2002, Congress adopted the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (“BCRA”) which amended the political file requirements in section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934. 47 U.S.C. 315. The amendments apply to broadcast television, cable, and DBS. The BCRA essentially codified the Commission's existing political file obligations by requiring that information regarding any request to purchase advertising time made on behalf of a legally qualified candidate for public office be placed in the political file. In addition, the BCRA expanded political file obligations by requiring that television, cable, and DBS entities also place in the political file information related to any advertisements that discuss a “political matter of national importance,” including in the case of an issue advertisement the name of the person or entity purchasing the time and a list of the chief executive officers or members of the executive committee or of the board of directors of any such entity.

    A. Online Public File

    6. In 2012 the Commission replaced the decades-old requirement that commercial and noncommercial television stations maintain public files at their main studios with a requirement to post most of the documents in those files to a central, online public file hosted by the Commission. See Second Report and Order, 77 FR 27631 (May 11, 2012). As noted above, the Commission's goals were to modernize the procedures television broadcasters use to inform the public about how they are serving their communities, make information concerning broadcast service more accessible to the public, and reduce broadcasters' cost of compliance. The television online public file rules were the culmination of a more than decade-long effort to make information regarding how a television broadcast station serves the public interest “easier to understand and more accessible,” “promote discussion between the licensee and its community,” and “lessen the need for government involvement in ensuring that a station is meeting its public interest obligation.”

    7. In June 2011, the Commission staff released “The Information Needs of Communities” Report (“INC Report”), a comprehensive report on the current state of the media landscape created by a working group including Commission staff, scholars, and consultants. See www.fcc.gov/infoneedsreport. The INC Report discussed both the need to empower citizens to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities in exchange for the use of public spectrum, and the need to remove unnecessary burdens on broadcasters who aim to serve their communities. The INC Report recommended an online system for public inspection files in order to ensure greater public access. The INC Report further suggested that governments at all levels collect and publish data in forms that make it easy for citizens, entrepreneurs, software developers, and reporters to access and analyze information to enable them to present the data in more useful formats, and noted that greater transparency by government and media companies can help reduce the cost of reporting, empower consumers, and foster innovation.

    8. Based upon commenter suggestions, in the Second Report and Order the Commission determined that each television station's entire public file would be hosted online by the Commission. The Commission took a number of steps to minimize the burden of the online file on stations. Broadcasters were required to upload only those items required to be in the public file but not otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the Commission's Web site. Any document or information required to be kept in the public file and that is required to be filed with the Commission electronically in the Consolidated DataBase System (“CDBS”) is imported to the online public file and updated by the Commission. In addition, television stations were not required to upload their existing political files to the online file; rather, stations were required only to upload new political file content on a going-forward basis. Because of privacy concerns, stations also were not required to upload letters and emails from the public to the online file; rather, they must continue to retain them in a correspondence file at the main studio.

    9. In addition, to smooth the transition for both television stations and the Commission and to allow smaller broadcasters additional time to begin posting their political files online, the Commission phased-in the new political file posting requirement. Stations affiliated with the top four national networks (ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox) and licensed to serve communities in the top 50 Designated Market Areas (“DMAs”) were required to begin posting their political file documents online starting August 2, 2012, but other stations were exempted from posting their political file documents online until July 1, 2014. In the Second Report and Order, the Commission also rejected several proposals in the FNPRM to increase public file requirements in conjunction with implementation of the online file. Rather, the Commission determined that stations would be required to place in their online files only material that is already required to be placed in their local files.

    10. The Commission stated in the Second Report and Order that it was deferring consideration of whether to adopt online posting for radio licensees and multichannel video programming distributors (“MVPDs”) until it had gained experience with online posting of public files of television broadcasters. The Commission noted that starting the online public file process with the much smaller number of television licensees, rather than with all broadcasters and MVPDs, would “ease the initial implementation of the online public file.” In response to the FNPRM, a group of public television licensees requested that the Commission permit NCE radio stations, or at least those licensed to the same entity as, or under common control with, an NCE-TV station, to maintain their public inspection files online on the Commission's Web site on a voluntary basis. While the Commission declined to grant this request, it stated that “as we and the broadcasting industry gain more experience with the online public file we will revisit the possibility of allowing stations not required to use the online public file to use it on a voluntary basis.” In addition, the Commission delegated to the Commission staff “the authority to allow (but not require) radio stations to voluntarily post their public files at such time the staff determines that such an option is feasible and desirable.” To date, the Commission staff has not made this option available to radio stations, instead focusing initially on ensuring that the database was functioning smoothly and was capable of handling the increase in volume once all television stations were required to use the online file beginning July 1, 2014.

    B. Petition for Rulemaking

    11. In July 2014, the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, and the Sunlight Foundation (collectively, “Petitioners” or “CLC”) filed a joint Petition for Rulemaking requesting that the Commission initiate a rulemaking to expand to cable and satellite systems the requirement that public and political file documents be posted to the FCC's online database. See Campaign Legal Center, et al., Petition for Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 14-127, at 1 (July 31, 2014) (“Petition”). The Petitioners argue that cable and satellite services have increasingly become outlets for political advertising. According to Petitioners, political spending on cable is projected to constitute as much as 25 percent of total projected political television spending in the 2014 election cycle. Petitioners also assert that, due to advances in technology, satellite television providers are preparing to sell household-specific “addressable advertising,” a feature that has attracted interest from advertising campaigns. Petitioners assert that moving the television public file online has resulted in “unquestionably substantial” public benefits, which would also arise if cable and satellite systems were required to upload their public and political files online. In addition, Petitioners argue that television broadcasters experienced few problems moving to the online file, and cable and satellite systems would also likely not be burdened by the online filing requirement.

    12. On August 7, 2014, the Media Bureau issued a Public Notice seeking comment on the Petition and, in addition, on whether it should initiate a rulemaking to expand online public file obligations to broadcast radio stations. See Public Notice, Commission Seeks Comment on Petition for Rulemaking Filed by the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, and the Sunlight Foundation Seeking Expansion of Online Public File Obligations to Cable and Satellite TV Operators, Bureau Also Seeks Comment on Expanding Online Public File Obligations to Radio Licensees, 79 FR 51136-01 (August 27, 2014)(“Public Notice”). The National Association of Broadcasters (“NAB”) filed comments supporting the extension of the online public file to cable and satellite providers, stating that there is “no rational basis” for requiring television broadcasters, but not their competitors in the video marketplace, to disclose public and political file material online. The National Cable & Telecommunications Association (“NCTA”) argued that, if the Commission were to open a proceeding to expand online file obligations, it should examine how to tailor any online posting requirements to minimize burdens on cable operators and avoid requiring them to upload files of little interest to the public. With respect to radio, while CLC and the American Public Media Group supported the initiation of a rulemaking to require all radio stations to post their public and political files to the FCC's online database, the majority of commenters addressing this issue either objected to extending the online filing requirement to radio and/or argued that the Commission should carefully consider the financial burden on struggling radio stations as well as the technical and financial challenges to the FCC that would be posed by expanding the online file to include radio. In addition, a number of commenters also argued that extending the online public file to radio at this time is premature and that, at most, the Commission should first consider a voluntary online public file for radio before mandating online filing.

    III. Discussion

    13. We propose to adopt a phased-in approach to expanding the online file requirements to cable and DBS providers and broadcast and satellite radio entities. The implementation of the television online file represents a significant achievement in the Commission's ongoing effort to modernize disclosure procedures to improve access to public file material. Since it was launched on August 2, 2012, more than 650,000 documents have been successfully uploaded into the online file, and the site has generated close to six million page views. Despite initial concerns, NAB characterized the first wave of implementation as “uneventful.” As of July 1, 2014, all television broadcast stations have fully transitioned to the online file and, with this transition now complete, it is time to seek comment on expanding the online file to encompass cable, satellite, and radio public file material.

    14. As the Commission stated in the Second Report and Order, this modernization of the public inspection file is “plain common sense.” The evolution of the Internet and the spread of broadband infrastructure have transformed the way society accesses information today. It is no longer reasonable to require the public to incur the substantial expense and inconvenience of traveling to a station or headquarters' office to review the public file and make paper copies when a centralized, online file would permit review with a quick and essentially costless Internet search.

    A. Benefits of Expanding the Online Public File

    15. Our goal in this proceeding is to modernize the outdated procedures for providing public access to cable, DBS, radio, and SDARS files in a manner that avoids unnecessary burdens on these entities. By taking advantage of the efficiencies made possible by digital technology, we intend to make information that cable and DBS providers and broadcast and satellite radio licensees are already required to make publicly available more accessible while also reducing costs both for the government and the private sector. The Internet is an effective, low-cost means of maintaining contact with, and distributing information to, viewers and listeners. Placing the public file online will permit 24-hour access from any location, without requiring a visit to the site where the paper file is maintained, thereby improving access to information about how cable, satellite, and radio entities are serving their communities and meeting their public interest obligations. As the Commission stated in the Second Report and Order, the public benefits of posting public file information online, while difficult to quantify with exactitude, are unquestionably substantial.

    16. Expansion of the online public file to more media is particularly important with respect to improving public access to political files. As Petitioners point out, political advertising is increasingly shifting from broadcast television to cable and satellite television, and the advent of technological advances such as addressable advertising are likely to further this trend. Political advertising on radio is also on the rise. According to CLC, political advertising expenditures on radio in 2012 ranked third behind spending on broadcast television and cable and could reach as high as 7 percent of overall spending on political advertising in 2014. Adding cable, satellite television, and broadcast and satellite radio political file material to the existing television online database would facilitate public access to disclosure records for all these media and allow the public to view and analyze political advertising expenditures more easily in each market as well as nationwide.

    17. We propose to take the same general approach to transitioning cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS to the online file that the Commission took with television broadcasters, tailoring the requirements as necessary to the different services. We also propose to take similar measures to minimize the effort and cost entities must undertake to move their public files online. Specifically, we propose to require entities only to upload to the online file public file documents that are not already on file with the Commission or that the Commission maintains in its own database. We also propose to exempt existing political file material from the online file requirement and to require only that political file documents be uploaded on a going-forward basis.

    18. With only minor exceptions—requiring cable operators to provide information about the geographic areas they serve, clarifying the documents required to be included in the cable public file, and requiring cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities to provide the location and contact information for their local file—we do not propose new or modified public inspection file requirements in this proceeding. Our goal is simply to adapt our existing public file requirements to an online format. We seek comment on this approach. While we propose to place the entire public file online, we invite comment on whether we should instead require only that certain components of the public file be placed on the Commission's online database. We note that limiting online file requirements to certain components of the public file would require entities to upload certain documents and maintain others in the local public file, thereby potentially imposing a greater burden than moving documents to the online file over time. We seek comment on these issues. One benefit of this proceeding, however, is to ensure that, within a short timeframe, there will be less need for the public to visit the affected entities, which will enable such entities to improve security and minimize risks to employees. We seek comment on these issues, including ways to further reduce the burdens of the public file and limit visits to the affected entities.

    B. Expansion of the Online File to Broadcast Radio

    19. While no commenter responding to the Public Notice opposed the extension of the online public file to cable or DBS providers, as discussed above a number of commenters either opposed imposing online public file obligations on broadcast radio or urged the Commission carefully to consider a number of obstacles unique to radio before requiring radio stations to use the online file. In general, these commenters argue that many radio stations are very small and have limited financial resources and small staffs. Some argue that, for many stations, the additional responsibility of maintaining an online file would take time and resources that would be better devoted to providing local programming and information. Other commenters note that many small stations already face significant economic challenges simply to stay on the air and might be unable to withstand any additional financial pressure an online public file obligation would impose. Finally, some commenters argue that local radio listeners that might be interested in accessing the current public file can do so easily. These commenters contend that moving the public file online would not improve access for current listeners but only encourage complaints from advocacy groups and that responding to these complaints would further strain stations' limited resources.

    20. In the television online public file proceeding, the Commission rejected similar arguments regarding the burden an online file requirement would pose and concluded that the benefits of the online file outweighed any potential burden. The Commission also took a number of steps to minimize the costs of moving public files online, most of which we propose to take in this proceeding as well. With respect to radio, we recognize that concerns regarding the potential cost of an online public file requirement carry more weight, particularly for very small radio stations, which may struggle financially and have fewer resources than small television stations. While we believe that moving toward an online public file makes sense in today's world for all entities that currently have public file requirements, we are committed to considering carefully all concerns raised in this proceeding with respect to potential online file requirements. With respect to broadcast radio licensees, as discussed further below, we propose to commence the transition to an online file with commercial stations in larger markets with five or more full-time employees, while postponing temporarily all online file requirements for other radio stations. We believe that this approach addresses the concerns raised by commenters and will help ensure that the transition to the online file is not unduly burdensome.

    21. We reject the argument that we should not expand the online file requirement to broadcast radio because doing so will benefit only non-local advocacy groups. Making the file available online will make it easier for the public generally to access the file, including local listeners, and will give the Commission and the public the information needed to evaluate whether stations are meeting their responsibilities to their local community.

    C. Online File Capacity and Technical Issues

    22. We recognize that adding cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities to the Commission's online file will greatly increase the number of users of the file and the volume of material that must be uploaded. NAB notes that, if radio stations are required to use the online file, there could be more than 17,500 broadcast entities uploading quarterly issues/programs lists on the same four dates in a year. In addition, we recognize that there is likely to be a heavy demand on the online file during peak political seasons, when many broadcast stations take new advertising orders and modify existing orders on a daily basis. NAB urges the Commission to consider increasing its online capacity to accommodate the significant increase in network traffic that will occur when a large number of filings must be uploaded on the same date and consider ways to stagger filings to relieve network congestion. Other commenters argue the Commission should consider expanding the traditional 10-day filing window for many broadcast reports to a 30-day filing window to place less stress on the database. We seek comment on these proposals to stagger or otherwise alter filing deadlines and any other suggestions for ways in which the Commission could improve performance of its online public file database.

    23. The Commission noted in the Second Report and Order that allowing the use of private web hosting services in connection with the online file would allow for greater station efficiencies. As several commenters note, work to establish an interface between the online file database and web hosting services has not yet been finished. Once work on this interface is completed, we anticipate that this would enable an entity to establish a link between its own privately-maintained electronic file database at the system or station to enable automatic synchronization with the database hosted at the FCC. We recognize that web hosting services could assist many entities with their obligation to maintain the online public file, particularly smaller entities, and continue to examine issues related to implementation of such services. We also intend to investigate adding the capability to permit entities to upload documents to multiple online files using a single upload.

    24. Television stations are not required to upload material to the online file that is already filed with the Commission or available on a Commission database, and we propose to take a similar approach with respect to cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities. Broadcast radio licensees, like television broadcasters, file material electronically with the Commission via CDBS (which is currently being migrated to LMS), which is already connected to the online public file. Filings and data concerning cable systems, however, are currently maintained in the Commission's Cable Operations and Licensing System (“COALS”) database, which does not currently interface with the Commission's online file database. The Commission intends to create a connection between this database and the online file database as appropriate and plans to complete that process before the effective date of any cable online filing requirement that may be adopted in this proceeding.

    D. Proposed Online File Rules for Cable, DBS, Broadcast Radio, and SDARS

    25. In general, we propose to adopt a similar approach with respect to cable, DBS, broadcast and satellite radio online file requirements as we did for the television online file. Specifically, we propose that these entities' entire public files be hosted online by the Commission and that entities be responsible for uploading only items now required to be in the public file but not otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the Commission's Web site. As with the television online file, we propose that the Commission itself upload to the online public file material that is already on file with the Commission or that currently resides in a Commission database.

    26. Political file. With respect to the political file, we also propose that cable operators, broadcast radio licensees, DBS operators, and SDARS entities not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file. Instead, as we required with television licensees, we propose that these entities be permitted to maintain at the station those documents already in place in their political file at the time the new rules become effective, and only upload documents to the online political files on a going-forward basis. Under this proposal, existing political file material must be retained in the local political file at the station or cable system for the remainder of the two-year retention period. Exempting existing political file material from the online file will substantially reduce the burden of transitioning to the online public file while allowing online access to the political file material most likely to be of interest to the public. The retention period for the political file for cable, DBS, and radio is two years, similar to the political file retention period for television stations. Consequently, as the Commission noted in the Second Report and Order, exempting the existing political file will require entities to continue to maintain this file locally only for a relatively short period. Consistent with the requirement we imposed on television broadcasters in the Second Report and Order, we also propose that, following the effective date of the new rules, cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities be required to upload new records to their online political file immediately absent unusual circumstances. We seek comment generally on these proposals.

    27. Organization. In light of the expansion of the online file we propose herein, we invite comment on any steps we might take to improve the organization of the online file and facilitate the uploading and downloading of material. With respect to the television online political file, the Commission designed an organizational structure of folders and subfolders that ensures that the contents of the files are orderly as required by our rules. Each political file is first organized by year, then by type. Beyond that, we “populated” some additional subfolders by creating folders for major races and jurisdictions. The Commission then provided stations with the ability to create additional subfolders and subcategories for specific candidates, or other organizing structure, in compliance with their own practices. We intend to take the same approach in designing the online political file for cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities, and invite comment on this approach. We expect entities required to upload material to the online political file to do so in an organized manner so that candidates and members of public seeking information can easily navigate it.

    28. Compliance dates. We intend to give entities sufficient time to familiarize themselves with the online public file before the effective date of any posting requirement. With respect to documents required to be placed in the file on a “going forward” basis, television stations were required to begin using the online public file upon the effective date of the Second Report and Order, which was 30 days after the Commission announced in the Federal Register that OMB had completed its review under the Paperwork Reduction Act and had approved the information collection. Should we follow the same timeline for documents required to be placed in the file on a “going forward” basis in this proceeding?

    29. With respect to existing public file materials, we also seek comment on the amount of time we should provide entities to upload these documents to the online public file. Television stations were given six months from the effective date of the Second Report and Order to complete the uploading process. Is this amount of time sufficient for cable, DBS, and broadcast and satellite radio? Should we adopt a staggered date by service (cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS) or by some other basis? Should any of these entities be given more time to upload existing files? We note that we propose below to temporarily exempt radio stations in smaller markets from online public file requirements, and seek comment on whether also to temporarily exempt stations with few employees. We propose to permit these stations to commence uploading material to the online file early on a voluntary basis. This would provide these radio stations with more time to upload existing public file material and to budget for any additional cost or staff resources necessary to accomplish this task.

    30. Back-up files. In addition, consistent with the approach the Commission took in the Second Report and Order, we propose that cable, DBS, and broadcast and satellite radio entities not be required to maintain back-up copies of all public file materials. Instead, as we do for the television online file, the Commission itself will create a mirror copy of each public file daily to ensure that, if the data in the online public file are compromised, the file can be reconstituted using the back-up copy. If the Commission's online file becomes temporarily inaccessible for the uploading of new documents, we will require entities to maintain those documents and upload them to the file once it is available again for upload. However, consistent with the approach taken with respect to television broadcasters, we propose that cable, DBS, and all radio entities be required to maintain local back-up files for the political file to ensure that they can comply with their statutory obligation to make that information available to candidates, the public, and others as soon as possible. Stations will only be required to make these backups available if and during such rare times as the Commission's online public file is unavailable and the Commission has tools available to entities that will minimize any burden caused by this requirement. We seek comment on this approach.

    31. Format. The Commission determined in the Second Report and Order that it would not establish specific formatting requirements for documents posted to the online file and we do not anticipate changes to that approach at this time. We propose to require cable, DBS, and broadcast and satellite radio entities to upload any electronic documents in their existing format to the extent feasible; we will then display the documents in both the uploaded format and in a pdf version. To the extent that a required document already exists in a searchable format, we propose to require these entities to upload the filing in that format to the extent technically feasible. We seek comment on these proposals.

    32. Announcements and links. Consistent with the Commission's approach in the Second Report and Order, we propose to require cable operators, DBS providers, and broadcast and satellite radio licensees that have Web sites to place a link to the online public file on their home pages. We also propose that these entities that have Web sites include on their home page contact information for a representative who can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public file. We do not propose that cable and DBS operators or broadcast or satellite radio stations be required to make on-air announcements regarding the change in location of their public file. As required of television stations in the Second Report and Order, however, we propose to require radio stations to revise their on-air pre- and post-filing renewal announcements to reflect the availability of a station's renewal application on the Commission's Web site, as reflected in Appendix B. We invite comment on these proposals.

    33. Location of public inspection file and designated contact information. As the Commission required with respect to television stations, we also propose that cable and DBS operators and broadcast and satellite radio licensees be required to provide information in the online public file about the location of the local public file and the individual who may be contacted for questions about the file. This information would be provided when the operator or licensee first establishes its online public file, but should be updated if and when staffing or location changes occur. We believe this information is necessary to inform the public of the location of the existing political file (until its retention period expires in two years), which will be publicly available at the local public file location, as well as the correspondence folder retained by commercial broadcasters. We seek comment on this proposal.

    34. EEO materials. In the Second Report and Order, we continued to require that television stations make their EEO materials available on their Web sites, if they have one, and we propose to take the same approach in this proceeding with respect to cable operators, DBS providers, and broadcast and satellite radio licensees. Similar to television stations, we propose to permit these entities to fulfill this Web site posting requirement by providing, on their own Web site, a link to the EEO materials on their online public file page on the Commission's Web site. We seek comment on this proposal.

    35. No major changes to public file obligations. Finally, with only minor exceptions, we do not propose to impose new public file obligations on cable, DBS, or broadcast or satellite radio entities in connection with this transition to the online public file. While we propose below a reorganization of the existing cable public file rules for purposes of clarification and seek comment on other minor changes to those rules, our intention for purposes of the initial transition to a centralized, online file for cable operators, DBS providers, and broadcast and satellite radio licensees is to simply adapt our existing requirements to the online file format. We seek comment generally on these proposals.

    36. OVS. We note that Open Video System (“OVS”) operators have several public file obligations. Should OVS operators be required to make this information available on the Commission's online public file database, or is it sufficient that this information be made available by the operator locally? How can we identify those entities that do not have Physical System IDs (“PSIDs”) or facility ID numbers?

    E. Requirements and Issues Unique to Each Service

    37. Certain issues related to the online public file requirement are unique to each service. Accordingly, we address each service separately below and also address whether and how to phase-in certain requirements for each service.

    1. Cable Public Inspection File a. Current Rules

    38. The FCC's rules regarding records to be maintained by cable systems distinguish between records that must be retained for inspection by the public and those that must be made available to Commission representatives or local franchisors only. The rules also impose different recordkeeping requirements based on the number of subscribers to the cable system. Operators of cable systems with fewer than 1,000 subscribers are exempt from many public inspection file requirements, including the political file, sponsorship identification, EEO records, and records regarding children's commercial programming. Operators of systems with between 1,000 and 5,000 subscribers must provide certain information “upon request” but must also “maintain for public inspection” a political file, while operators of systems having 5,000 or more subscribers must “maintain for public inspection” a political file and records regarding, among other things, sponsorship identification, EEO, and children's programming commercials. The rules state that the public inspection file must be maintained “at the office which the system operator maintains for the ordinary collection of subscriber charges, resolution of subscriber complaints, and other business or at any accessible place in the community served by the system unit(s).”

    39. Cable system political file requirements are similar to those for television stations. The political file must contain a “complete and orderly record . . . of all requests for cablecast time made by or on behalf of a candidate for public office” including the disposition of such requests. The file must also show the “schedule of time purchased, when spots actually aired, the rates charged, and the classes of time purchased.” With respect to issue advertisements, the file must disclose the name of the purchasing organization and a list of the board of directors. These records must be filed “immediately absent unusual circumstances,” and must be retained for at least two years.

    b. Proposed Online Public File Requirements (i) Content Required To Be Maintained in the Online File

    40. As discussed above, consistent with the rules we adopted for television broadcasters, we propose to require that cable operators upload to the online public file all documents and information that are required to be in the public file but which are not also filed in COALS or maintained by the Commission on its own Web site. The Commission proposes to import these latter documents or information into the online public file itself.

    41. We note that the only document that cable operators file with the Commission that must also be retained in their public inspection files is the EEO program annual report, which we propose that the Commission upload to the online file. Cable operators are not required to maintain in their public inspection files documents similar to The Public and Broadcasting manual, which television and radio broadcasters must retain in their public files and which the Commission makes available to the online file for television stations and will make available to the online file for radio stations. Accordingly, as the Commission maintains very few documents cable operators must retain in their public inspection files, most documents in the cable online file will be required to be uploaded by cable operators themselves.

    42. Certain information that must be included in cable operators' public files is collected through FCC Form 325 (Annual Cable Operator Report), which is filed annually by cable systems with 20,000 or more subscribers. For example, operators must maintain at the “local office” a “current” listing of the cable television channels delivered to subscribers and must “maintain for public inspection” a list of all broadcast television stations carried in fulfillment of the must-carry requirements. Some of this information is also collected on FCC Form 325. Cable operators required to file the form are required to identify on the form whether a broadcast station is carried pursuant to must-carry obligations, but the form does not request all of the specific information about the system's must-carry channels that is required to be placed in the public file pursuant to 47 CFR 76.1709. We invite comment on whether the Commission should make FCC Form 325 available in the online file for those systems required to file this form annually. We also invite comment on any other ways we can import to the online file information cable operators would otherwise be required to upload to the file themselves in order to reduce the burden on operators of uploading information to the online file.

    43. NCTA requests that the Commission review the ongoing need for channel lineups to be placed in the public inspection file as this information is provided to consumers in paper format and, according to NCTA, is available on operators' Web sites. We seek comment on this request. If most operators maintain this information electronically, we believe it would not be burdensome to require operators to upload this information to the online public file. We seek comment on this view. If we were to require all cable systems to upload channel lineups to the online file, should we require this information to be uploaded or updated annually or on some other schedule? To the extent an operator maintains the required information on a channel lineup its own Web site, we also seek comment on whether the operator should be permitted to provide a link directly to this channel lineup in lieu of uploading this information to the public file.

    44. As discussed below, we propose to clarify our rules regarding proof-of-performance test data and signal leakage logs and repair data. Specifically, we propose to make it clear in our rules that this information must be made available only to the Commission and, in the case of proof-of-performance test data, also to the franchisor, and not to the public. Accordingly, this information would not be required to be included in the online public inspection file, thereby reducing the amount of material cable operators would be required to upload to the file.

    45. We propose that cable systems be required to upload other material currently required to be maintained for public inspection or made available to the public “upon request.” For cable systems with 1,000 or more subscribers, this material would include new political file material, sponsorship identification information, commercial records on children's programs, certain EEO materials, leased access policy information, records concerning operator interests in video programming, and copies of requests for waiver of the prohibition on scrambling/encryption. While cable systems with 1,000 or more subscribers but fewer than 5,000 subscribers are currently required to provide certain materials to the public only “upon request,” we believe these systems should be required to place these materials in the online file as this will facilitate public access to these materials. We believe this requirement will be no more burdensome than placing the materials in a physical file and should be less burdensome over time. We invite comment on this approach.

    46. We also propose to exempt cable systems with fewer than 1,000 subscribers from all online public file requirements, either permanently or at least initially. As discussed above, these systems have far fewer public file requirements than larger systems and are not required to maintain a political file. Alternatively, we could exempt systems with fewer than 1,000 subscribers that maintain public file information on their own Web sites. We seek comment on these possible approaches and any other suggestions for ways we should provide regulatory relief to very small cable systems.

    47. Political file. As discussed above, consistent with the approach we adopted for television broadcasters, we propose that cable operators not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file; rather, we propose that they be permitted to maintain existing material in their physical political file and only upload documents to the online political file on a going-forward basis. We believe this approach will minimize the burden of transitioning to the online file for cable operators, while providing convenient access to the information most likely to be of interest to the public, and invite comment on this proposal. We note that Time Warner Cable, which is not currently required to maintain its public file online, already posts its political files online to save costs and expedite access to this material. We invite comment on whether there are any aspects of our current cable political file requirements that are unclear and that should be clarified in connection with our proposal to transition to an online political file.

    48. To smooth the transition for both cable operators and the Commission and to allow smaller cable systems additional time to begin posting their political files online, we propose to phase-in the requirement to commence uploading political file documents to the online file for smaller cable systems. We invite comment on ways in which this phase-in period should be structured. One approach would be to start by requiring cable systems with 5,000 or more subscribers to post new political file materials online, while exempting systems with fewer than 5,000 subscribers for some period of time. As cable systems with fewer than 1,000 subscribers are exempt from all political file requirements, this temporary exemption would apply to systems with 1,000 or more subscribers but fewer than 5,000 subscribers. As discussed above, the rules currently exempt systems with fewer than 5,000 subscribers from some recordkeeping requirements, and we invite comment on whether this 5,000 subscriber cutoff should also be used to provide regulatory relief in this context. Another approach would be to define “small cable system” for purposes of the exemption as a system with fewer than 15,000 subscribers that is not affiliated with a larger operator serving more than 10 percent of all MVPD subscribers. The Commission used this definition for purposes of determining eligibility for a streamlined financial hardship waiver in the CALM Act Report and Order. The Commission explained in that Order that it believed that the streamlined waiver “should be available only to those systems that are most likely to face financial hardships in complying with” the Commission's CALM Act requirements. We invite comment on the appropriate definition of “small cable system” for purposes of the political file exemption and on the appropriate period of time we should exempt small systems from the requirement to commence posting political file material online. Should there be a means of providing the public with information regarding which systems' political files are included in the online file, and which are exempt, either temporarily or permanently?

    49. While we are proposing to delay the transition to the online political file for small cable systems, we propose to allow these systems to commence uploading documents to the online political file on a voluntary basis at the same time that online political file requirements become effective for larger cable systems. In addition, if we were to decide to exempt systems with fewer than 1,000 subscribers from all online public file obligations, we propose to allow these systems to participate in the online file database on a voluntary basis. Regardless of whether we determine to delay or exempt small systems from online filing requirements, we believe it is appropriate to permit any system that desires to participate in the online database to do so voluntarily. We invite comment on this proposal.

    50. Geographic information. We propose to require cable operators, when first establishing their online public file, to provide a list of the geographic areas served by the system. The Commission currently lacks precise information about the geographic areas served by cable systems and we believe that making this information available in the online public file will make the information in the file, and especially the political file, more useful to subscribers, advertisers, candidates, and others. We propose to require cable systems to provide information regarding the ZIP Codes served by the system and the Designated Market Area (“DMA”) or areas it serves, and we seek comment on this proposal. We also seek comment on alternative proposals for collecting geographic information, such as Census Block or Census Tract information. We note that operators would have to provide this information when they first establish their public files on the Commission's database, and update it only to reflect changes. Therefore, we do not believe this requirement would be burdensome.

    51. We also invite comment on any ways to facilitate access to the online database by consumers. Cable operators are currently required to maintain their public files on a per-system basis and we tentatively conclude that the same should apply to the online database. However, as NCTA notes, cable public files cannot be organized by call sign and the analogous unit, a physical system identifier, is not readily known by consumers. If we require cable operators to provide information on the geographic area served by the system, should we use that geographic information to help identify cable systems in the cable online file? Are there other ways in which systems can be identified to consumers so that they can quickly find the information they are seeking?

    (ii) Clarification and Streamlining of Current Recordkeeping Requirements

    52. NCTA argues that we should streamline cable public file requirements to avoid requiring cable operators to incur the cost of posting unnecessary material. While we decline to undertake a comprehensive review of cable public inspection file requirements in this proceeding, we seek comment on several issues raised by NCTA and propose to clarify certain requirements. First, NCTA asks that we eliminate the requirement that proof-of-performance and signal leakage information be retained in the public inspection file. We note that the current recordkeeping rules regarding this information are unclear. While 47 CFR 76.1700(a), which sets out recordkeeping requirements, includes “proof-of-performance test data” and “signal leakage logs and repair records” in the list of items either to be made available “upon request” (for systems with 1,000 or more but fewer than 5,000 subscribers) or to be maintained in the public inspection file (for systems with 5,000 or more subscribers), the rule sections specifically addressing these requirements require only that this information be maintained for inspection by the Commission and local franchisor. We agree with NCTA that this information is unlikely to be of interest to the general public and does not need to be made available online. Accordingly, we propose to clarify that this information must be maintained and made available to the Commission and franchisor upon request, but does not need to be maintained in the system's public inspection file or uploaded to the online file. We seek comment on this proposal.

    53. Second, NCTA requests that the Commission evaluate whether it should exclude headend location information from any online public inspection file as it is of no interest to the general public and revealing this information in a centralized database available to Internet users “raises potentially serious security risks.” We propose to exclude headend location information from the online public file and seek comment on this proposal.

    54. Third, NCTA requests that the Commission consider eliminating the current requirement that cable operators post certain EEO materials on the system's own Web site, if it has one, as these materials would be available on the Commission's online public file. As discussed above, in the Second Report and Order, we continued to require that television stations make certain EEO materials available on their Web sites, if they have one, and we propose to take the same approach in this proceeding with respect to cable operators, DBS providers, and broadcast and satellite radio licensees. Consistent with the rules for television stations, however, we propose to permit these entities to fulfill this Web site posting requirement by providing, on their own Web site, a link to the EEO materials on their online public file page on the Commission's Web site.

    (iii) Reorganization of the Cable Public Inspection File Rules

    55. We believe that a limited reorganization and clarification of the public inspection file rules would make them easier to locate and understand. The public inspection file rules for broadcasters are contained in two rule sections that identify all public inspection file requirements for commercial and noncommercial educational broadcasters, with references to other rule sections as appropriate. In contrast, the cable recordkeeping requirements are spread over several rule sections in part 76, subpart U (Documents to be Maintained for Inspection), with some requirements contained in a separate rule subpart. While 47 CFR 76.1700 of the rules includes references to many of these recordkeeping requirements it does not cite them all. Revising our rules to identify all cable recordkeeping requirements in a single rule section, with references to other sections as appropriate, would make these requirements easier to locate and facilitate compliance. Moreover, as confirmed by our discussion above regarding maintenance of proof-of-performance and signal leakage information, some of the current rules are confusing and inconsistent. We propose to revise 47 CFR 76.1700 to include references to all public inspection file requirements and to more clearly address which records must be maintained in the file versus those that must be made available to the Commission or franchising authority. We invite comment on these proposed revisions, which are set out in Appendix B.

    2. DBS Public Inspection File a. Current Rules

    56. DBS providers are required to maintain a public file containing four categories of information: Information regarding compliance with the carriage obligation for noncommercial programming (the “noncommercial set-aside”); information regarding compliance with the commercial limits in children's programming; certain EEO materials; and a political file. With respect to the noncommercial set-aside, the rules require that DBS providers “keep and permit public inspection of a complete and orderly record of,” among other things, measurements of channel capacity, a record of entities to whom noncommercial capacity is being provided, the rates paid by the entity to whom capacity is provided, and a record of entities requesting capacity and the disposition of those requests. With respect to compliance with the children's programming commercial limits, DBS providers airing children's programming must maintain records sufficient to verify compliance with the rules and “make such records available to the public.” With respect to EEO materials, DBS operators are required to maintain in their public file EEO reports and certain EEO program information.

    57. DBS providers are also required to “keep and permit public inspection of a complete and orderly political file” and to “prominently disclose the physical location of the file and the telephonic and electronic means to access” it. The file must include, among other things, records of “all requests for DBS origination time” and the schedule of time purchased, when spots actually aired, the rates charged, and the classes of time purchased for each request. These records must be placed in the file “as soon as possible” and must be retained for at least two years. Unlike broadcasters and cable systems, DBS providers must “make available via fax, email, or by mail upon telephone request, photocopies of documents in their political files and shall assist callers by answering questions about the contents of their political files.” In 2004, the Commission explained that it was requiring DBS providers to abide by political file obligations similar to those requirements placed on terrestrial broadcasters and cable systems. Because DBS is a national service and each provider's headquarters is not necessarily readily accessible to most of its viewers and to candidates, we require DBS providers to make their political files available upon telephone or electronic request. They may provide access to the file by fax, email, via Internet Web site access, or, if so requested, by mailing photocopies of the documents in their political files. We expect that DBS providers will assist callers by promptly answering questions about how to access the contents of the DBS providers' political files. DBS providers may require individuals requesting documents to pay for photocopying if the requester prefers delivery by mail, but the DBS provider must pay for postage. DBS providers are encouraged to put their political files on their respective Web sites but must provide alternatives for individuals who do not have Internet access. In view of these requirements and expectations, we do not find it necessary to require that a provider maintain a public file in every community that receives its signal. We do, however, require, that DBS providers prominently disclose the toll-free telephone number and email address of the department responsible for responding to requests for access to the political file. In addition, because DBS experience with the political broadcasting rules is relatively new, and to facilitate a future Staff Report, we will require that DBS providers maintain all requests for time from candidates or individuals on behalf of candidates, including general requests for availabilities and rate information. In addition, and for the same reasons, DBS providers will be required to retain information in their political files for four years, until 2006, and thereafter for two years, as is required of cable operators and terrestrial broadcast stations.

    b. Proposed Online Public File Requirements

    58. We propose to treat DBS providers in the same manner as television, cable, and broadcast and satellite radio entities by requiring them to upload to the online file only material that is not already on file at the Commission. Similar to cable operators, the only document that DBS providers file with the Commission that must also be retained in their public inspection files is the EEO program annual report, which we propose that the Commission upload to the online file. Like cable operators, the other information DBS providers are required to maintain in their public inspection files is not currently filed with or maintained by the Commission. Accordingly, most material required to be kept in the online file would have to be uploaded by DBS providers themselves, which includes channel capacity measurements and other records related to the use of and requests for noncommercial capacity, records related to compliance with children's commercial limits, certain EEO materials, and political file material.

    59. We do not believe that requiring DBS providers to upload this material to the online file would be onerous. As compared to television and radio broadcasters and cable operators, DBS providers have the fewest number of public file requirements. In addition, there are currently only two U.S. DBS operators, each of which has sufficient financial resources to comply with any online file requirements we ultimately adopt in this proceeding. We agree with Petitioners that the transition to an online file is particularly important for DBS because of that service's nationwide reach. Each DBS provider is required to maintain only one public and political file for the entire U.S. at its headquarters, making in-person access very difficult. While staff members must copy and mail public and political file documents upon request under the current rules, making this material available online would considerably improve public access. Moreover, we believe that, for DBS providers, maintaining an online file hosted by the Commission will prove to be more efficient and less expensive over time than maintaining a local file, particularly in light of the extra steps DBS providers are required to take to assist callers requesting materials from the file.

    60. We tentatively conclude, consistent with our approach for television stations and our proposal herein for cable systems and broadcast radio licensees, that DBS providers should not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file but rather should be permitted to maintain existing material in their physical political file and only upload documents to the online political file on a going-forward basis. If we require DBS providers to upload their political files, we propose to eliminate the requirement that they mail photocopies of documents in that file to individuals requesting copies, as these materials would be available online Additionally, to the extent that political file materials relate to ads shown on a local or hyper-local basis, we seek comment on how DBS providers can indicate in their public files the area in which such ads were or will be shown. We also invite comment on whether there are any aspects of our current DBS political file requirements that are unclear and that should be clarified in connection with our proposal to transition to an online political file.

    3. Broadcast Radio Public Inspection File a. Current Rules

    61. The public inspection file rules for radio broadcasters are generally similar to those for television broadcasters. Every permittee or licensee of an AM or FM station in the commercial or noncommercial educational broadcast service must maintain a public inspection file containing, among other things, FCC authorizations, applications, contour maps, ownership reports, EEO materials, issues/programs lists, and time brokerage (also known as “local marketing”) and joint sales agreements. The file must be maintained at the station's main studio.

    62. Radio stations must maintain a political file as part of the public inspection file. The political file must contain a “complete and orderly record” of requests for broadcast time made by or on behalf of a candidate for public office.” The file must also show the “schedule of time purchased, when spots actually aired, the rates charged, and the classes of time purchased.” With respect to issue advertisements, stations must disclose the name of the purchasing organization and a list of the board of directors. These records must be filed “as soon as possible, meaning immediately, absent unusual circumstances,” and must be retained for at least two years.

    b. Proposed Online Public File Requirements (i) Content Required To Be Maintained in the Online File

    63. As discussed above, consistent with the rules we adopted for television broadcasters we propose to require that radio broadcast licensees upload to the online public file all documents and information that are required to be in the public file but that are not also filed in CDBS (or LMS) or otherwise maintained by the Commission on its own Web site. Under this proposal, radio stations would be required to upload citizen agreements, certain EEO materials, issues/programs lists, local public notice announcements, time brokerage agreements, joint sales agreements, materials related to FCC investigations or complaints (other than investigative information requests from the Commission), and any new political file material. We propose that any document or information required to be in the public file that is electronically filed with CDBS (or LMS) will be imported to the online file by the Commission. For radio broadcasters, under this proposal the documents the Commission would upload to the online file include authorizations, applications and related materials, contour maps, ownership reports and related materials, EEO Reports, The Public and Broadcasting manual, and Letters of Inquiry and other investigative requests from the Commission, unless otherwise directed by the inquiry itself.

    64. While all stations will have issues/programs lists and materials related to local public notice announcements, few will have time brokerage agreements and very few will have citizen agreements or materials related to an FCC investigation or complaint. While many stations will have political file material, in general we expect that these files will be smaller for radio stations than for television stations as fewer political advertisements air on radio. In addition, radio stations with fewer than five full-time employees are exempt from many of the EEO recordkeeping requirements. We seek comment on these issues.

    65. Political file. As discussed above, consistent with the approach we adopted for television broadcasters and that we propose herein for cable operators, we propose that broadcast radio licensees not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file, but rather that they be permitted to maintain existing material in their local political file and only upload documents to the online political file on a going-forward basis. We believe this approach will minimize the burden of transitioning to the online file for radio licensees. We seek comment on this approach.

    66. Delay in implementation for small market stations. We propose to implement the online public file for broadcast radio stations by imposing requirements, at first, only on stations with more resources. We propose to delay all mandatory online filing for other radio stations for some period of time. As discussed above, several commenters express concern about whether radio stations have sufficient resources to implement and maintain an online public file, particularly small stations with limited financial resources and small staffs. Some commenters argue that we should postpone any consideration of moving to an online file for broadcast radio or, if we do adopt online file obligations for that medium in this proceeding, that we exempt smaller stations and/or NCE stations. Those advocating an exemption for NCE stations argue that many of these stations have very small staffs and limited resources and that compliance with an online requirement would create a severe financial and staffing hardship. Ampers and NFCB also note that NCEs are prohibited from accepting funds from political candidates and organizations advocating on behalf of a candidate or political issue, making online access to the political file less important for these stations. Other commenters argue that, in order to minimize the risk of online public file requirements becoming the “proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back” for already struggling small radio stations, the Commission should not require small stations to upload the contents of their existing public files, or at least should provide stations with an extended period of time during which they could incrementally add those materials to the online file.

    67. Another issue raised by radio commenters is the lack of computer or Internet access at some small, rural stations. According to NAB, some radio stations in remote locations, including Alaska, Maine, and areas of the Southwest, do not have access to reliable Internet service or even are without Internet access altogether. Other stations have no in-house computing resources or broadband capacity. According to Native Public Media, many Native-owned NCE radio stations operate on Tribal lands where broadband penetration rates are between five and 10 percent. Moreover, according to these commenters, in communities where broadband is theoretically available actual access is often severely hampered by high latency, slow dial-up speeds, and unreliable coverage. Native Public Media argues that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to require stations facing these circumstances to upload large files to the Commission's online database. In addition, these commenters argue that the cost of maintaining an online file would significantly outweigh the benefits in communities where listeners have limited Internet access.

    68. We recognize that some radio stations may face financial or other obstacles that could make the transition to an online public file more difficult. Accordingly, we believe that it is reasonable to commence the transition to an online public file for radio with stations with more resources while delaying, for some period of time, all mandatory online public file requirements for other stations. We propose that other stations be permitted to voluntarily transition to the online file early, but not be required to participate until we have gained some experience with the inclusion of stations with greater resources. Adding radio stations to the online file incrementally over time will give us more time to address any technical issues that may arise in connection with our online file database as the volume of users increases. Given the large number of radio stations and the volume of material they will be uploading to the online file, we believe it makes sense to proceed in stages to include radio stations in the Commission's online database.

    69. We seek comment generally on this approach. Is it appropriate to temporarily exempt a certain category of radio stations from all online public file requirements or should we instead temporarily exempt some stations from only the online political file? How should we define the category of stations that should be eligible for a temporary exemption? We note that, in the television online file proceeding, we implemented the online political file first with television stations in the top 50 DMAs that were also affiliated with the top four networks. With respect to radio, however, network affiliation is not a useful way to identify stations with more resources. Accordingly, we propose to begin implementation of online public file requirements for radio with commercial stations in markets 1 through 50, as defined by Nielsen Audio (formerly Arbitron), that have five or more full-time employees. We propose that these stations commence compliance with online public file requirements at the same time as cable, DBS, and SDARS entities. With respect to all other radio stations, we propose to delay all online public file requirements for two years. This two-year delay is the same length of time we delayed, in the television online file proceeding, the implementation of political file obligations for television stations in smaller markets and those unaffiliated with the top four networks. We propose to initially exempt NCE radio stations as well as those with fewer than five full-time employees from the online public file to help ensure that we commence online file requirements for radio with stations with greater resources. With respect to radio stations with fewer than five full-time employees, as noted above our rules exempt these stations from many EEO requirements. One advantage of tying an exemption for small radio stations to this EEO exemption is that information regarding the stations that are exempt from EEO requirements is readily available to the public, as this information is filed with the FCC and is available via the FCC's Web site. We seek comment on this and any other possible approach to structuring the temporary delay in online file requirements for certain radio stations. We also seek comment on whether we should permanently exclude certain radio stations, such as NCEs and stations with fewer than five full-time employees, from all online public file requirements, rather than simply delaying implementation of online file requirements for these stations.

    70. While we are proposing to delay the transition to the online public file for certain radio stations, we also propose to allow these stations to commence uploading all or part of their public file documents to the online file on a voluntary basis before the delayed effective date of any online file requirement for these stations. As discussed above, public television licensees in the television online file proceeding requested that we allow NCE radio stations, or at least those licensed to the same entity as, or under common control with, an NCE television station, to maintain their public inspection files online on the Commission's Web site on a voluntary basis. Public television licensees argued that this would allow radio stations that were jointly owned or operated with television stations to avoid duplicative efforts from having to maintain two separate public file systems, involving some of the same documents. If we decide to delay implementation of online file requirements for all or some NCEs in this proceeding, we believe it is appropriate to allow them and any other smaller radio station to voluntarily transition to the Commission's online file early. We seek comment on this proposal.

    71. We believe our proposal addresses many of the concerns raised regarding radio stations that may have fewer resources and, therefore, might find transitioning to the online file more burdensome. These stations would not be required to commence uploading documents to the Commission's database until stations with more resources have completed part or all of their transition to the online file. This delayed transition will assist small stations to budget for any initial costs to upload documents to the file and any extra staff time required for this effort. In the meantime, stations may commence uploading documents to the online database early on a voluntary basis. We invite comment on this approach and on ways we can help ensure that permitting stations to commence uploading documents early on a voluntary basis is not confusing to members of the public trying to locate and access public file material.

    (ii) Contour Map and Main Studio Information

    72. Radio stations are currently required to include in their public inspection files “any service contour maps submitted with any application” together with “any other information in the application showing service contours and/or main studio and transmitter location.” We propose to have the Commission create contour maps for the online file based upon existing data. Given the complexities of AM contour mapping, we may not be able to use the same tools that we used to map TV contours and that we anticipate using to map FM contours. We seek comment on ways to address this issue. Should AM stations be required to upload contour maps to the online file?

    73. We also propose to require stations to provide information to the online file regarding the location of the station's main studio. The Commission's rules do not currently require the reporting of this information and it is not included on contour maps. We believe that information regarding the location of the main studio would help members of the public to engage in an active dialogue with radio licensees regarding their service, which is one of the goals of this proceeding. In addition, we believe this information is necessary to inform the public of the location of the correspondence file and existing political file (until its retention period expires in two years), both of which will be publicly available at the station. Therefore, consistent with the approach we took in the television station online file proceeding, we propose to require stations to include in the online public file the station's main studio address and telephone number, and the email address of the station's designated contact for questions about the public file. In addition, we propose that stations with a main studio located outside of their community of license be required to list the location of the correspondence file and existing political file, as well as the required local or toll free number. We seek comment on this proposal.

    (iii) Letters From the Public

    74. In the Second Report and Order, the Commission exempted letters and emails from the public from the online public file and instead required that such material be maintained at the station in a correspondence file. The Commission determined that including these documents in the online file could risk exposing personally identifiable information and that requiring stations to redact such information prior to uploading these documents would be overly burdensome. The Commission determined that letters and emails from the public should be maintained at the station's main studio either in a paper file or electronically on a computer. Further, the Commission clarified that, as required under the current public inspection file rules, this file should include all letters and emails from the public regarding operation of the station unless the letter writer has requested that the letter not be made public or the licensee feels that it should be excluded due to the nature of its content. Finally, the Commission determined that it would not require stations to retain social media messages in their correspondence file. We propose to take the same approach with respect to broadcast radio stations and the letters and emails they receive from the public, and seek comment on this proposal.

    (iv) Donor Lists

    75. NCE stations are required to retain in the public inspection file lists of donors supporting specific programs. Native Public Media asks that, for the same reason the Commission excluded letters and emails from the public from the television online file requirement, donor lists also be excluded from any NCE online file requirements to ensure the privacy of donors. In the Second Report and Order we required NCE television broadcasters to include donor lists in their online public files, and we propose to take the same approach with respect to radio. We seek comment on this issue. Is there a reason to treat NCE radio station donor lists differently from NCE television station donor lists?

    4. Satellite Radio Public Inspection File a. Current Requirements

    76. Licensees in the satellite radio service are required to maintain a public file with two categories of material. First, as discussed above, SDARS licensees are required to comply with EEO requirements similar to those imposed on broadcasters, including the requirement to file EEO reports and to maintain those reports in their public file together with other EEO program information. Second, also as discussed above, satellite radio licensees are required to maintain a political file. In addition, SiriusXM, the current, sole U.S. SDARS licensee, is required to retain a third category of material in the public file. SiriusXM made a voluntary commitment to make capacity available for noncommercial educational and informational programming, similar to the requirement imposed on DBS providers, in connection with its merger application. As part of its approval of the merger, the Commission required that the merged entity reserve channels for educational and informational programming, offer those channels to qualified programmers, and comply with the public file requirements of 47 CFR 25.701(f)(6), which sets forth public file requirements for the noncommercial set-aside for DBS providers.

    b. Proposed Online Public File Requirements

    77. We propose to treat satellite radio licensees in the same manner as television, cable, DBS, and broadcast radio entities by requiring them to upload to the online file only material that is not already on file at the Commission. We seek comment on this proposal. Similar to cable operators and DBS providers, the only document that SDARS entities file with the Commission that must be retained in the public inspection file is the EEO program annual report, which we propose that the Commission upload to the online file. We do not believe that requiring SDARS licensees to upload to the online file other material required to be maintained in the public file would be burdensome as the number of public file requirements for this service is fewer than for other services and entities discussed in this item and because the current, sole U.S. SDARS licensee has ample financial resources to comply with any online file requirement we ultimately adopt in this proceeding. We also believe that, similar to DBS, the transition to an online file is particularly important for satellite radio because of that service's nationwide reach and the fact that the current licensee maintains only one public and political file for the entire U.S., making in-person access very difficult.

    78. With respect to the political file, we propose to treat satellite radio similar to DBS, as they are both nationwide services with few licensed service providers. As we do with respect to the DBS political file herein, we tentatively conclude, consistent with our approach for television stations and our proposal herein for cable systems and radio broadcasters, that SDARS licensees should not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file but rather should be permitted to maintain existing material in their physical political file, and only upload documents to the online political file on a going-forward basis. In addition, to the extent that political file materials relate to ads shown on a local or hyper-local basis, we seek comment on how satellite radio licensees can indicate in their public files the area in which such ads were or will be shown.

    IV. Procedural Matters A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (“RFA”), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (“IRFA”) concerning the possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”). Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the first page of this NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of this NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”). In addition, this NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.

    2. This NPRM proposes to expand to cable and Direct Broadcast Satellite (“DBS”) operators and broadcast and satellite radio (“SDARS”) licensees the requirement that public and political files be posted to the online public file database hosted by the Commission. In 2012, the Commission adopted online public file rules for broadcast television stations which required them to post public file documents to a central, FCC-hosted online database rather than maintaining the files locally at their main studios. The Commission's goal was to modernize the procedures television broadcasters use to inform the public about how they are serving their communities by harnessing current technology to make information more accessible to the public and, over time, to reduce the cost of compliance. We are initiating this proceeding to extend our modernization effort to include the public file documents required to be maintained by cable operators, DBS providers, broadcast radio licensees, and SDARS licensees. While the Commission first included only television broadcasters in its public file database to “ease the initial implementation of the online public file,” television broadcasters have now successfully transitioned to the online file over the past two years. Accordingly, we now believe it is appropriate to commence the process of expanding the online file to other media in order to extend the benefits of improved public access to public inspection files and, ultimately, reduce the burden on these other entities of maintaining those files.

    3. In general, this NPRM proposes to adopt a similar approach with respect to cable, DBS, and broadcast and satellite radio online file requirements as we did for the television online file. Specifically, we propose that these entities' entire public files be hosted online by the Commission and that entities be responsible for uploading only items now required to be in the public file but not otherwise filed with the Commission or available on the Commission's Web site. As with the television online file, we propose that the Commission itself upload to the online public file material that is already on file with the Commission or that currently resides in a Commission database. With respect to the political file, we also propose that cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and satellite radio entities not be required to upload their existing political files to the online file. Instead, as we required with television licensees, we propose that these entities be permitted to maintain at the station those documents already in place in their political file at the time the new rules become effective, and only upload documents to the online political file on a going-forward basis. With respect to radio, this NPRM proposes to commence the transition to the online file with commercial stations in larger markets with five or more full-time employees. In addition, the item invites comment on whether to temporarily delay the requirement to upload new political file material to the online file for small cable systems.

    4. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, 315, 317, 335, 601, 611, 651 and 653 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 315, 317, 335, 601, 611, 651, and 653.

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

    6. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has developed its own small business size standards for the purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a “small cable company” is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers nationwide. Industry data shows that there were are currently 660 cable operators. Of this total, all but ten cable operators nationwide are small under this size standard. In addition, under the Commission's rate regulation rules, a “small system” is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. Current Commission records show 4,629 cable systems nationwide. Of this total, 4,057 cable systems have less than 20,000 subscribers, and 572 systems have 20,000 or more subscribers, based on the same records. Thus, under this standard, we estimate that most cable systems are small entities.

    7. Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard). The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is “a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.” There are approximately 54 million cable video subscribers in the United States today. Accordingly, an operator serving fewer than 540,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based on available data, we find that all but ten incumbent cable operators are small entities under this size standard. We note that the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million. Although it seems certain that some of these cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250,000,000, we are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the definition in the Communications Act.

    8. Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) Service. DBS service is a nationally distributed subscription service that delivers video and audio programming via satellite to a small parabolic “dish” antenna at the subscriber's location. DBS, by exception, is now included in the SBA's broad economic census category, Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which was developed for small wireline businesses. Under this category, the SBA deems a wireline business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated for that entire year. Of this total, 2,940 firms had fewer than 100 employees, and 248 firms had 100 or more employees. Therefore, under this size standard, the majority of such businesses can be considered small entities. However, the data we have available as a basis for estimating the number of such small entities were gathered under a superseded SBA small business size standard formerly titled “Cable and Other Program Distribution.” As of 2002, the SBA defined a small Cable and Other Program Distribution provider as one with $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. Currently, only two entities provide DBS service, which requires a great investment of capital for operation: DIRECTV and DISH Network. Each currently offers subscription services. DIRECTV and DISH Network each report annual revenues that are in excess of the threshold for a small business. Because DBS service requires significant capital, we believe it is unlikely that a small entity as defined under the superseded SBA size standard would have the financial wherewithal to become a DBS service provider.

    9. Radio Broadcasting. The SBA defines a radio broadcast station as a small business if such station has no more than $38.5 million in annual receipts. Business concerns included in this industry are those “primarily engaged in broadcasting aural programs by radio to the public.” According to review of the BIA Publications, Inc. Master Access Radio Analyzer Database as of November 26, 2013, about 11,331 (or about 99.9 percent) of the then number of commercial radio stations (11,341) have revenues of $35.5 million or less and thus qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. The Commission has estimated the number of licensed noncommercial radio stations to be 4,082. The Commission does not compile and otherwise does not have access to information on the revenue of NCE stations that would permit it to determine how many such stations would qualify as small entities. These stations rely primarily on grants and contributions for their operations, so we will assume that all of these entities qualify as small businesses. We note that in assessing whether a business entity qualifies as small under the above definition, business control affiliations must be included. This estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of small entities that might be affected, because the revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies.

    10. In addition, an element of the definition of “small business” is that the entity not be dominant in its field of operation. The Commission is unable at this time to define or quantify the criteria that would establish whether a specific radio station is dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses to which rules may apply does not exclude any radio station from the definition of a small business on this basis and therefore may be over-inclusive to that extent. Also, as noted, an additional element of the definition of “small business” is that the entity must be independently owned and operated. The Commission notes that it is difficult at times to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and the estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive to this extent.

    11. Satellite Radio. The rules proposed in this NPRM would affect the sole, current U.S. provider of satellite radio (“SDARS”) services, XM-Sirius, which offers subscription services. XM-Sirius reported revenue of $3.8 billion in 2013 and a net income of $377 million. In light of these figures, we believe it is unlikely that this entity would be considered small.

    12. Open Video Systems. The open video system (OVS) framework was established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily recognized options for the provision of video programming services by local exchange carriers. The OVS framework provides opportunities for the distribution of video programming other than through cable systems. Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within the SBA small business size standard covering cable services, which is “Wired Telecommunications Carriers.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is: All such businesses having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007 shows that there were 3,188 firms that operated for that entire year. Of this total, 2,940 firms had fewer than 100 employees, and 248 firms had 100 or more employees. Therefore, under this size standard, we estimate that the majority of these businesses can be considered small entities.

    13. Certain rule changes proposed in this NPRM would affect reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. Cable, DBS, radio, and SDARS entities are currently required to maintain a “local” copy of their public inspection files. This NPRM proposes to require that these files be maintained online in the database hosted by the Commission. Entities subject to this requirement would be required to upload certain documents currently maintained in their local files to the online database.

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

    15. This NPRM proposes a number of measures to minimize the effort and cost entities must undertake to move their pubic files online. Specifically, we propose to require entities only to upload to the online file public file documents that are not already on file with the Commission or that the Commission maintains in its own database. We also propose to exempt existing political file material from the online file requirement and to require only that political file documents be uploaded on a going-forward basis. In addition, with only minor exceptions—requiring cable operators to provide information about the geographic areas they serve, clarifying the documents required to be included in the cable public file, and requiring cable, DBS, broadcast radio, and SDARS entities to provide the location and contact information for their local file—we do not propose new or modified public inspection file requirements in this proceeding. Our goal is simply to adapt our existing public file requirements to an online format. While we recognize that entities may incur a modest, one-time transitional cost to upload some portions of their existing public file to the online database, we believe this initial expense will be offset by the public benefits of online disclosure. We also believe that, over time, entities will benefit from the lower costs of sending documents electronically to the Commission as opposed to creating and maintaining a paper file at the local or headquarters' office or main studio and assisting the public in accessing it. While we propose to place the entire public file online, we invite comment on whether we should instead require only that certain components of the public file be placed on the Commission's online database. We note that limiting online file requirements to certain components of the public file would require entities to upload certain documents and maintain others in the local public file, thereby potentially imposing a greater burden than moving documents to the online file over time.

    16. In addition, with respect to radio licensees this NPRM proposes to commence the transition to an online file with commercial stations in larger markets with five or more full-time employees, while postponing temporarily all online file requirements for other radio stations. This NPRM also proposes to exempt small cable systems temporarily from the requirement to commence uploading new political file material to the online public file and proposes to exempt very small cable systems from all requirements to upload documents to the Commission's online database. Finally, this NPRM also seeks comment on whether we should exclude certain radio stations from all online public file requirements, rather than simply delaying implementation of certain requirements.

    Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule

    None.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    17. This document contains proposed information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we seek specific comment on how we might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”

    C. Ex Parte Rules

    18. Permit-But-Disclose. This proceeding will be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule § 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule § 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable.pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.

    D. Filing Requirements

    19. Comments and Replies. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).

    Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.

    Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.

    Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

    All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building.

    Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.

    U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

    People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).

    20. Additional Information. For additional information on this proceeding, please contact Kim Matthews of the Media Bureau, Policy Division, [email protected], (202) 418-2154.

    V. Ordering Clauses

    21. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 303(r), and 335 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 303(r), and 335 this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.

    22. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

    23. It is further ordered that the Petition for Rulemaking filed by the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, and the Sunlight Foundation is granted.

    List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 25

    Direct Broadcast Satellite, Satellite radio.

    47 CFR Part 73

    Broadcast radio.

    47 CFR Part 76

    Cable television.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 25, 73, and 76 as follows:

    PART 25—SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS 1. The Authority citation for Part 25 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Interprets or applies sections 4, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 319, 332, 705, and 721 of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 319, 332, 605, and 721, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 25.601 is revised to read as follows:
    § 25.601 Equal employment opportunities.

    Notwithstanding other EEO provisions within these rules, an entity that uses an owned or leased Fixed-Satellite Service or Direct Broadcast Satellite Service or 17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service facility (operating under this part) to provide video programming directly to the public on a subscription basis must comply with the equal employment opportunity requirements set forth in part 76, subpart E, of this chapter, if such entity exercises control (as defined in part 76, subpart E, of this chapter) over the video programming it distributes. Notwithstanding other EEO provisions within these rules, a licensee or permittee of a direct broadcast satellite station operating as a broadcaster, and a licensee or permittee in the satellite DARS service, must comply with the equal employment opportunity requirements set forth in part 73.

    3. Section 25.701 is amended by revising the section heading and paragraphs (d), (e)(3), and (f)(6) to read as follows:
    § 25.701 Other DBS public interest obligations.

    (d) Political file. Each DBS provider shall maintain a complete and orderly political file.

    (1) The political file shall contain, at a minimum:

    (i) A record of all requests for DBS origination time, the disposition of those requests, and the charges made, if any, if the request is granted. The “disposition” includes the schedule of time purchased, when spots actually aired, the rates charged, and the classes of time purchased; and

    (ii) A record of the free time provided if free time is provided for use by or on behalf of candidates.

    (2) All records required to be retained by this section must be placed in the political file as soon as possible and must be retained for a period of two years. After the effective date of this section, DBS providers shall place all new political file material required to be retained by this section in the online file hosted by the Commission.

    (3) DBS providers shall assist callers by answering questions about the contents of their political files.

    (e) * * *

    (3) DBS providers airing children's programming must maintain in the online file hosted by the Commission records sufficient to verify compliance with this rule. Such records must be maintained for a period sufficient to cover the limitations period specified in 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(6)(B).

    (f) * * *

    (6) Public file. (i) In addition to the political file requirements in § 25.701, each DBS provider shall maintain in the online file hosted by the Commission a complete and orderly record of:

    (A) Quarterly measurements of channel capacity and yearly average calculations on which it bases its four percent reservation, as well as its response to any capacity changes;

    (B) A record of entities to whom noncommercial capacity is being provided, the amount of capacity being provided to each entity, the conditions under which it is being provided and the rates, if any, being paid by the entity;

    (C) A record of entities that have requested capacity, disposition of those requests and reasons for the disposition.

    (ii) All records required by paragraph (f)(6)(i) of this section shall be placed in the online file hosted by the Commission as soon as possible and shall be retained for a period of two years.

    (iii) Each DBS provider must also place in the online file hosted by the Commission the records required to be placed in the public inspection file by § 25.701(e) (commercial limits in children's programs) and by § 25.601 and 47 CFR part 76, subpart E (equal employment opportunity requirements) and retain those records for the period required by those rules.

    (iv) Each DBS provider must provide a link to the public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if the provider has a Web site, and provide on its Web site contact information for a representative who can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files. Each DBS provider also must include in the online public file the address of the provider's local public file and the name, phone number, and email address of the provider's designated contact for questions about the public file.

    4. Section 25.702 is added to read as follows:
    § 25.702 Other SDARS Public interest obligations.

    (a) Political broadcasting requirements. The following political broadcasting rules shall apply to all SDARS licensees: 47 CFR 73.1940 (Legally qualified candidates for public office), 73.1941 (Equal opportunities), and 73.1944 (Reasonable access).

    (b) Political file. Each SDARS licensee shall maintain a complete and orderly political file.

    (1) The political file shall contain, at a minimum:

    (i) A record of all requests for SDARS origination time, the disposition of those requests, and the charges made, if any, if the request is granted. The “disposition” includes the schedule of time purchased, when spots actually aired, the rates charged, and the classes of time purchased; and

    (ii) A record of the free time provided if free time is provided for use by or on behalf of candidates.

    (2) SDARS licensees shall place all records required by this section in the political file as soon as possible and shall retain the records for a period of two years. After the effective date of this section, SDARS licensees shall place all new political file material required to be retained by this section in the online file hosted by the Commission.

    (c) Public inspection file. Each SDARS applicant or licensee must also place in the online file hosted by the Commission the records required to be placed in the public inspection file by 47 CFR 25.601 and 73.2080 (equal employment opportunities (EEO)) and retain those records for the period required by those rules. Each SDARS licensee must provide a link to the public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if the licensee has a Web site, and provide on its Web site contact information for a representative who can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files. Each SDARS licensee also must include in the online public file the address of the licensee's local public file and the name, phone number, and email address of the licensee's designated contact for questions about the public file.

    PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 5. The Authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.

    6. Section 73.1943 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 73.1943 Political file.

    (d) Location of the file. A licensee or applicant must post all of the contents added to its political file after the effective date of this subsection in the political file component of its online public file hosted by the Commission. A station must retain in its political file maintained at the station, at the location specified in § 73.3526(b) or § 73.3527(b), all material required to be included in the political file and added to the file prior to the effective date of this subsection. The online political file must be updated in the same manner as paragraph (c) of this section.

    7. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commercial stations.

    (b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be located as follows:

    (1) For radio licensees temporarily exempt from the online file, as discussed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, a hard copy of the public inspection file shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. For all licensees, letters and emails from the public, as required by paragraph (e)(9) of this section, shall be maintained at the main studio of the station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of license or at its proposed main studio.

    (2)(i) A television station licensee or applicant, and any radio station licensee or applicant not temporarily exempt as described in this paragraph, shall place the contents required by paragraph (e) of this section, of its public inspection file on the online file hosted by the Commission, with the exception of letters and emails from the public as required by paragraph (e)(9) of this section, which shall be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and the political file as required by paragraph (e)(6) of this section, as discussed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. Any radio station not in the top 50 Nielsen Audio markets, and any radio station with fewer than five full-time employees, shall continue to retain the public inspection file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127]. However, any radio station that is not required to place its public inspection file in the online file hosted by the Commission before [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] may choose to do so, instead of retaining the public inspection file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (ii) A station must provide a link to the public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if the station has a Web site, and provide contact information on its Web site for a station representative that can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files. A station also is required to include in the online public file the station's main studio address and telephone number, and the email address of the station's designated contact for questions about the public file. To the extent this section refers to the local public inspection file, it refers to the public file of an individual station, which is either maintained at the station or on the Commission's Web site, depending upon where the documents are required to be maintained under the Commission's rules.

    (3)(i) A licensee or applicant shall place the contents required by paragraph (e)(6) of this section of its political inspection file in the online file hosted by the Commission. Political inspection file material in existence 30 days after the effective date of this provision shall continue to be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until the end of its retention period.

    (ii) Any television station not in the top 50 DMAs, and any station not affiliated with one of the top four broadcast networks, regardless of the size of the market it serves, shall continue to retain the political file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until July 1, 2014. For these stations, effective July 1, 2014, any new political file material shall be placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, while the material in the political file as of July 1, 2014, if not placed in the Commission's Web site, shall continue to be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until the end of its retention period. However, any station that is not required to place its political file in the online file hosted by the Commission before July 1, 2014 may choose to do so, instead of retaining the political file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (iii) Any radio station not in the top 50 Nielsen Audio markets, and any radio station with fewer than five full-time employees, shall continue to retain the political file at the station in the matter discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127]. For these stations, effective [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], any new political file material shall be placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, while the material in the political file as of [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], if not placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, shall continue to be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until the end of its retention period. However, any station that is not required to place its political file on the Commission's Web site before [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] may choose to do so, instead of retaining the political file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (4) The Commission will automatically link the following items to the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission has these items electronically: Authorizations, applications, contour maps; ownership reports and related materials; portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file held by the Commission; “The Public and Broadcasting”; Letters of Inquiry and other investigative information requests from the Commission, unless otherwise directed by the inquiry itself; Children's television programming reports; and DTV transition education reports. In the event that the online public file does not reflect such required information, the licensee will be responsible for posting such material.

    8. Section 73.3527 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 73.3527 Local public inspection file of noncommercial educational stations.

    (b) Location of the file. The public inspection file shall be located as follows:

    (1) For radio licensees, a hard copy of the public inspection file shall be maintained at the main studio of the station until [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] except that, as discussed in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, any radio station may voluntarily place its public inspection file online before [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] if it chooses to do so instead of retaining the file at the station. An applicant for a new station or change of community shall maintain its file at an accessible place in the proposed community of license or at its proposed main studio.

    (2)(i) A noncommercial educational television station licensee or applicant shall place the contents required by paragraph (e) of its public inspection file in the online file hosted by the Commission, with the exception of the political file as required by paragraph (e)(5) of this section, which may be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until July 1, 2014. Effective July 1, 2014, any new political file material shall be placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, while the material in the political file as of July 1, 2014, if not placed on the Commission's Web site, shall continue to be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until the end of its retention period. However, any noncommercial educational station that is not required to place its political file in the online file hosted by the Commission before July 1, 2014 may choose to do so instead of retaining the political file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (ii) Beginning [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], noncommercial educational radio station licensees and applicants shall place the contents required by paragraph (e) of this section in the online public inspection file hosted by the Commission. For these stations, effective [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], any new political file material shall be placed on the Commission's Web site, while the material in the political file as of [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], if not placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, shall continue to be retained at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section until the end of its retention period. However, any radio station that is not required to place its public inspection file in the online file hosted by the Commission before [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] may choose to do so, instead of retaining the public inspection file at the station in the manner discussed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (iii) A station must provide a link to the public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if the station has a Web site, and provide contact information for a station representative on its Web site that can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files. A station also is required to include in the online public file the station's main studio address and telephone number, and the email address of the station's designated contact for questions about the public file. To the extent this section refers to the local public inspection file, it refers to the public file of an individual station, which is either maintained at the station or on the Commission's Web site, depending upon where the documents are required to be maintained under the Commission's rules.

    (3) The Commission will automatically link the following items to the electronic version of all licensee and applicant public inspection files, to the extent that the Commission has these items electronically: Authorizations; applications; contour maps; ownership reports and related materials; portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity file held by the Commission; and “The Public and Broadcasting”.

    9. Section 73.3580 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (ii) to read as follows:
    § 73.3580 Local public notice of filing of broadcast applications.

    (d) * * *

    (4) * * *

    (i) Pre-filing announcements. During the period and beginning on the first day of the sixth calendar month prior to the expiration of the license, and continuing to the date on which the application is filed, the following announcement shall be broadcast on the 1st and 16th day of each calendar month. Stations broadcasting primarily in a foreign language should broadcast the announcements in that language.

    Radio announcement: On (date of last renewal grant) (Station's call letters) was granted a license by the Federal Communication Commission to serve the public interest as a public trustee until (expiration date).

    Our license will expire on (date). We must file an application for renewal with the FCC (date four calendar months prior to expiration date). When filed, a copy of this application will be available for public inspection at www.fcc.gov. It contains information concerning this station's performance during the last (period of time covered by the application).

    Individuals who wish to advise the FCC of facts relating to our renewal application and to whether this station has operated in the public interest should file comments and petitions with the FCC by (date first day of last full calendar month prior to the month of expiration).

    Further information concerning the FCC's broadcast license renewal process is available at (address of location of the station's public inspection file) or may be obtained from the FCC, Washington, DC 20554.

    Television announcement: On (date of last renewal grant) (Station's call letters) was granted a license by the Federal Communication Commission to serve the public interest as a public trustee until (expiration date).

    Our license will expire on (date). We must file an application for renewal with the FCC (date four calendar months prior to expiration date). When filed, a copy of this application will be available for public inspection at www.fcc.gov. It contains information concerning this station's performance during the last (period of time covered by the application).

    Individuals who wish to advise the FCC of facts relating to our renewal application and to whether this station has operated in the public interest should file comments and petitions with the FCC by (date first day of last full calendar month prior to the month of expiration).

    Further information concerning the FCC's broadcast license renewal process is available at (address of location of the station) or may be obtained from the FCC, Washington, DC 20554.

    (ii) Post-filing announcements. During the period beginning of the date on which the renewal application is filed to the sixteenth day of the next to last full calendar month prior to the expiration of the license, all applications for renewal of broadcast station licenses shall broadcast the following announcement on the 1st and 16th day of each calendar month. Stations broadcasting primarily in a foreign language should broadcast the announcements in that language.

    Television announcement: On (date of last renewal grant) (Station's call letters) was granted a license by the Federal Communications Commission to serve the public interest as a public trustee until (expiration date).

    Our license will expire on (date). We have filed an application for renewal with the FCC.

    A copy of this application is available for public inspection at www.fcc.gov. It contains information concerning this station's performance during the last (period of time covered by application).

    Individuals who wish to advise the FCC of facts relating to our renewal application and to whether this station has operated in the public interest should file comments and petitions with the FCC by (date first day of last full calendar month prior to the month of expiration).

    Further information concerning the FCC's broadcast license renewal process is available at (address of location of the station) or may be obtained from the FCC, Washington, DC 20554.

    Radio announcement: On (date of last renewal grant) (Station's call letters) was granted a license by the Federal Communications Commission to serve the public interest as a public trustee until (expiration date).

    Our license will expire on (date). We have filed an application for renewal with the FCC.

    A copy of this application is available for public inspection at www.fcc.gov. It contains information concerning this station's performance during the last (period of time covered by application).

    Individuals who wish to advise the FCC of facts relating to our renewal application and to whether this station has operated in the public interest should file comments and petitions with the FCC by (date first day of last full calendar month prior to the month of expiration).

    Further information concerning the FCC's broadcast license renewal process is available at (address of location of the station's public inspection file) or may be obtained from the FCC, Washington, DC 20554.

    PART 76—MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 10. The Authority citation for Part 76 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573.

    11. Section 76.630 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
    § 76.630 Compatibility with consumer electronics equipment.

    (a) * * *

    (2) Requests for waivers of this prohibition must demonstrate either a substantial problem with theft of basic tier service or a strong need to scramble basic signals for other reasons. As part of this showing, cable operators are required to notify subscribers by mail of waiver requests. The notice to subscribers must be mailed no later than 30 calendar days from the date the request for waiver was filed with the Commission, and cable operators must inform the Commission in writing, as soon as possible, of that notification date. The notification to subscribers must state:

    On (date of waiver request was filed with the Commission), (cable operator's name) filed with the Federal Communications Commission a request for waiver of the rule prohibiting scrambling of channels on the basic tier of service. 47 CFR 76.630(a). The request for waiver states (a brief summary of the waiver request). A copy of the request for waiver shall be available for public inspection at www.fcc.gov.

    Individuals who wish to comment on this request for waiver should mail comments to the Federal Communications Commission by no later than 30 days from (the date the notification was mailed to subscribers). Those comments should be addressed to the: Federal Communications Commission, Media Bureau, Washington, DC 20554, and should include the name of the cable operator to whom the comments are applicable. Individuals should also send a copy of their comments to (the cable operator at its local place of business).

    Cable operators may file comments in reply no later than 7 days from the date subscriber comments must be filed.

    12. Section 76.1700 is revised to read as follows:
    § 76.1700 Records to be maintained by cable system operators.

    (a) Public inspection file. The following records must be placed in the online public file hosted by the Commission, except as indicated in § 76.1700(d) and except that the records listed in 76.1700(1) (political file) that are in existence 30 days after the effective date of this provision shall continue to be retained at the system and made available to the public in the manner discussed in paragraph (e) of this section until the end of the retention period. In addition, any cable system with fewer than 5,000 subscribers shall continue to retain the political file at the system in the manner discussed in paragraph (e) of this section until [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127]. For these systems, effective [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], any new political file material shall be placed in the online file hosted by the Commission, while the material in the political file as of [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127], if not placed on the Commission's Web site, shall continue to be retained at the system in the manner discussed in paragraph (e) of this section until the end of its retention period. However, any system that is not required to place its political file on the Commission's Web site before [2 years following the effective date of the Report and Order in MB Docket No. 14-127] may choose to do so, instead of retaining the political file at the system in the manner discussed in paragraph (e) of this section.

    (1) Political file. All requests for cablecast time made by or on behalf of a candidate for public office and all other information required to be maintained pursuant to § 76.1701;

    (2) Equal employment opportunity. All EEO materials described in § 76.1702 except for any EEO program annual reports, which the Commission will link to the electronic version of all systems' public inspection files;

    (3) Commercial records on children's programs. Sufficient records to verify compliance with § 76.225 in accordance with § 76.1703;

    (4) Performance tests (channels delivered). The operator of each cable television system shall maintain at its local office a current listing of the cable television channels which that system delivers to its subscribers in accordance with § 76.1705;

    (5) Leased access. If a cable operator adopts and enforces written policy regarding indecent leased access programming, such a policy shall be published in accordance with § 76.1707;

    (6) Principal headend. The operator of every cable system shall maintain the designation and location of its principal headend in accordance with § 76.1708;

    (7) Availability of signals. The operator of every cable television system shall maintain a list of all broadcast television stations carried by its system in fulfillment of the must-carry requirements in accordance with § 76.1709;

    (8) Operator interests in video programming. Cable operators shall maintain records regarding the nature and extent of their attributable interests in all video programming services as well as information regarding their carriage of such vertically integrated video programming services on cable systems in which they have an attributable interests in accordance with § 76.1710;

    (9) Sponsorship identification. Whenever sponsorship announcements are omitted pursuant to § 76.1615(f) of subpart T, the cable television system operator shall maintain a list in accordance with § 76.1715;

    (10) Compatibility with consumer electronics equipment. Cable system operators generally may not scramble or otherwise encrypt signals carried on the basic service tier. Copies of requests for waivers of this prohibition must be available in the public inspection file in accordance with § 76.630.

    (b) Information available to the franchisor. These records must be made available by cable system operators to local franchising authorities on reasonable notice and during regular business hours, except as indicated in § 76.1700(d).

    (1) Proof-of-performance test data. The proof of performance tests shall be made available upon request in accordance with § 76.1704;

    (2) Complaint resolution. Cable system operators shall establish a process for resolving complaints from subscribers about the quality of the television signal delivered. Aggregate data based upon these complaints shall be made available for inspection in accordance with § 76.1713.

    (c) Information available to the Commission. These records must be made available by cable system operators to the Commission on reasonable notice and during regular business hours, except as indicated in § 76.1700(d).

    (1) Proof-of-performance test data. The proof of performance tests shall be made available upon request in accordance with § 76.1704;

    (2) Signal leakage logs and repair records. Cable operators shall maintain a log showing the date and location of each leakage source in accordance with § 76.1706;

    (3) Emergency alert system and activations. Every cable system shall keep a record of each test and activation of the Emergency Alert System (EAS). The test is performed pursuant to the procedures and requirements of part 11 of this chapter and the EAS Operating Handbook. The records are kept in accordance with part 11 and § 76.1711 of this chapter;

    (4) Complaint resolution. Cable system operators shall establish a process for resolving complaints from subscribers about the quality of the television signal delivered. Aggregate data based upon these complaints shall be made available for inspection in accordance with § 76.1713;

    (5) Subscriber records and public inspection file. The operator of a cable television system shall make the system, its public inspection file, and its records of subscribers available for inspection upon request in accordance with § 76.1716.

    (d) Exceptions to the public inspection file requirements. The operator of every cable television system having fewer than 1,000 subscribers is exempt from the online public file and from the public record requirements contained in § 76.1701 (political file); § 76.1702 (EEO records available for public inspection); § 76.1703 (commercial records for children's programming); § 76.1704 (proof-of-performance test data); § 76.1706 (signal leakage logs and repair records); § 76.1714 (FCC rules and regulations); and § 76.1715 (sponsorship identification).

    (e) Location of records. Political file material that continues to be retained at the system shall be retained in a public inspection file maintained at the office in the community served by the system that the system operator maintains for the ordinary collection of subscriber charges, resolution of subscriber complaints, and other business and, if the system operator does not maintain such an office in the community, at any accessible place in the communities served by the system (such as a public registry for documents or an attorney's office). Public file locations will be open at least during normal business hours and will be conveniently located. The public inspection file shall be available for public inspection at any time during regular business hours for the facility where they are kept. All or part of the public inspection file may be maintained in a computer database, as long as a computer terminal capable of accessing the database is made available, at the location of the file, to members of the public who wish to review the file.

    (f) Links and contact and geographic information. A system must provide a link to the public inspection file hosted on the Commission's Web site from the home page of its own Web site, if the system has a Web site, and provide contact information on its Web site for a system representative who can assist any person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files. A system also is required to include in the online public file the address of the system's local public file and the name, phone number, and email address of the system's designated contact for questions about the public file. In addition, a system must provide on the online public file a list of the geographic areas served by the system. To the extent this section refers to the local public inspection file, it refers to the public file of a physical system, which is either maintained at the location described in paragraph (e) of this section or on the Commission's Web site, depending upon where the documents are required to be maintained under the Commission's rules.

    (g) Reproduction of records. Copies of any material in the public inspection file shall be available for machine reproduction upon request made in person, provided the requesting party shall pay the reasonable cost of reproduction. Requests for machine copies shall be fulfilled at a location specified by the system operator, within a reasonable period of time, which in no event shall be longer than seven days. The system operator is not required to honor requests made by mail but may do so if it chooses.

    13. Section 76.1709 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
    § 76.1709 Availability of signals.

    (a) The operator of every cable television system shall maintain for public inspection a file containing a list of all broadcast television stations carried by its system in fulfillment of the must-carry requirements pursuant to § 76.56. Such list shall include the call sign, community of license, broadcast channel number, cable channel number, and in the case of a noncommercial educational broadcast station, whether that station was carried by the cable system on March 29, 1990.

    (b) Such records must be maintained in accordance with the provisions of § 76.1700.

    [FR Doc. 2015-02531 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0133; 4500030113] RIN 1018-AY78 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Remove the Modoc Sucker From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the reopening of the public comment period on our February 13, 2014, proposed rule to remove the Modoc sucker (Catostomus microps) from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. This action allows us to accept and consider additional public comments on the proposed rule. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully considered in preparation of the final listing determination.

    DATES:

    We will consider comments received or postmarked on or before March 16, 2015. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. Any comments that we receive after the closing date may not be considered in the final decision on this action.

    ADDRESSES:

    Document availability: You may obtain a copy of the proposed rule and associated documents on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0133, or by contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Falls Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Comment submission: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R8-ES-2013-0133, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click the Search button. In the Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, click on the box next to “Proposed Rule” to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”

    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2013-0133; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Information Requested section, below, for more information).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Laurie Sada, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Falls Fish and Wildlife Office, 1936 California Avenue, Klamath Falls, OR 97601; telephone 541-885-8481; or facsimile 541-885-7837.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 13, 2014, we published in the Federal Register (79 FR 8656) a proposed rule to remove the Modoc sucker from Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife due to information suggesting that the species no longer needs protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). A completed scientific analysis of the biological information and threats facing the Modoc sucker is presented in detail in the Modoc Sucker Species Report (Service 2013, entire), which is available at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0133. The Species Report was prepared by Service biologists to provide thorough discussion of the species' ecology and biological needs, and to provide an analysis of the threats that may be impacting the species.

    In order to comply with the public notification requirements of the Act under section 4(b)(5)(D) and to ensure that the public has an adequate opportunity to review and comment on our proposal, we are reopening the comment period on the proposed rule for an additional 30 days (see DATES, above).

    Information Requested

    We intend that any final action resulting from the proposed rule will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and be as accurate and complete as possible. Therefore, we request comments or information from other concerned Federal and State agencies, the scientific community, or any other interested party concerning the proposal to remove the Modoc sucker from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Please see the Information Requested section of the February 13, 2014, proposed rule (79 FR 8656) for a list of the information and comments that we particularly seek.

    If you previously submitted comments or information on the proposed rule, please do not resubmit them. We have incorporated them into the public record, and we will fully consider them in our final rulemaking. Our final determination concerning the proposed rule will take into consideration all written comments and any additional information we receive.

    Please note that submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened species must be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.”

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning the proposed rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES. If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov. Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include.

    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing the proposed rule, will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Falls Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Authority

    The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: February 2, 2015. Stephen Guertin, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02928 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    80 30 Friday, February 13, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request February 9, 2015.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by March 16, 2015 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

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

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Importation of Baby Squash and Baby Courgettes from Zambia.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0347.

    Summary of Collection: Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to carry out operations or measures to detect, eradicate, suppress, control, prevent, or retard the spread of plant pests new to the United States or not known to be widely distributed throughout the United States. APHIS fruits and vegetables regulations allow the importation into the continental United States of baby squash and baby courgettes from Zambia. As a condition of entry, both commodities would have to be produced in accordance with a systems approach that would include requirements for pest exclusion at the production site, fruit fly trapping inside and outside the production site, and pest excluding packinghouse procedures. Both commodities would also be required to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate with an additional declaration stating that the baby squash and baby courgette have been produced in accordance with the proposed requirements.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect information using the following: Physanitary Certificate, Records and Monitoring, Labeling on Cartons and Inspection of Greenhouses.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 2.

    Frequency of Responses: Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 4.

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Importation of Eggplant from Israel.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0350.

    Summary of Collection: Under the Plant and Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to carry out operation or measures to detect, eradicate, suppress, control, prevent, or retard the spread of plant pests new to the United States not known to be widely distributed throughout the United States. APHIS' fruits and vegetables regulations allow the importation of commercial shipments of fresh eggplant from Israel. As a condition of entry, the eggplant must be grown under a system approach that would include requirements for pest exclusion at the production site, fruit fly trapping inside and outside the production site, and pest-excluding packinghouse procedures.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS uses the following information activities to allow for the importation of commercial consignments of fresh eggplant from Israel into the United States while continuing to provide protection against the introduction of quarantine pests: Phytosanitary Certificate (foreign) Trapping Records; Inspection of Pest-Exclusionary Structures by Israel NPPO's, Labeling of Boxes, and Approved Pest-Exclusionary Structure. Failure to collect this information would cripple APHIS' ability to ensure that eggplant from Israel is not carrying plant pests.

    Description of Respondents: Foreign Government, Business and other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 2.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 5.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02988 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Malheur National Forest; Blue Mountain Ranger District; Grant County, Oregon; Magone Project Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of commercial and non-commercial vegetation management activities, prescribed burning, road activities, recreation opportunity improvements, and other restoration activities. Other design criteria are included to protect resources and facilitate management activities. The project is located on the Blue Mountain Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Grant County, Oregon, approximately 7 miles north of the town of John Day, Oregon.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received within 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Dave Halemeier, District Ranger, Blue Mountain Ranger District, c/o Sasha Fertig, P.O. Box 909, John Day, OR 97845. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected]; or submitted via facsimile to 541-575-3319.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sasha Fertig, Lead NEPA Planner, Blue Mountain Ranger District, 431 Patterson Bridge Road, P.O. Box 909, John Day, OR 97845. Phone: 541-575-3061. Email: [email protected] Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Magone project planning area encompasses approximately 27,000 acres in the Grub Creek and East Fork Beech Creek subwatersheds that drain into the Upper John Day River. The legal description for the project planning area includes Townships 11 and 12 South, Ranges 31 and 32 East, Willamette Meridian, Grant County, Oregon.

    Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose and need for the Magone Project was developed by comparing the management objectives and desired conditions in the Malheur Forest Plan to the existing conditions in the project planning area related to forest resiliency and function. Comparison of the existing and desired condition indicates the specific needs to: (1) Restore forest structure, composition, and density toward more resilient vegetative conditions given the historical fire regime; (2) reduce the fuel loadings by reducing the density and connectivity of standing vegetation, surface fuels, and ladder fuels; (3) maintain or improve habitat for fish and wildlife species present in the project planning area; (4) improve one or more of the nine roadless area characteristics within the Nipple Butte inventoried roadless area; and (5) provide for a variety of social values and opportunities in the watershed, including availability of traditional use plants, a variety of wood products, enhanced recreation experiences around Magone Lake, and forest management employment opportunities.

    Proposed Action

    The Forest proposed action includes silviculture treatments, prescribed burning, road activities, recreation opportunity improvements, and Magone Lake restoration activities to address the purpose and need. These activities would occur over approximately the next 10 years. The proposed action includes:

    (1) Commercial thinning (5,500 acres), non-commercial thinning (1,200 acres), post and pole removal (400 acres), biomass removal (may occur within units designated for commercial and non-commercial thinning), and mountain mahongany and bitterbursh enhancement (within commercial and non-commercial thinning units). Silviculture treatments would help restore forest structure, composition, and density toward more resistant and resilient vegetative conditions.

    (2) Prescribed fire on up to 28,500 acres to reduce and maitain fuel loadings. Treated stands would see a combination of burning piled material and underburning (approximately 5,800 acres). Those stands not mechanically treated would be managed exclusively with the use of prescribed burning. As conditions and stand characteristics allow, natural ignitions within the planning area would be used to meet the objectives of prescribed burning. In the project planning area, the Grant County Community Wildfire Protection Plan identified 2 county roads and the Malheur National Forest identified 4 Forest Service roads as potential escape route/safety corridors in the event of a wildland fire. Fuel breaks would be created and maintained using a combination of mechanical treatments and prescribed burning. Additionally, the decreased fuel loadings in strategically placed, shaded fuel breaks would afford suppression forces a higher probability of success controlling wildfires.

    (3) Approximately 85 miles of road would be maintained for haul and 9 miles of temporary road would be constructed (and rehabilitated following use). The following changes to the road system are also proposed: Decommissioning 1.3 miles of road, closing 2.3 miles of currently open road, closing currently open roads and co-designating those roads as trails (1.3 miles), and converting a road to a trail (1.2 miles). These changes would reduce water quality issues, close roads that are already effectively closed on the ground, and decommission and close roads that are within the Nipple Butte inventoried roadless area (IRA).

    (4) A variety of recreation opportunities would be developed to enhance recreational experiences in the project planning area. An expanded trail system would be centered around the Magone Lake developed recreation area. Several connecting trail options would provide for longer hikes, varied returns, and a more broad recreation experience. New construction of single-track bicycle trails within the Nipple Butte IRA would connect with existing bicycle trails and the other newly constructed trails. All of the trails would be single-track bicycle and hiker trails with measures to prevent any off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. Approximately 50 miles of trail would be designated, with 42 miles of that being new trail construction. New interpretive signs would be placed at Four Corners and the Magone Lake Campground. Fishing and recreational boating opportunities would be enhanced with expansion of the existing floating boat dock located at the boat launch, modifying the existing two piece floating dock adjacent to the campground, and placing a new floating fishing dock on the east side of Magone Lake.

    (5) The proposed action also includes restoration activities within Magone Lake to increase near shore habitat complexity for fish. Fish cribs and fish sticks (bunches of 3 to 5 trees) would be placed on the ice during winter, to sink into the lake during ice melt.

    Preliminary connectivity corridors have been identified between late and old structure stands to allow for movement of old-growth dependent species. The goal of creating “connectivity” is to manage stands in corridors at higher canopy densities when compared to more intensively managed stands located outside of corridors. Corridors established for old-growth dependent species in the project planning area would allow for big game migratory and dispersal movements, as well as providing higher cover rates and forage. The designated connectivity corridors are approximately 1,900 acres in size.

    The Magone Project will also include a variety of project design criteria that serve to mitigate impacts of activities to forest resources, including wildlife, soils, watershed condition, aquatic species, riparian habitat conservation areas, heritage resources, visuals, rangeland, botanical resources, and invasive plants. The proposed action may also include amendments to the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended.

    Possible Alternatives

    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of these will be the “no action” alternative in which none of the proposed action would be implemented. Additional alternatives may be included in response to issues raised by the public during the scoping process or due to additional concerns for resource values identified by the interdisciplinary team.

    Responsible Official

    The Forest Supervisor of the Malheur National Forest, 431 Patterson Bridge Road, John Day, OR 97845, is the Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official, I will decide if the proposed action will be implemented. I will document the decision and rationale for the decision in the Record of Decision. I have delegated the responsibility for preparing the draft EIS and final EIS to the District Ranger, Blue Mountain Ranger District.

    Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Based on the purpose and need, the Responsible Official reviews the proposed action, the other alternatives, the environmental consequences, and public comments on the analysis in order to make the following decision:

    (1) Whether to implement timber harvest and associated fuels treatments, prescribed burning, and watershed work, including the design features and potential mitigation measures to protect resources; and if so, how much and at what specific locations;

    (2) What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements are needed to assure design features and potential mitigation measures are implemented and effective, and to evaluate the success of the project objectives. A project specific monitoring plan will be developed.

    Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The interdisciplinary team will continue to seek information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, Tribal governments, and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. There is a collaborative group in the area that the interdisciplinary team will interact with during the analysis process.

    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.

    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Steven K. Beverlin, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03027 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board (Board) will meet in Rapid City, South Dakota. The Board is established consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. App. II), the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et. seq.), the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1612), and the Federal Public Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (Pub. L. 108-447). Additional information concerning the Board, including the meeting summary/minutes, can be found by visiting the Board's Web site at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/blackhills/workingtogether/advisorycommittees.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 1:00 p.m.

    All meetings are subject to cancellation. For updated status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Mystic Ranger District, 8221 South Highway 16, Rapid City, South Dakota. Written comments may be submitted as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. All comments, including names and addresses, when provided, are placed in the record and available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received at the Black Hills National Forest Supervisor's Office. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Scott Jacobson, Committee Coordinator, by phone at 605-673-9216, or by email at [email protected]

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting is to provide:

    (1) Motorized Travel Fees for FY 16—Working Group Update;

    (2) FY 15-19 MPB/Fuels Restoration Areas—Recommendation;

    (3) Over Snow Use Forum;

    (4) Lakes Enhancement Project Update; and

    (5) Northern Long Eared Bat Proposed Listing Update.

    The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should submit a request in writing by February 16, 2015 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the Board may file written statements with the Board's staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and time requests for oral comments must be sent to Scott Jacobson, Black Hills National Forest Supervisor's Office, 1019 North Fifth Street, Custer, South Dakota 57730; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 605-673-9208.

    Delayed Notice: Due to organizational changes within the agency, this notice has not been published within 15 calendar-days of the February 18th meeting.

    Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Craig Bobzien, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03023 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS Sunshine Act Meeting Notice DATE AND TIME:

    Wednesday, February 18, 2015, 9:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m. EST.

    PLACE:

    Cohen Building, Room 3321, 330 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20237.

    SUBJECT:

    Notice of Meeting of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

    SUMMARY:

    The Broadcasting Board of Governors (Board) will be meeting at the time and location listed above. The Board will vote on a consent agenda consisting of the minutes of its December 18, 2014 meeting, a resolution honoring Michael Meehan for his service on the Board, and a resolution on revised BBG meeting dates in 2015. The Board will also receive a review of the Voice of America.

    This meeting will be available for public observation via streamed webcast, both live and on-demand, on the agency's public Web site at www.bbg.gov. Information regarding this meeting, including any updates or adjustments to its starting time, can also be found on the agency's public Web site.

    The public may also attend this meeting in person at the address listed above as seating capacity permits. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting in person must register at http://bbgboardmeetingfebruary2015.eventbrite.com by 12:00 p.m. (EST) on February 17. For more information, please contact BBG Public Affairs at (202) 203-4400 or by email at [email protected]

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Persons interested in obtaining more information should contact Oanh Tran at (202) 203-4545.

    Oanh Tran, Director of Board Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03148 Filed 2-11-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8610-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Commission Business Meeting.

    DATES:

    Date and Time: Friday, February 20, 2015; 9:30 a.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Place: 1331 Pennsylvania Ave NW., Suite 1150, Washington, DC.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591.

    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the briefing and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at [email protected] at least seven business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Meeting Agenda

    This meeting is open to the public.

    I. Approval of Agenda II. Program Planning • Discussion and Vote: Commission Statement commemorating the 55th Anniversary of Executive Order 10925 signed by President Kennedy barring discrimination in federal hiring • Discussion and Vote: Commission Statement commemorating the 50th Anniversary of Selma, Alabama “Bloody Sunday” March • Discussion and Vote: Commission Statement commemorating International Day for Elimination of Racial Discrimination • Discussion and Vote: Commission Statement commemorating Cesar Chavez Day III. Management and Operations • Status Report on March Briefing: Examining Workplace Discrimination against LGBT • Status Report from RPCU Chief on SAC projects from around the country • Status Report on Commission follow up re: Visit to Immigration Detention Center (s) to round out FY2015 Statutory Enforcement Report Examination IV. State Advisory Committee (SAC) Appointments • Ohio V. Adjourn Meeting Dated: February 10, 2015. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03102 Filed 2-11-15; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration Notice of National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship Meeting AGENCY:

    Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of an open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (NACIE) will hold a meeting on Thursday, March 5, 2015 from 2:00-3:00 p.m. and Friday, March 6, 2015, from 8:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) and will be open to the public. During this time, members will discuss potential committee initiatives on innovation, entrepreneurship, and workforce/talent. The meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4830, Washington, DC 20230.

    DATES:

    Thursday, March 5, 2015 Time: 2:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. EST Friday, March 6, 2015 Time: 8:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m. EST ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4830, Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Council was chartered on November 10, 2009 to advise the Secretary of Commerce on matters related to innovation and entrepreneurship in the United States. NACIE's overarching focus is recommending transformational policies to the Secretary that will help U.S. communities, businesses, and the workforce become more globally competitive. The Council operates as an independent entity within the Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (OIE), which is housed within the U.S. Commerce Department's Economic Development Administration. NACIE members are a diverse and dynamic group of successful entrepreneurs, innovators, and investors, as well as leaders from nonprofit organizations and academia.

    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Council's planned work initiatives in three focus areas: workforce/talent, entrepreneurship, and innovation. The final agenda will be posted on the NACIE Web site at http://www.eda.gov/oie/nacie/ prior to the meeting. Any member of the public may submit pertinent questions and comments concerning the Council's affairs at any time before or after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to the Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the contact information below. Those unable to attend the meetings in person but wishing to listen to the proceedings can do so through a conference call line 1-888-603-9742, passcode: 1962840. Copies of the meeting minutes will be available by request within 90 days of the meeting date.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julie Lenzer Kirk, Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Room 70003, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; email: [email protected]; telephone: 202-482-8001; fax: 202-273-4781. Please reference “NACIE March 5-6, 2015” in the subject line of your correspondence.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Julie Lenzer Kirk, Director, Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03028 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-7-2015] Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone—Central Pennsylvania Under Alternative Site Framework

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the Pennsylvania Foreign-Trade Zone Corporation to establish a foreign-trade zone in Central Pennsylvania, adjacent to the Pittsburgh and Harrisburg CBP ports of entry, under the alternative site framework (ASF) adopted by the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.2(c)). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new “subzones” or “usage-driven” FTZ sites for operators/users located within a grantee's “service area” in the context of the FTZ Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for a zone project. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on February 5, 2015. The applicant is authorized to make the proposal under Pennsylvania Statute 66 Pa. Sec. 3102.

    The proposed zone would be the third zone for the Pittsburgh CBP port of entry and the second zone for the Harrisburg CBP port of entry. The existing zones for Pittsburgh are as follows: FTZ 33, Pittsburgh (Grantee: Regional Industrial Development Corporation of Southwestern Pennsylvania, Board Order 124, 11/9/1977); and, FTZ 254, Jefferson County (Grantee: North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development Commission, Board Order 1211, 3/13/2002). The existing zone for Harrisburg is as follows: FTZ 147, Berks County (Grantee: FTZ Corp of Southern Pennsylvania, Board Order 378, 6/28/1988).

    The applicant's proposed service area under the ASF would be Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Centre, Fulton, Huntingdon and Somerset Counties, Pennsylvania. If approved, the applicant would be able to serve sites throughout the service area based on companies' needs for FTZ designation. The applicant has indicated that the proposed service area is adjacent to the Pittsburgh and Harrisburg Customs and Border Protection ports of entry.

    The application indicates a need for zone services in the Central Pennsylvania area. Several firms have indicated an interest in using zone procedures. Specific sites or production approvals are not being sought at this time. Such requests would be made to the FTZ Board on a case-by-case basis.

    In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Elizabeth Whiteman of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the FTZ Board.

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is April 14, 2015. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to April 29, 2015.

    A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at [email protected] or (202) 482-0473.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02980 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Request for Applicants for Appointment to the United States Section of the United States-Turkey Business Council; Amendment AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Amended notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration Notice of Request for Applicants for Appointment to the United States Section of the United States-Turkey Business Council (Council) of February 2, 2015 (80 FR 5511) to revise the eligibility criteria to permit federally-registered lobbyists to apply for appointment to the Council. The Department of Commerce recently revised its policy regarding appointment of federally-registered lobbyists to Department advisory committees and related entities following a policy clarification by the Office of Management and Budget that the eligibility restriction does not apply to persons serving on advisory committees, boards, or commissions if they are specifically appointed to represent the interests of a nongovernmental entity, a recognizable group of persons or nongovernmental entities (an industry sector, labor unions, environmental groups, etc.), or state or local governments (see 79 FR 47482). The Under Secretary for International Trade will now consider applications of federally-registered lobbyists for appointment on the Council. This notice also extends the deadline for submitting applications to March 6, 2015. All other eligibility criteria continue to apply.

    In December 2009, the Governments of the United States and Turkey agreed to establish a U.S.-Turkey Business Council. This notice announces membership opportunities for appointment as American representatives to the U.S. Section of the Council. The current U.S. Section term expired on November 5, 2014.

    DATES:

    Applications should be received no later than March 6, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please send applications to Ryan Barnes, Senior International Trade Specialist, and Chase Miller, International Trade Specialist, Office of Europe, U.S. Department of Commerce, either by email at [email protected] and [email protected], or by mail to U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 3319, Washington, DC 20230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ryan Barnes, Senior International Trade Specialist, and Chase Miller, International Trade Specialist, Office of Europe, U.S. Department of Commerce, telephone: 202-482-4915.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Under Secretary for International Trade of the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Ministry of Economy of Turkey co-chair the U.S.-Turkey Business Council, pursuant to the Terms of Reference signed on May 25, 2010, by the U.S. and Turkish Governments, which set forth the objectives and structure of the Council. The Terms of Reference may be viewed at: http://www.trade.gov/mac/terms-of-reference-us-turkey-business-council.asp.

    The Council is intended to facilitate the exchange of information and encourage bilateral discussions of business and economic issues, including promoting bilateral trade and investment and improving the business climate in each country. The Council brings together the respective business communities of the United States and Turkey to discuss such issues of mutual interest and to communicate their joint recommendations to the U.S. and Turkish Governments. The Council consists of the U.S. and Turkish co-chairs and a Committee comprised of private sector members. The Committee is composed of two Sections of private sector members, a U.S. Section and a Turkish Section, each consisting of approximately ten to twelve members, representing the views and interests of their respective private sector business communities. Each government will appoint the members to its respective Section. The Committee will provide joint recommendations to the two governments that reflect private sector views, needs, and concerns regarding creation of an environment in which the private sectors of both countries can partner, thrive, and enhance bilateral commercial ties that could form the basis for expanded trade and investment between the United States and Turkey.

    The Department of Commerce is currently seeking applicants for membership on the U.S. Section of the Committee. Each applicant must be a senior-level executive of a U.S.-owned or controlled company that is incorporated in and has its main headquarters located in the United States and that is currently doing business in Turkey. Each applicant also must be a U.S. citizen, or otherwise legally authorized to work in the United States, and be able to travel to Turkey and locations in the United States to attend official Council meetings, as well as U.S. Section and Committee meetings. In addition, the applicant may not be a registered foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended.

    Evaluation of applications for membership in the U.S. Section by eligible individuals will be based on the following criteria:

    —A demonstrated commitment by the applicant's company to the Turkish market either through exports or investment. —A demonstrated strong interest by the applicant's company in Turkey and its economic development. —The ability by the applicant to offer a broad perspective on the business environment in Turkey, including cross-cutting issues that affect the entire business community. —The ability by the applicant to initiate and be responsible for activities in which the Council will be active.

    Members will be selected on the basis of who will best carry out the objectives of the Council as stated in the Terms of Reference establishing the U.S.-Turkey Business Council. In selecting members of the U.S. Section, the Department of Commerce will also seek to ensure that the Section represents a diversity of business sectors and geographical locations, as well as a cross-section of small, medium, and large-sized firms.

    U.S. members will receive no compensation for their participation in Council-related activities. They shall not be considered as special government employees. Individual private sector members will be responsible for all travel and related expenses associated with their participation in the Council, including attendance at Committee and Section meetings. Only appointed members may participate in official Council meetings; substitutes and alternates may not be designated. Members will normally serve for two-year terms, but may be reappointed.

    To apply for membership, please submit the following information as instructed in the ADDRESSES and DATES captions above:

    1. Name(s) and title(s) of the applicant(s);

    2. Name and address of the headquarters of the applicant's company;

    3. Location of incorporation of the applicant's company;

    4. Percentage share of U.S. citizen ownership in the company;

    5. Size of the company in terms of number of employees;

    6. Dollar amount of the company's export trade to Turkey;

    7. Dollar amount of the company's investments in Turkey;

    8. Nature of the company's investments, operations or interest in Turkey;

    9. An affirmative statement that the applicant is a U.S. citizen or otherwise legally authorized to work in the United States;

    10. An affirmative statement that the applicant is neither registered nor required to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended;

    11. An affirmative statement that the applicant meets all other eligibility requirements;

    12. A brief statement of why the applicant should be considered;

    13. A brief statement of how the applicant meets the four listed criteria, including information about the candidate's ability to initiate and be responsible for activities in which the Council will be active. Applications will be considered as they are received.

    All candidates will be notified of whether they have been selected.

    Dated: February 4, 2015. Jay A. Burgess, Director of the Office of European Country Affairs (OECA).
    [FR Doc. 2015-02721 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DA-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD711 Marine Mammals; File No. 18881 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the Texas Sealife Center, 14220 South Padre Island Drive, Corpus Christi, TX 78418, [Responsible Party: Tim Tristan], has applied in due form for a permit to conduct research on bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus).

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the Features box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 18881 from the list of available applications.

    These documents are also available upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone: (301) 427-8401; fax: (301) 713-0376.

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Hapeman or Howard Goldstein; phone: (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    The applicant requests a five-year permit to conduct research on bottlenose dolphins in the bay, sound, estuary and near-shore coastal waters of Texas in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of the research is to: (1) Develop and maintain standardized photo-identification catalogs; (2) characterize fine-scale population structure and dynamics; (3) estimate abundance for strategic stocks; (4) establish baseline patterns of distribution, habitat use, site-fidelity, diet, and contaminant loads; (5) analyze dolphin behavior in relation to anthropogenic activities; and (6) identify potential risks to the population. Proposed methods include vessel surveys for photographic identification, focal follows, behavioral observation, and biopsy sampling.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Perry F. Gayaldo, Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03017 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD763 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC); Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold meetings of the: Joint Habitat and Environmental Protection Committee and the Ecosystem-Based Management Committee; the Law Enforcement Advisory Panel; Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) Committee (partially Closed); Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) Selection Committee; Protected Resources Committee; Spiny Lobster Committee, Snapper Grouper Committee; King and Spanish Mackerel Committee; Executive Finance Committee; Golden Crab Committee; Data Collection Committee; and a meeting of the Full Council. The Council will also hold a Council Member Visioning Workshop for the Snapper Grouper Fishery. The Council will take action as necessary. The Council will also hold an informal public question and answer session regarding agenda items and a formal public comment session.

    DATES:

    The Council meeting will be held from 9 a.m. on Monday, March 2, 2015 until 1:30 p.m. on Friday, March 6, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The meeting will be held at the King and Prince Hotel, 201 Arnold Road, St. Simons Island, GA 31522; telephone: (800) 342-0212 or (912) 638-3631; fax: (912) 638-7699.

    Council address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, SAFMC; telephone: (843) 571-4366 or toll free: (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The items of discussion in the individual meeting agendas are as follows:

    Council Member Visioning Workshop, Monday, March 2, 2015, 9 a.m. Until 12 noon

    1. Council members will receive a recap of the December 2014 Visioning Workshop, review the draft snapper grouper goals and objectives, receive a summary of statistics for the snapper grouper fishery, and discuss planning and timelines for collecting public input on the Draft Vision Blueprint.

    2. Council members will discuss next steps and provide guidance to staff.

    Joint Habitat and Environmental Protection Committee and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee, Monday, March 2, 2015, 1:30 p.m. Until 5:30 p.m.

    1. The committees will receive an update on the status of Coral Amendment 8, an overview of the updated Beach Renourishment Policy Statement and hold a South Atlantic Ecosystem Session.

    2. The committees will develop recommendations and provide guidance to staff.

    Law Enforcement Advisory Panel Meeting (Concurrent Session), Monday, March 2, 2015, 1:30 p.m. Until 5:30 p.m.

    1. The advisory panel (AP) will receive updates on recently completed and developing amendments to fishery management plans, receive a presentation on the status of Joint Enforcement Agreements, and overviews of the following amendments under development by the Council: Snapper Grouper Amendment 35 (removing species from the fishery management unit and measures to address endorsements for the commercial golden tilefish fishery); Snapper Grouper Amendment 36 (Spawning Special Management Zones); and Regulatory Amendment 16 (modifications to the black sea bass pot fishery seasonal closure). The AP will also discuss remote sensing as a tool to monitor marine protected area compliance.

    2. The AP will develop recommendations for the Council.

    SEDAR Committee, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 8:30 a.m. Until 9 a.m. (Partially Closed)

    1. The committee will develop SEDAR appointment recommendations for the SEDAR 41 stock assessment (red snapper and gray triggerfish) Data Best Practices Procedure Workshop.

    2. The committee will receive an update on SEDAR Activities and updates from NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC).

    Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) Selection Committee, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 9 a.m. Until 9:30 a.m.

    1. The committee will review SSC policies and develop recommendations for modifications.

    Protected Resources Committee, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 9:30 a.m. Until 10:30 a.m.

    1. The committee will receive a report on ongoing formal consultations and other Protected Resources updates, a presentation the Coastal Migratory Pelagics Biological Opinion, an overview of Advanced Notice of Rulemaking and Request of Information for Coral, and an overview of the Endangered Species Act/Magnuson-Stevens Act Integration Agreement. The Council will discuss and take action as necessary.

    2. The committee will also receive an overview on Proposed Modifications to Right Whale Critical Habitat from NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office (SERO) Protected Resources staff, discuss and take action as necessary.

    Spiny Lobster Committee, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 10:30 a.m. Until 12 noon

    1. The committee will receive an update on the status of commercial and recreational catches versus annual catch limits and a report on the Spiny Lobster Review Panel recommendations

    2. The committee will discuss the report, take action as necessary and provide direction to staff.

    Snapper Grouper Committee, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 1:30 p.m. Until 5 p.m. and Wednesday, March 4, 2015 From 8:30 a.m. Until 5:30 p.m.

    1. The committee will receive updates from NOAA Fisheries on the status of catches versus annual catch limits and the status of amendments currently under formal Secretarial review.

    2. The committee will receive an overview of Snapper Grouper Amendment 37 (Short-term measures relative to the Visioning Project, measures for hogfish, the jacks management complex, almaco jack trip limits, size limits on deepwater species, and measures for red grouper). The committee will develop recommendations for items to include in the amendment and timing for development.

    3. The committee will review Snapper Grouper Amendment 22 with management alternatives for developing a harvest tag program and provide guidance to staff.

    4. The committee will receive a report from the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team meeting, discuss the report and provide guidance to staff.

    5. The committee will review Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 16 (Black sea bass pot closure), develop recommendations for modifying the document and select preferred management alternatives for the amendment.

    6. The committee will receive an overview of Snapper Grouper Amendment 36 (Spawning Special Management Zones), review the decision document and develop recommendations as appropriate. The committee is scheduled to recommend approving the amendment for public hearings.

    7. The committee will receive an overview of the draft System Management Plan for Deepwater Marine Protected Areas and provide guidance to staff.

    8. The committee will receive an overview of Snapper Grouper Amendment 35 (removing species from the management unit, golden tilefish endorsements), review public hearing comments, approve actions, and provide recommendations.

    9. The committee will address issues relative to increased blueline tilefish landings north of North Carolina. The committee will receive a briefing on legal issues and an overview of a decision document to address management issues. The committee will consider recommending an emergency rule or interim action as appropriate to address the increased landings, and provide guidance to staff on next steps and timing.

    Note:

    There will be an informal public question and answer session with the NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Administrator and the Council Chairman on Wednesday, March 4, 2015, beginning at 5:30 p.m.

    King and Spanish Mackerel Committee, Thursday, March 5, 2015, 8:30 a.m. Until 12 noon

    1. The committee will receive an update on the status of commercial and recreational catches versus ACLs and an update on the status of amendments under Formal Review.

    2. The committee will receive a report from the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council meeting and actions taken.

    3. The committee will review public scoping comments.

    4. The committee will review the decision document for Coastal Migratory Pelagics (CMP) Amendment 26 addressing king mackerel ACLs, allocations, stock boundary options, and sales provisions, and provide direction to staff.

    5. The committee will receive an overview of options for separate South Atlantic and Gulf Fishery Management Plans for mackerel from NOAA General Counsel and Council staff, discuss, take action as necessary and provide direction to staff.

    Executive Finance Committee, Thursday, March 5, 2015, 1:30 p.m. Until 2:30 p.m.

    1. The committee will receive updates on the status of the Calendar-Year 2015 budget and budget expenditures.

    2. Address the Council Follow-up and priorities.

    3. Receive an update on the Joint South Florida Committee issues, a report from the Council Coordinating Committee meeting, an update on staff health insurance, and address other issues as appropriate.

    Golden Crab Committee, Thursday, March 5, 2015, 2:30 p.m. Until 3:30 p.m.

    The committee will receive a report on the status of catch versus ACLs for golden crab, an update on the status of Amendment 9 to the Golden Crab Fishery Management Plan (accountability measures), and a report from the Golden Crab AP meeting. The committee will provide recommendations as appropriate.

    Data Collection Committee, Thursday, March 5, 2015, 3:30 p.m. Until 5 p.m.

    1. The committee will receive an update on the status of work on Bycatch Reporting in the Southeast, a presentation on the Electronic Technology Implementation Plan (Data Collection and Monitoring), and an overview and status update on the Implementation Plan for Commercial Logbook Electronic Reporting. The committee will discuss and provide guidance to staff.

    2. The committee will also receive a presentation on the status of the commercial electronic logbook pilot project by NOAA Fisheries SEFSC, and an overview of the Gulf Council's action, status and next steps for the Joint South Atlantic and Gulf Council Generic Charterboat Reporting Amendment. The Committee will review the decision document for the amendment and provide guidance to staff.

    Note:

    A formal public comment session will be held on Thursday, March 5, 2015 beginning at 5:30 p.m. Public comment will be accepted on any items on the Council agenda. The amount of time provided to individuals will be determined by the Chairman based on the number of individuals wishing to comment.

    Council Session: Friday, March 6, 2015, 8:30 a.m. Until 1:30 p.m.

    8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m.: Call the meeting to order, adopt the agenda, and approve the December 2014 minutes.

    8:45 a.m.-9 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Snapper Grouper Committee and is scheduled to approve Snapper Grouper Amendment 36 for public hearings. The Council will consider other committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    9 a.m.-9:15 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the King and Spanish Mackerel Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    9:15 a.m.-9:30 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the SSC Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    9:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Council Member Visioning Workshop, consider recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    9:45 a.m.-10 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Joint Habitat and Environmental Protection Committee and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    10 a.m.-10:15 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Protected Resources Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    10:15 a.m.-10:30 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the SEDAR Committee, consider committee recommendations and will take action as appropriate.

    10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Executive Finance Committee, approve the Council Follow Up and Priorities, take action on the South Florida Management issues as appropriate, and consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    10:45-11 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Golden Crab Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    11 a.m.-11:15 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Data Collection Committee, consider recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    11:15 a.m.-11:30 a.m.: The Council will receive a report from the Spiny Lobster Committee, consider committee recommendations and take action as appropriate.

    11:30 a.m.-12 noon: The Council will receive a presentation on Amendment 6 to the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan from NOAA Fisheries.

    12 noon-12:15 p.m.: The Council will receive an update on the Marine Resources Education Program—Southeast.

    12:15 p.m.-1:30 p.m.: The Council will receive status reports from NOAA Fisheries SERO and the SEFSC. The Council will review and develop recommendations on Experimental Fishing Permits as necessary; review agency and liaison reports; and discuss other business and upcoming meetings.

    Documents regarding these issues are available from the Council office (see ADDRESSES).

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

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) 3 days prior to the meeting.

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03071 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD751 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Groundfish Advisory Subpanel (GAP) will hold an online webinar, which is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The webinar will be held Tuesday, March 3, 2015, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Pacific Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    To attend the webinar, visit http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/webinar/join-webinar. Enter the webinar ID, which is 101-963-979, and your name and email address (required). Once you have joined the webinar, choose either your computer's audio or select “Use Telephone.” If you do not select “Use Telephone” GoToMeeting will automatically connect you to the audio using your computer's microphone and speakers (VoIP).

    If you do not have a headset and speakers, or if there is excessive feedback, please use your telephone for the audio portion of the meeting by dialing this TOLL number +1 (702) 489-0004 (not a toll-free number); then enter the attendee phone audio access code 502-039-210; then enter your audio phone pin (shown after joining the webinar). System Requirements for PC-based attendees: Windows® 7, Vista, or XP; for Mac®-based attendees: Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer; and for mobile attendees: iPhone®, iPad®, AndroidTM phone or Android tablet (See the GoToMeeting Webinar Apps). You may send an email to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt or contact him at (503) 820-2425 for technical assistance. A listening station will also be provided at the Pacific Council office.

    Council address: Pacific Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brett Wiedoff, Staff Officer; telephone: (503) 820-2424.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The primary purpose of the webinar is to discuss and develop statements for the Pacific Council's March 2015 meeting in Vancouver, WA on two agenda items: (1) Recommendations for incidental halibut retention allowances in the sablefish fishery north of Pt. Chehalis, WA—this topic will only be discussed if the Area 2A Pacific halibut Total Allowable Catch is high enough to provide such opportunities; and (2) Ecosystem Plan Initiatives—the Pacific Council will prioritize a list of fishery ecosystem plan initiatives and provide direction for additional consideration of the highest priority issue(s).

    Other pertinent items that are on the Pacific Council's agenda for the March meeting may be addressed if time allows. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the GAP's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Public comment may be accommodated if time allows, at the discretion of the GAP Chair.

    Special Accommodations

    The listening station at the Pacific Council office is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt, at (503) 820-2280, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03040 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD762 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 (Council) will hold a meeting via webinar.

    DATES:

    The Webinar will be held Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Eastern Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via webinar—registration information can be found at http://gulfcouncil.org/council_meetings/panel_committee_meetings.php.

    Council address: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Doug Gregory, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone: (813) 348-1630; fax: (813) 348-1711; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The items of discussion on the agenda are as follows:

    (1) Review Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) Red Snapper Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) Recommendations (2) Public Comment regarding a Framework Action to Adjust the Red Snapper Annual Catch Limit (3) Review and take Final Action on a Framework Action to Adjust the Red Snapper Annual Catch Limit (4) Other Business —Adjourn—

    For meeting materials visit the Council's Web site http://www.gulfcouncil.org. The meeting will be webcast over the internet. A link to the webcast will be available on the Council's Web site http://gulfcouncil.org/council_meetings/Webinars.php.

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

    Special Accommodations

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

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03041 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD768 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (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 meeting of the Coastal Migratory Pelagics Advisory Panel.

    DATES:

    The meeting will convene at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, March 3 until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 4, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council's office, 2203 North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ryan Rindone, Fishery Biologist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone: (813) 348-1630; fax: (813) 348-1711; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The items of discussion on the agenda are as follows:

    Mackerel Advisory Panel Agenda, Tuesday, March 3, 2015, 8:30 a.m. Until Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 5 p.m. I. Introductions and Adoption of Agenda II. Approval of May 15, 2013 Mackerel Advisory Panel (AP) report minutes III. Review of SEDAR 38—Gulf of Mexico King Mackerel Stock Assessment (a) AP Recommendations IV. Overview of Coastal Migratory Pelagics (CMP) Amendment 26—Gulf and Atlantic King Mackerel Reallocation, Stock Boundary, and Sale Provisions (a) AP Recommendations V. Overview of CMP Amendment 28—Gulf and Atlantic King Mackerel Permit Separation (a) AP Recommendations VI. Overview of Gulf King Mackerel Southern Zone Gillnet Fishery Issues (a) AP Recommendations VII. Other Business (a) Discussion topics posed by AP members —Adjourn—

    This agenda may be modified as necessary to facilitate the discussion of pertinent materials up to and during the scheduled meeting.

    For meeting materials see folder “Mackerel Advisory Panel meeting—2015-03” on Gulf Council file server. To access the file server, the URL is https://public.gulfcouncil.org:5001/webman/index.cgi, or go to the Council's Web site and click on the FTP link in the lower left of the Council Web site (http://www.gulfcouncil.org). The username and password are both “gulfguest”.

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

    Special Accommodations

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

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03043 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XA428 Marine Mammals; File No. 14301 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of permit amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that The University of Alaska Museum of the North, 907 Yukon Drive Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960 (Link Olson, Responsible Party) has been issued a minor amendment to Scientific Research Permit No. 14301-01.

    ADDRESSES:

    The amendment and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone: (301) 427-8401; fax: (301) 713-0376.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brendan Hurley or Jennifer Skidmore; phone: (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The requested amendment has been granted under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    Permit No. 14301 (74 FR 65748), authorizes the permit holder to collect, receive, import, or export marine mammal parts for scientific research purposes from all species under NMFS' jurisdiction. Import/export activities may occur world-wide. No live animals are authorized to be harassed or taken, lethally or otherwise, under the permit. This minor amendment (No. 14301-02) extends the duration of the permit one year, through December 31, 2015, but does not change any other terms or conditions of the permit.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Perry F. Gayaldo, Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03018 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XK46 Marine Mammals; File No. 13430 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of permit amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a major amendment to Permit No. 13430-01 has been issued to the NMFS National Marine Mammal Laboratory (Responsible Party: John Bengtson, Ph.D.), 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070.

    ADDRESSES:

    The permit amendment and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401; fax (301) 713-0376.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Sloan or Courtney Smith, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 23, 2014, notice was published in the Federal Register (79 FR 35524) that a request for an amendment to Permit No. 13430-01 to conduct research on pinnipeds had been submitted by the above-named applicant. The requested permit amendment has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    Permit No. 13430-01 authorized the permit holder to take Pacific harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), and northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) within coastal waters and on pinniped rookeries and haul outs of Washington and Oregon and harass Eastern Distinct Population Segment Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) and Southern Resident killer whales (Orcinus orca). The permit also allowed for a limited number of research related mortality of marine mammals. Permit No. 13430-02 (1) extends the duration of the permit five years, through January 31, 2020; (2) authorizes use of an alternate injectable sedative to reduce stress in harbor seals and California sea lions during handling; and (3) removes takes of Southern Resident killer whales due to additional mitigation measures.

    A supplemental environmental assessment (SEA) analyzing the effects of the permitted activities on the human environment was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Based on the analyses in the SEA, NMFS determined that issuance of the permit amendment would not significantly impact the quality of the human environment and that preparation of an environmental impact statement was not required. That determination is documented in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), signed on January 30, 2015.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. Perry F. Gayaldo, Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03021 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Availability of Seats for National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Councils AGENCY:

    Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for applications.

    SUMMARY:

    ONMS is seeking applications for vacant seats for 11 of its 13 national marine sanctuary advisory councils and for the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve Advisory Council (advisory councils). Vacant seats, including positions (i.e., primary member and alternate), for each of the advisory councils are listed in this notice under Supplementary Information. Applicants are chosen based upon their particular expertise and experience in relation to the seat for which they are applying; community and professional affiliations; views regarding the protection and management of marine or Great Lake resources; and possibly the length of residence in the area affected by the sanctuary. Applicants who are chosen as members or alternates should expect to serve two- or three year terms, pursuant to the charter of the specific national marine sanctuary advisory council or the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve Advisory Council.

    DATES:

    Applications are due by March 31, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Application kits are specific to each advisory council. As such, application kits must be obtained from and returned to the council-specific addresses noted below.

    • Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Michael Murray, Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, University of California Santa Barbara, Ocean Science Education Building 514, MC 6155, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-6155; (805) 893- 6418; email [email protected]; or download application from http://channelislands.noaa.gov/sac/council_news.html.

    • Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Beth Dieveney, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, 33 East Quay Rd., Key West, FL 33040; (305) 809-4700 extension 228; email [email protected]; or download application from http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/sac/welcome.html?s=sac.

    • Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Shelley DuPuy, Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, 4700 Avenue U, Bldg. 216, Galveston, TX 77551; (409) 621-5151 extension 106; email [email protected]; or download application from http://flowergarden.noaa.gov/advisorycouncil/councilnews.html.

    • Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Becky Shortland, Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary, 10 Ocean Science Circle, Savannah, GA 31411; (912) 598- 2381; email [email protected]; or download application from http://graysreef.noaa.gov/management/sac/council_news.html.

    • Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Leslie Abramson, Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary, 991 Marine Drive, The Presidio, San Francisco, CA 94129; (415) 561-6622 extension 306; email [email protected]; or download application from http://farallones.noaa.gov/manage/sac.html.

    • Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Inouye Regional Center, ATTN: NOS/ONMS/Shannon Lyday, 1845 Wasp Blvd., Building 176, Honolulu, HI 96818; (808) 725-5905; email [email protected]; or download application from http://hawaiihumpbackwhale.noaa.gov/council/council_app_accepting.html.

    • Monitor National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Shannon Ricles, Monitor National Marine Sanctuary, 100 Museum Drive, Newport News, VA 23606; (757) 591-7328; email [email protected]; or download application from http://monitor.noaa.gov.

    • Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Erin Ovalle, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, 99 Pacific Street, Building 455A, Monterey, CA 93940; (831) 647-4206; email [email protected]; or download application from http://montereybay.noaa.gov/sac/2014/recruit/14v2/141114covlet.html.

    • National Marine Sanctuary of American Samoa Advisory Council: Joseph Paulin, National Marine Sanctuary of American Samoa, Tauese P.F. Sunia Ocean Center, P.O. Box 4318, Pago Pago, AS 96799 (Utulei, American Samoa); (684) 633-6500; email [email protected]; or download application from http://americansamoa.noaa.gov/about/samoa.html.

    • Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve Advisory Council: Hoku Johnson, NOAA Inouye Regional Center, NOS/ONMS/PMNM, 1845 Wasp Blvd., Building 176, Honolulu, HI 96818; (808) 725-5800; email [email protected]; or download application from http://www.papahanaumokuakea.gov/council/.

    • Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Karlyn Langjahr, Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, 115 East Railroad Ave., Suite 101, Port Angeles, WA 98362; (360) 457-6622 extension 31; email [email protected]; or download application from http://olympiccoast.noaa.gov/involved/sac/sac_welcome.html.

    • Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Jean Bauer, Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, 500 W. Fletcher Street, Alpena, Michigan 49707; (989) 356-8805 extension 13; email [email protected]; or download application from http://thunderbay.noaa.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information on a particular national marine sanctuary advisory council, please contact the individual identified in the Addresses section of this notice.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    ONMS serves as the trustee for 14 marine protected areas encompassing more than 170,000 square miles of ocean and Great Lakes waters from the Hawaiian Islands to the Florida Keys, and from Lake Huron to American Samoa. National marine sanctuaries protect our Nation's most vital coastal and marine natural and cultural resources, and through active research, management, and public engagement, sustains healthy environments that are the foundation for thriving communities and stable economies. One of the many ways ONMS ensures public participation in the designation and management of national marine sanctuaries is through the formation of advisory councils. National marine sanctuary advisory councils are community-based advisory groups established to provide advice and recommendations to the superintendents of the national marine sanctuaries on issues including management, science, service, and stewardship; and to serve as liaisons between their constituents in the community and the sanctuary. Additional information on ONMS and its advisory councils can be found at http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov. Information related to the purpose, policies and operational requirements for advisory councils can be found in the charter for a particular advisory council (http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/ac/council_charters.html) and the National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council Implementation Handbook (http://www.sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/ac/acref.html).

    The following is a list of the vacant seats, including positions (i.e., primary member or alternate), for each of the advisory councils currently seeking applications for members and alternates:

    Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Business (primary member); Business (alternate); Commercial Fishing (primary member); Commercial Fishing (alternate); Conservation (primary member); Conservation (alternate); Non-consumptive Recreation (primary member); Non-consumptive Recreation (alternate); Public At-large (two primary members); Research (primary member); and Research (alternate).

    Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Fishing—Charter Fishing Flats Guide (alternate).

    Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Education (primary member); Oil and Gas Production (primary member); Recreational Diving (primary member); Recreational Fishing (primary member); and Research (primary member).

    Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Citizen-at-large (primary member).

    Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Community-At-Large: San Francisco/San Mateo (primary member); Conservation (primary member); Conservation (alternate); Maritime Activities/Commercial (primary member); and Maritime Activities/Commercial (alternate).

    Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Business Commerce (primary member); Commercial Shipping (primary member); Commercial Shipping (alternate); Hawaii County (alternate); Lanai Island (alternate); Molokai Island (alternate); Native Hawaiian (alternate); and Whale Watching (primary member).

    Monitor National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Commercial and Recreational Fishing (primary member); and Education (primary member).

    Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Conservation (alternate); and Education (primary member).

    National Marine Sanctuary of American Samoa Advisory Council: Research (primary member).

    Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve Advisory Council: Native Hawaiian (alternate); and Native Hawaiian Elder (alternate).

    Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Tourism/Economic Development (alternate).

    Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council: Tourism/Recreation (primary member); Tourism/Recreation (alternate); Business/Economic Development (primary member); Business/Economic Development (alternate); Fishing (primary member); Fishing (alternate); Diving (primary member); Diving (alternate); Education, K-12 (primary member); Education, K-12 (alternate); Higher Education (primary member); Higher Education (alternate); Maritime Industry/Business (primary member); Maritime Industry/Business (alternate); Citizen-at-Large (three primary members); and Citizen-at-Large (three alternates).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. Sections 1431, et seq.

    (Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary Program) Dated: January 12, 2015. Daniel J. Basta, Director, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02792 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Deletions from the Procurement List.

    SUMMARY:

    This action deletes products from the Procurement List previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: 3/16/2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patricia Briscoe, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Deletions

    On 12/30/2014 (79 FR 78407) and 1/12/2015 (80 FR 1494), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notices of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the products listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

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

    1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

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

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

    End of Certification

    Accordingly, the following products are deleted from the Procurement List:

    Products Product Names/NSNs Shirt, Flyers, Midweight, Fire Resistant, MPS, Navy, Men's, Black NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0504—XSR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0505—SR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0506—MR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0507—LR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0508—XLR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0766—X Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0767—X Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0768—Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0769—Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0770—Medium Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0771—Medium Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0772—Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0773—Large Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0774—X Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0775—X Large Long Drawers, Flyers, Midweight, Fire Resistant, MPS, Navy, Men's, Long, Black NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0509—XSR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0510—SR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0511—MR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0512—LR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0513—XLR NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0776—X Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0777—X Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0778—Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0779—Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0780—Medium Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0781—Medium Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0782—Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0783—Large Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0784—X Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0785—X Large Long Shirt, Flyers, Midweight, Fire Resistant, MPS, Navy, Women's, Black NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0786—X Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0787—X Small Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0788—X Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0789—Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0790—Small Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0791—Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0792—Medium Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0793—Medium Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0794—Medium Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0795—Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0796—Large Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0797—Large Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0798—X Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0799—X Large Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0800—X Large Long Drawers, Power Stretch Underwear, MPS, Army, Women's, Sage Green NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0801—X Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0802—X Small Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0803—X Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0804—Small Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0805—Small Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0806—Small Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0807—Medium Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0808—Medium Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0809—Medium Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0810—Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0811—Large Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0812—Large Long NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0813—X Large Short NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0814—X Large Regular NSN: 8415-00-NSH-0815—X Large Long Mandatory Source of Supply: No Nonprofit Agency authorized Contracting Activities: Dept of the Army, W40M Northern Region Contracting Office, Fort Belvoir, VA Dept of the Navy, U S Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, VA Product Name/NSN Steno Pad Holder, Vinyl/7510-01-455-0020 Mandatory Source of Supply: The Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind, Little Rock, AR Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Names/NSNs Pen, Ergonomic, Ballpoint, “The Constitution”/7520-01-454-7996 Pen, “Patriot” Ergonomic/7520-01-454-7997 Pen, Ball Point, Liberty Writer, Retractable, Cushion Grip, Black Ink, Fine Point/7520-01-454-7998 Pen, Ball Point, Liberty Writer, Retractable, Cushion Grip, Black Ink, Medium Point NSN: 7520-01-454-7999 Pen & Pencil Set, “The Liberty”/7520-01-439-3393 Pen, Ball Point, Retractable, Stealth Writer, Woodland Green Camouflage, Black Ink, Medium Point/7520-01-439-3407 Pen, Ball Point, Retractable, Stealth Writer, Desert Tan Camouflage, Black ink, Medium Point/7520-01-439-3408 Mandatory Source of Supply: Industries for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Names/NSNs Clock, Atomic, Standard, Thermometer NSN: 6645-01-491-9819 NSN: 6645-01-491-9826 Clock, Wall NSN: 6645-01-421-6899 NSN: 6645-01-456-6029—Customized Slimline Workstation Clocks NSN: 6645-01-516-9623—6″ Federal Logo—Brown NSN: 6645-01-516-9624—6″ Black Case NSN: 6645-01-516-9625—6″ Brown Case NSN: 6645-01-516-9628—6″ Federal Logo—Black Mandatory Source Of Supply: The Chicago Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired, Chicago, IL Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Names/NSNs Use in Canon printers BJC3000/6000/6200/6500/S400/7510-01-544-0840 Inkjet printer cartridge/compatible with Epson Part No. T029201. Tri color/7510-01-555-6172 Cartridge, Inkjet, Compatible with Canon BCI-15BK, Black, 185 Page Yield/7510-01-555-6174 Inkjet printer cartridge/7510-01-555-6175 Inkjet printer cartridge/7510-01-555-6176 Inkjet printer cartridge/7510-01-555-6177 Mandatory Source of Supply: Alabama Industries for the Blind, Talladega, AL Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Name/NSN: Marker, Tube Type, Broad Tip/7520-01-424-4858 Mandatory Source of Supply: Dallas Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc., Dallas, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Name/NSN: Handle, Mop, Lockjaw, Wood/7920-01-452-2028 Mandatory Source Of Supply: Alphapointe, Kansas City, MO Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, Fort Worth, TX Product Name/NSNs: Bag, Plastic

    NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0011

    NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0012 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0013 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0014 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0015 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0016 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0017 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0018 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0019 NSN: 8105-00-NIB-0020 Mandatory Source of Supply: Unknown Contracting Activity: U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, VA Product Names/NSNs Flexible Erasable Wall Planners NSN: 7510-01-600-8032—Dated 2014 18-month Paper Wall Planner, 24″ x 37″ NSN: 7510-01-600-8042—Dated 2014 12-Month 2-Sided Laminated Wall Planner, 24″ x 37″ NSN: 7520-01-585-0982—Planner, Flexible, Erasable, Undated, Vacation Mandatory Source of Supply: The Chicago Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired, Chicago, IL Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FSS Household and Industrial Furniture, Arlington, VA Product Names/NSNs Daily Desk Planner, Dated 2014, Wire bound, Non-refillable, Black Cover/7530-01-600-7567 Wall Calendar, Dated 2014, Wire Bound w/Hanger, 12″ x 17″/7510-01-600-7570 Monthly Desk Planner, Dated 2014, Wire Bound, Non-refillable, Black cover/7530-01-600-7598 Weekly Desk Planner, Dated 2014, Wire Bound, Non-refillable, Black cover/7530-01-600-7609 Monthly Wall Calendar, Dated 2014, Jan-Dec, 81/2″ x 11″/7510-01-600-7623 Weekly Planner Book, Dated 2014, 5″ x 8″, Digital Camouflage/7530-01-600-7624 Wall Calendar, Dated 2014, Wire Bound w/hanger, 15.5″ x 22″/7510-01-600-7636 Mandatory Source Of Supply: The Chicago Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired, Chicago, IL Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Names/NSNs: Paper, Mimeograph and Duplicating/7530-00-285-3072 Paper, Mimeograph and Duplicating/7530-00-285-3073 Paper, Writing/7530-00-285-5836 Paper, Bond & Writing/7530-00-616-7284 Mandatory Source of Supply: Louisiana Association for the Blind, Shreveport, LA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY
    Patricia Briscoe, Deputy Director, Business Operations (Pricing and Information Management).
    [FR Doc. 2015-03044 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Additions and Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Proposed additions to and deletions from the procurement list.

    SUMMARY:

    The Committee is proposing to add products to the Procurement List that will be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes products and services previously furnished by such agencies.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before: 3/16/2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patricia Briscoe, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Additions

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

    The following products are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

    Products Products Name/NSNs: MR 385—Kit, Gifts for Santa MR 378—Christmas Sticker Book Mandatory for Purchase by: Defense Commissary Agency, Fort Lee, VA Mandatory Source of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Distribution: C-List Products Name/NSNs: MR 390—Slotted Spoon, Red MR 391—Slotted Turner, Red MR 392—Tongs, Red MR 393—Slotted Spoon, Green MR 394—Slotted Turner, Green MR 395—Tongs, Green Mandatory for Purchase by: Defense Commissary Agency, Fort Lee, VA Mandatory Source of Supply: Industries for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI Distribution: C-List Deletions

    The following products and services are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

    Products Product Name/NSNs: Folder, Zebley Claim NSN: 7530-00-000-0430 NSN: 7530-00-000-0432 Mandatory Source of Supply: Goodwill Industries of the Pioneer Valley, Inc., Springfield, MA Contracting Activity: Social Security Administration Hdqtrs—Office of Acquisition & Grants, Baltimore, MD Services Service Type: Microfilming Service Service is Mandatory for: Commodities Future Trading Commission, 1155 21st Street, Washington, DC Mandatory Source of Supply: No NPA Assigned Service Type: Warehouse Staffing Service Service is Mandatory for: Warehouse Section, 325 Broadway, Bldg. 22, NOAA's Logistics Div., Boulder, CO Mandatory Source of Supply: Bayaud Industries, Inc., Denver, CO Contracting Activity: Dept of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Co Service Type: Custodial Service Service is Mandatory for: USDA, Laboratory Research Building, 6301 W. 750 North, West Lafayette, IN Mandatory Source of Supply: Wabash Center, Inc., Lafayette, IN Contracting Activity: Dept of Agricultural, Agricultural Research Service, USDA ARS MWA 52KJ, West Lafayette, IN
    Patricia Briscoe, Deputy Director, Business Operations, (Pricing and Information Management).
    [FR Doc. 2015-03030 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Friday, February 20, 2015.

    PLACE:

    Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Surveillance, enforcement, and examinations matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.

    Natise Allen, Executive Assistant.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03166 Filed 2-11-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No. CFPB-2015-0001] Request for Information Regarding an Initiative on Safe Student Banking AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for information; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On January 27, 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) published in the Federal Register a request for information seeking feedback on a draft Safe Student Account Scorecard that offers information to colleges and universities when soliciting agreements from financial institutions to market safe and affordable financial accounts for their students. The Bureau seeks comment from the public, including student and parent consumers, institutions of higher education, and financial institutions. To allow interested persons additional time to consider and submit their responses, the Bureau has determined that an extension of the comment period until March 30, 2015, is appropriate.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the Request for Information Regarding an Initiative on Safe Student Banking published January 27, 2015 at 80 FR 4255 is extended. Responses must now be received on or before March, 30, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CFPB-2015-0001, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include Docket No. CFPB-2015-0001 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1275 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002.

    Instructions: All submissions should include the agency name and docket number for this proposal. Because paper mail in the Washington, DC area and at the Bureau is subject to delay, commenters are encouraged to submit comments electronically. In general, all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov. In addition, comments will be available for public inspection and copying at 1275 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect the documents by telephoning (202) 435-7275.

    All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or social security numbers, should not be included. Comments generally will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general inquiries, submission process questions or any additional information, please contact Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, at 202-435-7275.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 14, 2015, the Bureau issued a Request for Information Regarding an Initiative on Safe Student Banking. The information request was published in the Federal Register on January 27, 2015. The Bureau is seeking feedback on a draft Safe Student Account Scorecard that offers information to colleges and universities when soliciting agreements from financial institutions to market safe and affordable financial accounts to their students. To allow interested persons additional time to consider and submit their responses, the Bureau has determined that an extension is appropriate. The comment period therefore will now close on March 30, 2015.

    Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 5511(c).

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Christopher D'Angelo, Chief of Staff, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02982 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled AmeriCorps State & National Social Network Study Partnership and Collaboration Survey for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Robin Ghertner, at 202-606-6772 or email to [email protected] Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    DATES:

    Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, within March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service, by any of the following two methods:

    (1) By fax to: 202-395-6974, Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service; or

    (2) By email to: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

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

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

    • Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments

    A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on November 30th, 2014. This comment period ended January 29th, 2015. No public comments were received from this Notice.

    Description: While previous evaluation efforts have confirmed CNCS's impact on members and recipients of services such as increased education, skills, and civic participation, the current effort through the Social Network Study (SNS) will be the first evaluation of the collaboration and partnerships between ACSN grantees and organizations within their geographic communities. The main goal of the SNS is to gather through the Partnership and Collaboration (PAC) Survey an in-depth understanding of how ACSN grantees engage community organizations and to learn more about their relationships and interactions with other organizations within their network. The PAC will also provide information about both the barriers that prevent collaboration and interaction, as well as factors that could be utilized to overcome them. These outcomes are an important step to developing a more vigorous civic infrastructure and increasing capacity in the communities served by CNCS and its grantees. This study will also help CNCS disseminate best practices about collaboration and partnerships to other AmeriCorps programs. Information will be collected electronically via web primarily and telephone and mail-in options will be provided only to those not responsive to the web survey.

    Type of Review: New.

    Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

    Title: AmeriCorps State & National Social Network Study Partnership and Collaboration Survey.

    OMB Number: TBD.

    Agency Number: None.

    Affected Public: AmeriCorps grantees and their community partners.

    Total Respondents: 250.

    Frequency: Once.

    Average Time per Response: 30 minutes.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 125

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Stephen Plank, Director, Research and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02978 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID DoD-2015-OS-0017] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) 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 April 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    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 Finance and Accounting Services—Cleveland, 1240 East 9th Street, Cleveland, OH 44199, ATTN: Mr. Charles Moss, [email protected], 216-204-4426.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Child Annuitant's School Certification; DD Form 2788; OMB Control Number 0730-0001.

    Needs and Uses: In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1447 and DoD Financial Management Regulation, 7000.14-R, Volume 7B, a child annuitant between the age of 18 and 22 years of age must provide evidence of intent to continue study or training at a recognized educational institution. The certificate is required for the school semester or other period in which the school year is divided.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 7,200 hours.

    Number of Respondents: 3,600.

    Responses per Respondent: 2.

    Annual Responses: 7,200.

    Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.

    Frequency: Once each semester of full time school, ages 18 to 22.

    The Child Annuitant's School Certification form is submitted to the child for completion and returned to this agency. The child will certify as to his or her intent for future enrollment and a school official must certify on the past or present school enrollment of the child. By not obtaining school certification, overpayment of annuities to children would exist. This information may be collected from some schools which are non-profit institutions such as religious institutions. If information is not received after the end of each school enrollment, over disbursements of an annuity would be made to a child who elected not to continue further training or study.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02999 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0018] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) 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 April 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    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 Finance and Accounting Services—Cleveland, 1240 East 9th Street, Cleveland, OH 44199, ATTN: Mr. Charles Moss, [email protected], 216-204-04426.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Custodianship Certification to Support Claims on Behalf of Minor Children of Deceased Members of the Armed Forces; DD Form 2790; OMB Control Number 0730-0010.

    Needs and Uses: Per DoD Financial Management Regulation, 7000.14-R, Volume 7B, Chapter 46, paragraph 460103A(1), an annuity for a minor child is paid to the legal guardian, or, if there is no legal guardian, to the natural parent who has care, custody, and control of the child as the custodian, or to a representative payee of the child. An annuity may be paid directly to the child when the child is considered to be a majority age under the law in the state of residence. The child then is considered an adult for annuity purposes and a custodian or legal fiduciary is not required.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 120.

    Number of Respondents: 300.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 300.

    Average Burden per Response: 24 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    The form is used by the Directorate of Retired and Annuity Pay, Defense Finance and Accounting Service—Cleveland, in order to pay the annuity to the correct person on behalf of the child under the age of majority. If the form, with the completed certification is not received, the annuity payments are suspended.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03003 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0019] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary of Defense, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice to alter a System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to alter a system of records, DMDC 10 DoD, entitled “Defense Biometric Identification Data System (DBIDS)” in its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended.

    The records in the system are used to support DoD physical security programs, to issue individual facility/installation access credentials, and for identity verification purposes. The system also is used to record personal vehicles and property registered with the DoD and for producing facility management reports. The records may be accessed by other physical access control systems for further verification at other sites. Records may also be used for law enforcement purposes.

    DATES:

    Comments will be accepted on or before March 16, 2015. This proposed action will be effective the date following the end of the comment period unless comments are received which result in a contrary determination.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    * Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    * Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Cindy Allard, Chief, OSD/JS Privacy Office, Freedom of Information Directorate, Washington Headquarters Service, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0461.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy and Civil Liberties Division Web site at http://dpcld.defense.gov/. The proposed system report, as required by U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on February 6, 2015, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,” dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. DMDC 10 DoD System name:

    The Defense Biometric Identification Data System (April 1, 2011, 76 FR 18191).

    Changes: System name:

    Delete entry and replace with “Defense Biometric Identification Data System (DBIDS).”

    Categories of individuals covered by the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “All individuals who request or have been granted physical access to DoD installations and facilities or using facilities interfacing with Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) Physical Access Control Systems.

    All individuals who have been or will be denied access to a DoD installation or facility using or interfacing with DMDC Physical Access Control System based on the decision of the facility commander in charge of physical access control.”

    Categories of records in the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “Personal data includes name, identification type (e.g. DoD ID number, driver's license number, passport number, state ID number, Social Security Number (SSN), date and place of birth, gender, nationality and country of citizenship, race, tribe, home and work addresses, personal and work email addresses and telephone numbers, marital status, photographs, weight, height, eye color, hair color, index fingerprints or 10-print rolled and slapped fingerprints, iris scans, hand geometry, grade, dates of issue and expiration of facility and installation access credentials, alert status (e.g. Wants or Warrants, Armed and Dangerous, Be On the Lookout, Red Cross Emergency, Missing) or other similar fields necessary in assisting law enforcement in understanding the current disposition of personnel and property entering and, when required by Status of Forces Agreement, exiting DBIDS controlled facility, and installation name and/or region the record was created.

    Privately owned vehicle information includes name of vehicle manufacturer, model year, color and vehicle type, license plate type (e.g., personal, commercial) and number, vehicle identification number (VIN), and current registration, automobile insurance, and driver's license data for those vehicles with established installation access (base/post decals).

    Information on personal property stored on a military installation or facility contains data on government-issued (when required by Status of Forces Agreement) and personal weapons, such as type, serial number, manufacturer, caliber, and firearm registration date; storage location data to include unit, room, building, and phone number; and type(s) of personal property (e.g., bicycles) and description of property, serial number, and color.”

    Authority for maintenance of the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “10 U.S.C. 113, Secretary of Defense; 10 U.S.C. 136, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; DoD Directive 1000.25, DoD Personnel Identity Protection (PIP) Program; DoD Instruction 5200.08, Security of DoD Installations and Resources and the DoD Physical Security Review Board (PSRB); DoD 5200.08-R, Physical Security Program; and E.O. 9397 (SSN), as amended.”

    Purpose(s):

    Delete entry and replace with “The records support DoD physical security programs, to issue individual facility/installation access credentials, and for identity verification purposes. The system also is used to record personal vehicles and property registered with the DoD and for producing facility management reports. The records may be accessed by other physical access control systems for further verification at other sites. Records may also be used for law enforcement purposes.”

    Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses:

    Delete entry and replace with “In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the records contained herein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    Law Enforcement Routine Use: If a system of records maintained by a DoD Component to carry out its functions indicates a violation or potential violation of law, whether civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by general statute or by regulation, rule, or order issued pursuant thereto, the relevant records in the system of records may be referred, as a routine use, to the agency concerned, whether federal, state, local, or foreign, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting such violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto.

    Congressional Inquiries Disclosure Routine Use: Disclosure from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be made to a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the congressional office made at the request of that individual.

    Disclosures Required by International Agreements Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed to foreign law enforcement, security, investigatory, or administrative authorities to comply with requirements imposed by, or to claim rights conferred in, international agreements and arrangements including those regulating the stationing and status in foreign countries of DoD military and civilian personnel.

    Disclosure to the Department of Justice for Litigation Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to any component of the Department of Justice for the purpose of representing the Department of Defense, or any officer, employee or member of the Department in pending or potential litigation to which the record is pertinent.

    Disclosure of Information to the National Archives and Records Administration Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to the National Archives and Records Administration for the purpose of records management inspections conducted under authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    Data Breach Remediation Purposes Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a Component may be disclosed to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (1) The Component suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of the information in the system of records has been compromised; (2) the Component has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the Component or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and (3) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Components efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    The DoD Blanket Routine Uses set forth at the beginning of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) compilation of systems of records notices may apply to this system. The complete list of DoD blanket routine uses can be found online at: http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNsIndex/BlanketRoutineUses.aspx”

    Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage:

    Delete entry and replace with “Electronic storage media.”

    Retrievability:

    Delete entry and replace with “Retrieved by name, identification type and number, vehicle identifiers, or weapon identification data. Records may also be retrieved by photograph or fingerprints.”

    Safeguards:

    Delete entry and replace with “Computerized records are maintained in a controlled area accessible only to authorized personnel. Entry is restricted by the use of locks, guards, and administrative procedures. Access to personal information is role based and limited to those who require the records in the performance of their official duties. Access to personal information is further restricted by the use of unique logon and passwords, which are changed periodically, or by two factor authentication including biometric verification.”

    Retention and disposal:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records are deleted three to five (3-5) years after deactivation or confiscation of access credentials.”

    System manager(s) and address:

    Delete entry and replace with “Deputy for Identity, Defense Manpower Data Center, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-6000.”

    Notification procedure:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking to determine whether information about themselves is contained in this system should address written inquiries to the Deputy for Identity, Defense Manpower Data Center, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-6000.

    Signed, written requests should contain the requester's name, identification type and number, date of birth, installation name and/or region the record was created and current address and telephone number of the individual.”

    Record access procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking access to information about themselves contained in this system should address written inquiries to the Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff Freedom of Information Act Requester Service Center, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    Signed, written requests should contain the requester's name, identification type and number, date of birth, installation name and/or region record was created, current address and telephone number of the requester and the name and number of this system of records notice.”

    Contesting record procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “The OSD rules for accessing records, for contesting contents, and appealing initial agency determinations are published in OSD Administrative Instruction 81; 32 CFR part 311; or may be obtained from the system manager.”

    Record source categories:

    Delete entry and replace with “Data is collected from the individual, the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), the Interoperability Layer Service (IoLS), the Military Services, and the DoD Components.”

    [FR Doc. 2015-03007 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID DoD-2015-OS-0016] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary of Defense, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice to alter a System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to alter a system of records, V5-02, entitled “Defense Clearance and Investigations Index (DCII)” in its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended.

    The DCII is a central database of DoD conducted or sponsored investigations used by DoD law enforcement activities, personnel security adjudicators, and in the Continuous Evaluation program. It also aggregates the results of National Agency Check (NAC) information prior to February 2005 (NAC information after this period is maintained by OPM as well as other Federal investigative agencies). Records document investigations on file with DoD agencies and the United States Coast Guard.

    The database also provides data query, data management and reporting capabilities on data pertaining to the existence and physical location of criminal and personnel security investigative files.

    DATES:

    Comments will be accepted on or before March 16, 2015. This proposed action will be effective the date following the end of the comment period unless comments are received which result in a contrary determination.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    * Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Cindy Allard, Chief, OSD/JS Privacy Office, Freedom of Information Directorate, Washington Headquarters Service, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0461.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy and Civil Liberties Division Web site at http://dpcld.defense.gov/.

    The proposed system report, as required by U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on February 6, 2015, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,” dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. V5-02 System name:

    Defense Clearance and Investigations Index (DCII) (August 17, 1999, 64 FR 44704).

    Changes: System ID:

    Delete entry and replace with “DMDC 13 DoD.”

    System name:

    Delete entry and replace with “Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII).”

    System location:

    Delete entry and replace with “Defense Manpower Data Center, DoD Center Monterey Bay, 400 Gigling Road, Seaside, CA 93955-6771.”

    Categories of individuals covered by the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “All Armed Forces personnel, DoD and U.S. Coast Guard civilian employees, federal contractor employees, and applicants, “affiliated” personnel (such as Non-Appropriated Fund employees, Red Cross volunteers and staff; USO personnel, and congressional staff members) who are the subject of an investigation completed by or for a DoD investigative organization or the United States Coast Guard when that investigation is retained by the organization and the name is submitted for central indexing.”

    Categories of records in the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records contain names, known alias, Social Security Number (SSN), date of birth, state of birth, country of birth, date investigation completed, employing agencies/companies, type of incident, type of record, and investigation information to include custodian of the file, year indexed, number used by the repository to locate the file location of the investigation, and file number.”

    Authority for maintenance of the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “E.O. 12829, National Industrial Security Program; E.O. 13467, Reforming Processes Related to Suitability for Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information; DoD Instruction 1320.04, Military Officer Actions Requiring Presidential, Secretary of Defense, or Under Secreary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Approval or Senate Confirmation; DoDI 5200.02, DoD Personnel Security Program (PSP); DoDI 5505.07, Titling and Indexing Subjects of Criminial Investigations in the Department of Defense; and E.O. 9397 (SSN), as amended.”

    Purpose(s):

    Delete entry and replace with “The DCII is a central database of DoD conducted or sponsored investigations used by DoD law enforcement activities, personnel security adjudicators, and in the Continuous Evaluation program. It also aggregates the results of National Agency Check (NAC) information prior to February 2005 (NAC information after this period is maintained by OPM as well as other Federal investigative agencies). Records document investigations on file with DoD agencies and the United States Coast Guard.

    The database also provides data query, data management and reporting capabilities on data pertaining to the existence and physical location of criminal and personnel security investigative files.”

    Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses:

    Delete entry and replace with “In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the records contained herein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    To the White House to obtain approval of the President of the United States regarding certain military personnel officer actions.

    To the U.S. Senate for appointments and promotions which require Senate confirmation.

    To Federal agencies for use in the performance of criminal investigation and personnel security activities to determine the security clearance status of an individual and to determine the existence or physical location of criminal and personnel security investigative files.

    Congressional Inquiries Disclosure Routine Use: Disclosure from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be made to a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the congressional office made at the request of that individual.

    Disclosure to the Department of Justice for Litigation Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to any component of the Department of Justice for the purpose of representing the Department of Defense, or any officer, employee or member of the Department in pending or potential litigation to which the record is pertinent.

    Disclosure of Information to the National Archives and Records Administration Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to the National Archives and Records Administration for the purpose of records management inspections conducted under authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    Data Breach Remediation Purposes Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a Component may be disclosed to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (1) The Component suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of the information in the system of records has been compromised; (2) the Component has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the Component or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and (3) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Components efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    The DoD Blanket Routine Uses set forth at the beginning of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) compilation of systems of records notices may apply to this system. The complete list of DoD blanket routine uses can be found online at: http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNsIndex/BlanketRoutineUses.aspx”

    Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records in the system: Storage:

    Delete entry and replace with “Electronic storage media.”

    Retrievability:

    Delete entry and replace with “SSN, name, combination of another data element with date of birth and/or place of birth; and/or by employing agencies/companies, type of incident, type of record, or file number.”

    Safeguards:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records are accessible only to authorized persons with a valid need-to-know, who are appropriately screened, investigated, and determined eligible for access. Physical safeguards include guards, the use of identification badges, and closed circuit TV. Technical safeguards include Personally Identifiable Verification (PIV) card login, Intrusion Detection System, encryption, firewall, and virtual private network. Administrative safeguards include security audits, monitoring of users' security practices, and encrypting backups of sensitive data offsite.”

    Retention and disposal:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records are deleted in accordance with DoD Component authorized disposition schedules or 15 years after completion date of the last update for that file, whichever is sooner.”

    System manager(s) and address:

    Delete entry and replace with “Deputy Director for Identity and Personnel Assurance, Defense Manpower Data Center, 4800 Mark Center, Alexandria, VA 22350-4000.”

    Notification procedure:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking to determine whether information about themselves is contained in this system should address written inquiries to: Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) Boyers, ATTN: Privacy Act Office, P.O. Box 168, Boyers, PA 16020-0168.

    Written requests must contain the full name and SSN of the subject individual, along with a return address.”

    Record access procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking access to records about themselves contained in this system should address written inquiries to: Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) Boyers, ATTN: Privacy Act Office, P.O. Box 168, Boyers, PA 16020-0168.

    Signed, written requests must contain the full name and SSN of the subject individual, a return address, and the name and number of this system of records notice.

    In addition, the requester must provide a notarized statement or an unsworn declaration made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1746, in the following format:

    If executed outside the United States: `I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).'

    If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: `I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).'

    Attorneys or other persons acting on behalf of an individual must provide written authorization from that individual for their representative to act on their behalf.”

    Contesting record procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) rules for accessing records, for contesting contents, and appealing initial agency determinations are published in OSD Administrative Instruction 81, 32 CFR part 311; or may be obtained directly from the system manager.”

    Record source categories:

    Delete entry and replace with “Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Army Crime Records Directorate, Army Investigation Record Repository, Defense Contract Management Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Logistics Agency, Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility, Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, National Security Agency, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, Pentagon Force Protection Agency, United States Coast Guard and other DoD agencies performing criminal investigation or personnel security activities.”

    [FR Doc. 2015-02968 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meetings for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Land-Water Interface and Service Pier Extension, Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Silverdale, WA AGENCY:

    Department of the Navy, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508), the Department of the Navy (Navy) has prepared and filed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Land-Water Interface (LWI) and Service Pier Extension (SPE) on Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Silverdale, WA. The Draft EIS evaluates the potential environmental effects of two proposed actions: (1) The proposed construction and operation of LWI structures and (2) the proposed construction and operation of a SPE and associated support facilities, both on Naval Base Kitsap Bangor.

    With the filing of the Draft EIS, the Navy is initiating a 60-day public comment period and has scheduled two public meetings to provide information and receive comments on the Draft EIS. This notice announces the dates and locations of the public meetings and provides information about the environmental planning effort.

    DATES:

    Dates and Addresses: Public meetings will be held from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., with a presentation at 6:30 p.m. on the following dates and locations: March 3, 2015, at the Chimacum High School Commons, 91 West Valley Road, Chimacum, WA 98325; March 4, 2015, at the North Kitsap High School Commons, 1780 NE Hostmark Street, Poulsbo, WA 98370.

    The 60-day public review and comment period for the Draft EIS is from February 13, 2015 through April 13, 2015. The Navy will hold two public meetings to inform the public about the proposed actions and potential environmental impacts, and to provide an opportunity for the public to comment on the adequacy and accuracy of the environmental analysis. The public meetings will include an open house information session, followed by a presentation by the Navy, and a verbal comment session. Navy representatives will be available during the open house information sessions to clarify information related to the Draft EIS. Federal, state, and local agencies and officials, as well as interested organizations and individuals, are encouraged to provide comments in writing during the public review period or in person at one of the scheduled public meetings.

    Attendees will be able to submit verbal and/or written comments during the public meetings. A court reporter will record comments from the public during the verbal comment session. In the interest of available time, and to ensure all who wish to provide a verbal statement to the court reporter have the opportunity to do so, each speaker's comments will be limited to three (3) minutes, which may be extended if meeting attendance and time permits. Equal weight will be given to verbal and written comments.

    Comments may also be submitted via mail to Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest, 1101 Tautog Circle, Suite 203, Silverdale, WA 98315-1101, Attn: Mr. Thomas Dildine, LWI/SPE EIS Project Manager, via Email at [email protected], or via the project Web site at: http://www.nbkeis.com/lwi. All comments, verbal or written, submitted during the public comment period will become part of the public record. All comments will be considered and acknowledged or responded to in the Final EIS. The Navy may address the comments directly, or the Navy may respond to public comments by modifying the analysis in the EIS as appropriate. Comments must be postmarked or received online by April 13, 2015, to ensure they are considered in the Final EIS. No decision will be made to implement any alternative until the NEPA process is complete and a Record of Decision is signed by the Navy.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest, 1101 Tautog Circle, Suite 203, Silverdale, WA 98315-1101, Attn: Mr. Thomas Dildine, LWI/SPE EIS Project Manager, Email: [email protected], or project Web site: http://www.nbkeis.com/lwi.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A Notice of Intent to prepare the Land-Water Interface and Service Pier Extension EIS was published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2013 (78 FR 7416). Two public scoping meetings were held on the following dates and locations:

    1. February 20, 2013, Chimacum High School Commons, 91 West Valley Road, Chimacum, WA 98325; and

    2. February 21, 2013, North Kitsap High School Commons, 1780 Northeast Hostmark Street, Poulsbo, WA 98370.

    The LWI proposed action is to complete the perimeter of the Waterfront Restricted Area at Naval Base Kitsap Bangor by constructing and operating barrier structures connecting the existing on-water Port Security Barrier system to the existing on-land Waterfront Security Enclave. The purpose of the LWI proposed action is to comply with Department of Defense directives to protect OHIO Class ballistic missile (TRIDENT) submarines from increased and evolving threats and to prevent the seizure, damage, or destruction of military assets. The LWI is needed to enhance security within the Waterfront Restricted Area and comply with security requirements. Three alternatives were carried forward for analysis: No Action (Alternative 1), Pile-Supported Pier (Alternative 2), and Port Security Barrier Modifications (Alternative 3). Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative.

    The SPE proposed action is to extend and operate the existing Service Pier and construct and operate support facilities to accommodate the transfer of two SEAWOLF Class submarines from Naval Base Kitsap Bremerton to Naval Base Kitsap Bangor. The purpose of the SPE proposed action is to eliminate deployment constraints and improve maintenance of the SEAWOLF Class submarine fleet. The SPE is needed to avoid restrictions at Naval Base Kitsap Bremerton on navigating SEAWOLF Class submarines through Rich Passage under certain tidal conditions; improve long-term operational effectiveness for the three SEAWOLF Class submarines on Naval Base Kitsap; provide berthing and logistical support for SEAWOLF, LOS ANGELES, and VIRGINIA Class submarines at the Navy's submarine research, development, test, and evaluation hub, located at Naval Base Kitsap Bangor; and improve submarine crew training and readiness through co-location of SEAWOLF Class submarines with command functions on the Naval Base Kitsap Bangor submarine training center. Three alternatives were carried forward for analysis: No Action (Alternative 1), Short Pier (Alternative 2), and Long Pier (Alternative 3). Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative.

    The LWI and SPE are independent actions, but are analyzed in the same EIS because their geographic proximity results in the potential for the two projects to have overlapping environmental impacts. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are cooperating agencies for this EIS.

    The Navy analyzed potential impacts from the proposed actions on environmental resources, including marine water resources (hydrography, water quality, sediment quality); marine vegetation and invertebrates; plankton; fish; marine mammals; marine birds; terrestrial biological resources (vegetation and habitats; wetlands; threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; and wildlife); geology, soils, and water resources; land use and recreation; airborne acoustic environment; aesthetics and visual quality; socioeconomics; environmental justice and protection of children; cultural resources; American Indian traditional resources; traffic; and air quality.

    For the LWI structures constructed under Alternative 2, impacts would include in-water pile-driving noise, including effects on fish and wildlife; turbidity; and habitat impacts. Impacts from operation and maintenance would include loss and shading of marine habitat, including eelgrass, macroalgae, and the benthic (bottom-dwelling) community, as well as potential interference with migration of some Endangered Species Act (ESA) protected juvenile salmon. LWI Alternative 2 has the potential to impact fish and bird species protected under the ESA and marine mammals protected under the ESA and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). For the LWI structures constructed under Alternative 3, impacts would include airborne pile-driving noise, including effects on fish and wildlife, and habitat impacts. Impacts from operation and maintenance would include loss of marine habitat, including eelgrass. LWI Alternative 3 has the potential to impact fish and bird species protected under the ESA.

    Upland construction for both Alternatives 2 and 3 would result in permanent and temporary vegetation disturbance, but no wetland impacts would occur. No terrestrial animals or plants protected under the ESA or Migratory Bird Treaty Act would be affected; however, bald eagles foraging along the shoreline could be disturbed during construction. Project construction would have overall positive impacts on the local economy. Tribal access to some shellfish beds would be restricted during construction and, in the long term, a small area of these beds would be lost. During construction, vessel traffic would result in more openings of the Hood Canal Bridge, causing traffic delays on State Route 104 between the Olympic and Kitsap peninsulas. Construction impacts on air and water quality would be minor and localized.

    For the SPE, construction impacts would include in-water pile-driving noise and its effects on fish, wildlife, and neighboring communities; turbidity; and habitat impacts. Impacts from operation and maintenance would include loss and shading of marine habitat, but there would be minimal interference with the migration of juvenile salmon. SPE alternatives 2 and 3 could potentially impact fish and bird species protected under the ESA and marine mammals protected under the ESA and the MMPA. Upland impacts would include both permanent and temporary vegetation disturbance; however, no wetland impacts would occur. No terrestrial animals or plants protected under the ESA would be affected. Bald Eagles foraging along the shoreline could be disturbed during construction. Residential areas south of the base would experience increased noise levels during project construction. Construction would have an overall positive impact on the local economy. During construction, vessel traffic would result in more openings of the Hood Canal Bridge, causing traffic delays on State Route 104 between the Olympic and Kitsap peninsulas. Construction impacts on air and water quality would be minor and localized.

    The Navy is consulting with NMFS in compliance with the MMPA permitting process regarding the potential behavioral disturbance of marine mammals associated with SPE construction. In accordance with ESA, the Navy is consulting with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the potential impacts of construction and operation on federally listed species and critical habitat for both LWI and SPE projects. The Navy is also consulting with NMFS regarding impacts on essential fish habitat. Other permitting and consultation will also occur.

    Past, present, and other reasonably foreseeable future actions are expected to result in cumulative impacts on marine habitats and species in Hood Canal. However, through the implementation of proposed compensatory aquatic mitigation actions described in the Mitigation Action Plan, the LWI and SPE contribution to cumulative impacts would not be significant. The LWI and SPE would contribute to regional cumulative impacts on nearshore terrestrial habitats. Construction of the LWI and SPE could possibly overlap with one another and construction of other waterfront structures on Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, resulting in increased pile-driving noise impacts on marine and terrestrial species. During construction, marine vessel traffic from LWI and SPE projects would increase the frequency of openings of the Hood Canal Bridge, resulting in impacts to travelers on State Route 104 between the Olympic and Kitsap peninsulas. Additionally, noise impacts on nearby residential and recreational areas would increase slightly. Construction of multiple projects may also increase traffic impacts on base roads and delays at the gates entering the base, leading to increased traffic impacts on adjacent roads. The projects would also have cumulative economic benefits.

    The Draft EIS was distributed to federal, state, and local agencies, elected officials, and other interested organizations and individuals. Copies of the Draft EIS are available for public review at the following public libraries:

    1. Jefferson County Library (Port Hadlock), 620 Cedar Ave., Port Hadlock, WA 98339;

    2. Kitsap Regional Library (Poulsbo), 700 NE Lincoln Road, Poulsbo, WA 98370;

    3. Kitsap Regional Library—Sylvan Way (Bremerton), 1301 Sylvan Way, Bremerton, WA 98310;

    4. Kitsap Regional Library (Silverdale), 3450 NW Carlton St., Silverdale, WA 98383;

    5. Port Townsend Public Library, 1220 Lawrence St., Port Townsend, WA 98368; and

    6. Seattle Central Library, 1000 Fourth Ave., Seattle, WA 98104.

    The Draft EIS is also available for electronic viewing at www.nbkeis.com/lwi. A compact disc of the Draft EIS will be made available upon written request by contacting: Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest, 1101 Tautog Circle, Suite 203, Silverdale, WA 98315-1101, Attn: Mr. Thomas Dildine, LWI/SPE EIS Project Manager, Email: [email protected], or project Web site: http://www.nbkeis.com/lwi.

    Authority:

    35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. N. A. Hagerty-Ford, Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03046 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy [Docket ID: USN-2015-0002] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    United States Marine Corps, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice to alter a System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Marine Corps proposes to alter the system of records, MMC00010, entitled “Marine Corps Marathon Automated Support System” in its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended.

    This system will be used to collect information to register, acknowledge and promote participation in Marine Corps race events. The primary user of the collected information is the Marine Corps Marathon Office. Information is used to plan, organize, coordinate and execute the events and communicate with the runners and volunteers before, during and after the event to include publication of finisher results, finisher certificates and race photographs, videos and motion pictures. Data and photographs, videotape, motion pictures and other recordings may be used by the Marine Corps Marathon Office and its select sponsors for surveys, publications on Web sites, race programs and promotions, newspaper articles, newsletters and other race marketing purposes and runner enhancements.

    DATES:

    Comments will be accepted on or before March 16, 2015. This proposed action will be effective the day following the end of the comment period unless comments are received which result in a contrary determination.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    * Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sally A. Hughes, Head, FOIA/PA Programs (ARSF), Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps, 3000 Marine Corps Pentagon, Washington, DC 20350-3000, telephone (703) 614-3685.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The U.S. Marine Corps' notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or from the Defense Privacy and Civil Liberties Office Web site at http://dpcld.defense.gov/.

    The proposed system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on November 24, 2014, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,” dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. MMC00010 System name:

    Marine Corps Marathon Automated Support System (August 3, 1993, 58 FR 41254).

    Changes: System location:

    Delete entry and replace with “Marine Corps Marathon Office, Building 3399 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134-5000.”

    Categories of individuals covered by the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “Participants, parents/guardians and volunteers for the Marine Corps Marathon, Marine Corps Marathon Transfer/Deferment, Marine Corps Marathon 10K, Marine Corps Marathon Kids Run, Marine Corps Historic Half, Historic 10K, Semper Fred 5K, Marine Corps 1775K, Run Amuck, Mini Run Amuck, Quantico Triathlon, Turkey Trot 10K, and Turkey Trot Kids Mile.”

    Categories of records in the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “Full name, home address, country, email address, phone numbers, birthdate and gender, emergency contact information for day of the race, military service and status, race name and volunteer job selection, physical or special accommodations selection, first time participants, expected finish time, race results, name, completion time, image, apparel selection and size, credit card type, card holder name, number, verification code and expiration.”

    Authority for maintenance of the system:

    Delete entry and replace with “10 U.S.C. 5041, Headquarters, Marine Corps: Function, Composition; Marine Corps Order P1700.27B, Marine Corps Community Services Policy Manual (MCCS); Marine Corps Marathon Charter, 27 March 2007.”

    Purpose(s):

    Delete entry and replace with “Information is collected to register, acknowledge and promote participation in Marine Corps race events. The primary user of the collected information is the Marine Corps Marathon Office. Information is used to plan, organize, coordinate and execute the events and communicate with the runners and volunteers before, during and after the event to include publication of finisher results, finisher certificates and race photographs, videos and motion pictures. Data and photographs, videotape, motion pictures and other recordings may be used by the Marine Corps Marathon Office and its select sponsors for surveys, publications on Web sites, race programs and promotions, newspaper articles, newsletters and other race marketing purposes and runner enhancements.”

    Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses:

    Delete entry and replace with “In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the records contained in the system may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    Television, online and print media to provide publicity on the Marine Corps Marathon organization events.

    Participant information to select sponsors approved by the Marine Corps Marathon Office.

    The Blanket Routine Uses set forth at the beginning of the Marine Corps system of records notices may apply to this system.”

    Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining and disposing of records in the system: Storage:

    Delete entry and replace with “Electronic storage media and paper files.”

    Retrievability:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records may be retrieved by name, home address, email address or telephone number.”

    Safeguards:

    Delete entry and replace with “Records are stored under lock and key in secure containers or on electronic media that contain intrusion safeguards. Access to records is role-based and limited to individuals requiring access in the performance of their official duties. All individuals who are granted access must have a need-to-know and have been advised as to the sensitivity of the records and their responsibilities to safeguard information from unauthorized disclosure. Electronic audit logs will be maintained to document access to data. All individuals granted access to this system of records will complete Information Assurance and Privacy Act training.

    Records are maintained in a database housed on a server secured by firewalls and locked in a secure area or on encrypted CDs locked in containers in a controlled area accessible only to authorized personnel. Entry to areas is restricted by the use of locks, administrative procedures and entry code access.”

    Retention and disposal:

    Delete entry and replace with “Disposition pending. Until the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) disposition schedule is approved, treat as permanent.”

    System manager(s) and address:

    Delete entry and replace with “Director, Marine Corps Marathon, 3399 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134-5000.”

    Notification procedure:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking to determine whether this system contains information about themselves should address written inquiries to Director, Marine Corps Marathon, P.O. Box 188, Quantico, VA 22134-5000.

    Written requests must contain full name, address, city, state, country and telephone number. You must sign your request. An email address is optional.

    For personal visits, the individual should be able to provide an identification bearing picture and signature or sufficient verbal data to ensure that the individual is the subject of the inquiry. A visitor may review his/her records by appointment, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Marine Corps Marathon, Building 3399 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134-5000. Please call (703)784-2225 for an appointment.”

    Record access procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “Individuals seeking to request access to information about themselves should address written inquiries to Director, Marine Corps Marathon, P.O. Box 188, Quantico, VA 22134-5000.

    Written requests must contain full name, address, city, state, country and telephone number. You must sign your request. An email address is optional.

    For personal visits, the individual should be able to provide an identification bearing picture and signature or sufficient verbal data to ensure that the individual is the subject of the inquiry. A visitor may review his/her records by appointment, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Marine Corps Marathon, Building 3399 Russell Road, Quantico, VA 22134. Please call (703) 784-2225 for an appointment.”

    Contesting record procedures:

    Delete entry and replace with “The USMC rules for accessing records and contesting and appealing initial agency determinations are published in Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5211.5 and 32 CFR part 701, subpart E or may be obtained from the system manager.”

    Record source categories:

    Delete entry and replace with “Information in the system is obtained from the individual (i.e., participant, parent/guardian or volunteer) through registration online, using Marine Corps Marathon Database (MCM).”

    [FR Doc. 2015-03012 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2015-ICCD-0016] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application Package for Grants Under the Minority Science & Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) (1894-0001) AGENCY:

    Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting Docket ID number ED-2015-ICCD-0016 or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. If the regulations.gov site is not available to the public for any reason, ED will temporarily accept comments at [email protected] Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted; ED will ONLY accept comments during the comment period in this mailbox when the regulations.gov site is not available. 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, Mailstop L-OM-2-2E319, Room 2E115, Washington, DC 20202.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Stacey Slijepcevic, (202) 219-7124.

    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: Application Package for Grants Under the Minority Science & Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) (1894-0001).

    OMB Control Number: 1840-0109.

    Type of Review: A reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 200.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 8,000.

    Abstract: The purpose of the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) is to effect long-range improvement in science and engineering education at predominantly minority institutions and to increase the flow of underrepresented ethnic minorities, particularly minority women, into scientific and technological careers. MSEIP supports the Federal Government's efforts to improve and expand the scientific and technological capacity of the United States to support its technological and economic competitiveness.

    For the purpose of planning for a competition in fiscal year (FY) 2015 for grants under the MSEIP, this application package includes program background, application instructions, and forms needed to submit a complete application to the Department of Education.

    The information on the applicant's eligibility form will be collected annually from applicants that desire to apply for awards under Title III, Part E—Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP). Applicants for MSEIP include public and private, nonprofit postsecondary institutions, nonprofit science-oriented organizations, and professional scientific societies. Without the collection of this information, the Department cannot properly screen applicants for eligibility, and therefore cannot award new grants in accordance with the Congressional intent of this program. The program staff and peer reviewers will use the information collected to evaluate applications and make funding decisions.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and Records Management Services, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02963 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.144F] Migrant Education Program (MEP) Consortium Incentive Grants Program; Correction AGENCY:

    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    On February 5, 2015, we published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 6502) inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2015 for the MEP Consortium Incentive Grants program. This notice corrects the “Deadline for Intergovernmental Review” date.

    DATES:

    Effective February 13, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rachel Crawford, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW., Room 3E-319, Washington, DC 20202-6135. Telephone: (202) 260-2590 or by email: [email protected] If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf or a text telephone, call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Corrections

    In the Federal Register of February 5, 2015 (80 FR 6502), on page 6502, in the third column, under the DATES heading, we correct the “Deadline for Intergovernmental Review” caption to read:

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 19, 2015.

    On page 6504, in the first column, we correct the “Deadline for Intergovernmental Review” caption to read:

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 19, 2015.

    All other information in the February 5, 2015, notice remains unchanged.

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Deborah Delisle, Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03065 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Submission for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has submitted an information collection request to the OMB for extension under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection requests a three year extension of its “Technology Partnerships Ombudsman Reporting Requirements”, OMB Control Number 1910-5118. This information collection request covers information necessary to implement a statutory requirement that the Technology Transfer Ombudsmen report quarterly on complaints they receive.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before March 16, 2015. If you anticipate difficulty that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, please advise the OMB Desk Officer of your intention to make a submission as soon as possible. The Desk Officer may be telephoned at 202-395-4718.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the:

    DOE Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 735 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; and to Janet N. Freimuth, HG-6, Acting Director, Office of Conflict Prevention and Resolution, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585; or by fax at 202-287-1415 or by email at [email protected]
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Janet N. Freimuth at the address listed in ADDRESSES. The Web site address for the report is http://www.energy.gov/oha/downloads/technology-transfer-reporting-form.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No. 1910-5118; (2) Information Collection Request Title: “Technology Partnerships Ombudsman Reporting Requirements”; (3) Type of Request: Renewal; (4) Purpose: The information collected will be used to determine whether the Technology Partnerships Ombudsmen are properly helping to resolve complaints from outside organizations regarding laboratory policies and actions with respect to technology partnerships; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 22; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 88; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 50; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $ 2,500. The cost burden is based on an average hourly rate of $ 50 per hour. We expect no start up or maintenance costs.

    Statutory Authority:

    Section 11 of the Technology Transfer Commercialization Act of 2000, Pub. L. 106-404, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7261c(c)(3)(C).

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 9, 2015. Janet N. Freimuth, Acting Director, Office of Conflict Prevention and Resolution, Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S. Department of Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03034 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9019-5] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

    Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 02/02/2015 Through 02/06/2015 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: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

    EIS No. 20150028, Final EIS, USFS, ID,Clear Creek Integrated Restoration Project, Review Period Ends: 03/16/2015, Contact:Lois Hill 208-935-4257. EIS No. 20150029, Final EIS, USFS, 00,Greater Sage Grouse Bi-State Distinct Population Segment Forest Plan Amendment, Review Period Ends: 04/07/2015, Contact: James Winfrey 775-355-5308. EIS No. 20150030, Draft EIS, USN, WA, Land-Water Interface and Service Pier Extension at Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Comment Period Ends:04/13/2015, Contact: Thomas Dildine 360-396-0018. EIS No. 20150031, Draft EIS, BLM, NV,Gold Rock Mine Project, Comment Period Ends:03/30/2015, Contact: Dan Netcher 775-289-1872. EIS No. 20150032, Draft EIS, BOP, KY,U.S. Penitentiary and Federal Prison Camp, Letcher County, Comment Period Ends: 03/30/2015, Contact: Issac Gaston 202-514-6470. EIS No. 20150033, Draft EIS, USFS, ID,Salmon-Challis National Forest Invasive Plant Treatment, Comment Period Ends: 03/30/2015, Contact: Jennifer Purvine 208-879-4162. EIS No. 20150034, Draft EIS, USACE, OR,Double-crested Cormorant Management Plan to Reduce Predation of Juvenile Salmonids in the Columbia River Estuary, Comment Period Ends:03/16/2015, Contact: Robert Winters 503-808-4738. Amended Notices EIS No. 20140372, Draft EIS, DOE, 00,Plains and Eastern Clean Line Transmission Project, Comment Period Ends: 04/20/2015, Contact: Jane Summerson, 505-845- 4091, Revision to FR Notice Published 12/29/2014; Extending Comment Period from 03/19/2015 to 04/20/2015 Dated: February 10, 2015. Cliff Rader, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03068 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0097; FRL-9922-89] Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Notice of Public Webinar AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of Pesticide Programs is announcing a public webinar for the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC) on February 25, 2015. The purpose of this webinar is to provide the PPDC with brief updates on several key topics, and to set-up discussion topics for the next in-person meeting to be held May 14-15, 2015. The PPDC provides advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on issues associated with pesticide regulatory development and reform initiatives, evolving public policy and program implementation issues, and science issues associated with evaluating and reducing risks from use of pesticides. The webinar is free, open to the public, and no advance registration is required.

    DATES:

    The webinar will be held on Wednesday, February 25, 2015, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    To request accommodation of a disability, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, preferably at least 10 days prior to the webinar, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    ADDRESSES:

    The webinar will be available only online, at the following site: https://epa.connectsolutions.com/ppdc_feb2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dea Zimmerman, Office of Pesticide Programs (LC-8J), Environmental Protection Agency, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604; telephone number: (312) 353-6344; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you work in agricultural settings or if you are concerned about implementation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); the amendments to both of these major pesticide laws by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996; the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA), and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: Agricultural workers and farmers; pesticide industry and trade associations; environmental, consumer, and farm worker groups; pesticide users and growers; animal rights groups; pest consultants; State, local, and tribal governments; academia; public health organizations; and the public. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    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-2015-0097, 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.

    II. Background

    The PPDC is a federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463. EPA established the PPDC in September 1995, to provide advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on issues associated with pesticide regulatory development and reform initiatives, evolving public policy and program implementation issues, and science issues associated with evaluating and reducing risks from use of pesticides. The following sectors are represented on the current PPDC: Environmental/public interest and animal rights groups; farm worker organizations; pesticide industry and trade associations; pesticide user, grower, and commodity groups; Federal and State/local/tribal governments; the general public; academia; and public health organizations.

    III. How can I request to participate in this meeting?

    PPDC meetings are open to the public. Persons interested in participating in the webinar do not need to register in advance of the meeting. As this is an informational briefing, there will not be time for public comment during the webinar. Members of the public may submit comments through the public docket, identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0097, available at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Jack E. Housenger, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03052 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9922-90] Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Request for Nominations to the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of Pesticide Programs is inviting nominations from a diverse range of qualified candidates to be considered for appointment to the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC). The PPDC was chartered to provide advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of issues concerning pesticide regulatory development and reform initiatives, evolving public policy and program implementation issues, and science issues associated with evaluating and reducing risks from pesticide use. To maintain the representation outlined by the charter, nominees will be selected to represent: Environmental/public interest and animal rights groups; farm worker organizations; pesticide industry and trade associations; pesticide user, grower, and commodity groups; Federal/State/local and tribal governments; academia; and public health organizations. Vacancies are expected to be filled by early summer 2015. Sources in addition to this Federal Register notice may be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

    DATES:

    Nominations must be emailed or postmarked no later than March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit nominations electronically with the subject line “PPDC Membership 2015” to [email protected] You may also submit nominations by mail to: Dea Zimmerman (LC-8J), PPDC Designated Federal Officer, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604. Non-electronic submissions must follow the same format and contain the same information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dea Zimmerman, Designated Federal Officer for the PPDC, telephone number: (312) 353-6344; 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, and may be of particular interest to persons who work in agricultural settings or persons who are concerned about implementation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); and the amendments to both of these major pesticide laws by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996; and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA). Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: Agricultural workers and farmers; pesticide industry and trade associations; environmental, consumer, and farmworker groups; pesticide users and growers; animal rights groups; pest consultants; State, local and tribal governments; academia; public health organizations; and the public. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    II. Background

    The PPDC is a federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463. EPA established the PPDC in September 1995, to provide advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on issues associated with pesticide regulatory development and reform initiatives, evolving public policy and program implementation issues, and science issues associated with evaluating and reducing risks from use of pesticides. The following sectors are represented on the current PPDC: Environmental/public interest and animal rights groups; farm worker organizations; pesticide industry and trade associations; pesticide user, grower, and commodity groups; Federal and State/local/tribal governments; the general public; academia; and public health organizations.

    The PPDC usually meets face-to-face twice a year, generally in the spring and the fall. Additionally, members may be asked serve on work groups to develop recommendations to address specific policy issues. The average workload for members is approximately 4 to 6 hours per month. PPDC members may receive travel and per diem allowances where appropriate and according to applicable federal travel regulations.

    III. Nominations

    The EPA values and welcomes diversity. In an effort to obtain nominations of diverse candidates, the agency encourages nominations of women and men of all racial and ethnic groups. All nominations will be fully considered, but applicants need to be aware of the specific representation sought as outlined in the Summary above. Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified persons to be considered for appointment to this advisory committee. Individuals may self-nominate. Nominations may be submitted in electronic format (preferred) or mailed to Dea Zimmerman at the address listed under ADDRESSES.

    To be considered, all nominations should include:

    • Current contact information for the nominee, including the nominee's name, organization (and position within that organization), current business address, email address, and daytime telephone number.

    • Brief Statement describing the nominee's interest and availability in serving on the PPDC.

    • Résumé and a short biography (no more than 2 paragraphs) describing the professional and educational qualifications of the nominee, including a list of relevant activities, or any current or previous experience on advisory committees.

    • Letter(s) of recommendation from a third party supporting the nomination. The letter should describe how the nominee's experience and knowledge will bring value to the work of the PPDC.

    Other sources, in addition to this Federal Register notice, may also be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: February 6, 2015. Jack E. Housenger, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03054 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9923-09-OA] Local Government Advisory Committee: Request for Nominations AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for nominations.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites nominations from a diverse range of qualified candidates to be considered for appointment to its Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC). The LGAC is chartered to provide advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of environmental issues affecting local governments. This notice solicits nominations to fill up to twelve (12) vacancies for one or two year terms. To maintain the representation outlined by the charter, nominees will be selected to represent: Large cities; moderate-sized cities; small communities; and townships (under 10,000); county-elected officials-urban, suburban and rural; city-elected and appointed officials; state-elected and appointed officials; and tribal-elected and appointed officials. Vacancies are anticipated to be filled by April 2015. Sources in addition to this Federal Register Notice may be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

    DATES:

    Nominations should be submitted no later than February 27, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit nominations electronically with the subject line “LGAC Membership 2015” to [email protected] You may also submit nominations by mail to: M. Frances Eargle, LGAC Designated Federal Officer, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW. (MC1301A), Washington, DC 20460. Non-electronic submissions must follow the same format and contain the same information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    M. Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer for the LGAC, U.S. EPA; telephone (202) 564-3115; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The LGAC is a federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463. EPA established the LGAC in 1993 to provide independent advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of public health and environmental issues affecting local governments. The LGAC conducts business in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App2) and related regulations.

    The Committee consists of approximately 30 members (including a Chairperson) appointed by EPA's Administrator. Members serve as non-federal stakeholders representing: Large cities; moderate-sized cities; small communities; and townships (under 10,000); county-elected officials-urban, suburban and rural; city-elected and appointed officials; state-elected and appointed officials; and tribal-elected and appointed officials. Members are appointed for one or two (1-2) year terms, and eligible for reappointment.

    The LGAC usually meets one or two times a year in person. Additionally, members participate in teleconference meetings and serve on Subcommittee and Workgroups to develop recommendations, advice letters and reports to address specific policy issues. The average workload for members is approximately 5 to 8 hours per month. We are unable to provide honoraria or compensation for members services. However, members may receive travel and per diem allowances where appropriate and according to applicable federal travel regulations.

    Nominations: The EPA values and welcomes diversity. In an effort to obtain nominations of diverse candidates, the agency encourages nominations of women and men of all racial and ethnic groups. All nominations will be fully considered, but applicants need to be aware of the specific representation sought as outlined in the Summary above. In addition, EPA is seeking nominees with demonstrated local leadership in community sustainability and sustainable development; public health and health disparities; air quality, energy, and climate change; water quality issues; green jobs and economic initiatives; and environmental financing.

    Other criteria used to evaluate nominees will include:

    • The background and experience that would help members contribute to the diversity of perspectives on the committee (e.g., geographic, economic, social, cultural, educational background, professional affiliations, and other considerations);

    • Demonstrated experience as elected and/or appointed official for a local, state or tribal government;

    • Demonstrated experience working with officials from other governments or other levels of government (e.g., other local governments, federal agencies);

    • Excellent interpersonal and consensus-building skills;

    • Ability to volunteer time to attend full committee meetings 1-2 times a year, participate in teleconference meetings, attend listening sessions with the Administrator or other senior-level EPA officials, develop policy recommendations to the Administrator and prepare reports and advice letters; and

    • Demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively on committees. How to Submit Nominations: Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified persons to be considered for appointment to this advisory committee. Individuals may self-nominate. Nominations can be submitted in electronic format (preferred) or in hard copy format (see ADDRESSES section above).

    To be considered, all nominations should include:

    • Current contact information for the nominee, including the nominee's name, organization (and position within that organization), current business address, email address, and daytime telephone number;

    • Brief Statement describing the nominee's interest in serving on the LGAC;

    • Resume and a short biography (no more than 2 paragraphs) describing the professional and educational qualifications of the nominee, including a list of relevant activities, and any current or previous service on advisory committees; and

    • Letter(s) of recommendation from a third party supporting the nomination. Letter(s) should describe how the nominee's experience and knowledge will bring value to the work of the LGAC.

    Other sources, in addition to this Federal Register notice, may be utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

    Dated: January 31, 2015. Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer, Local Government Advisory Committee.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03157 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [3060-1204] Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget 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 the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. 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 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 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before March 16, 2015. 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:

    Submit your PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via fax at 202-395-5167 or via Internet at [email protected] and to Benish Shah, Federal Communications Commission, via the Internet at [email protected] To submit your PRA comments by email send them to: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Benish Shah, Office of Managing Director, (202) 418-7866.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-1204.

    Title: Deployment of Text-to-911.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Businesses or other for profit; not-for-profit institutions; and state, local or tribal governments.

    Number of Respondents: 3,370 respondents; 58,012 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 to 8 hours.

    Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirements.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(j), 154(o), 251(e), 303(b), 303(g), 303(r), 316, and 403.

    Total Annual Burden: 76,237 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: None.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: On August 13, 2014, the Commission released the Order, FCC 14-118, published at 79 FR 55367, September 16, 2014, adopting final rules—containing information collection requirements—to enable the Commission to implement text-to-911 service pursuant to the Second Report and Order, FCC 14-118, released August 13, 2014. The Second Report and Order adopts new rules to commence the implementation of text-to-911 service with an initial deadline of December 31, 2014 for all covered text providers to be capable of supporting text-to-911 service. The Second Report and Order also provides that covered text providers then have a six-month implementation period—they must begin routing all 911 text messages to a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) by June 30, 2015 or within six months of a valid PSAP request for text-to-911 service, whichever is later. To implement these requirements, the Commission seeks to collect information primarily for a database in which PSAPs will voluntarily register that they are technically ready to receive text messages to 911. As PSAPs become text-ready, they may either register in the PSAP database (or, if the database is not yet available, submit a notification to PS Docket Nos. 10-255 and 11-153), or provide other written notification reasonably acceptable to a covered text messaging provider. Either measure taken by the PSAP shall constitute sufficient notification pursuant to the adopted rules in the Second Report and Order. PSAPs and covered text providers may mutually agree to an alternative implementation timeframe (other than six months). Covered text providers must notify the FCC of the dates and terms of the alternate timeframe that they have mutually agreed on with PSAPs within 30 days of the parties' agreement.

    Additionally, the rules adopted by the Second Report and Order also include other information collections for third party notifications that need to be effective in order to implement text-to-911, including necessary notifications to consumers, covered text providers, and the Commission. These notifications are essential to ensure that all of the affected parties are aware of the limitations, capabilities, and status of text-to-911 services. These information collections will enable the Commission to meet objectives to commence the implementation of text-to-911 service as of December 31, 2014 in furtherance of its core mission to ensure the public's safety.

    Federal Communications Commission.

    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Managing Director.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03008 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of the agreements are available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202) 523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 011314-003.

    Title: CSVV/Trans Global Cooperative Working Agreement.

    Parties: CSAV Sud Americana de Vapores S.A. and Trans Global Shipping N.V.

    Filing Party: Walter H. Lion Esq.; McLaughlin & Stern, LLP; 260 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016.

    Synopsis: The Amendment updates the agreement to reflect current name and address information for CSVV.

    Agreement No.: 012312-001.

    Title: Grimaldi/Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd. Space Charter Agreement.

    Parties: Grimaldi Deep Sea S.p.A. and Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd.

    Filing Party: Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1627 I Street NW.; Suite 1100; Washington, DC 20006.

    Synopsis: The Amendment changes the name of Industria Armamento Meridionale S.P.A. to Grimaldi Deep Sea S.p.A., and restates the Agreement accordingly.

    Agreement No.: 201219-001.

    Title: The Los Angeles and Long Beach Port Infrastructure and Environmental Programs Cooperative Working Agreement.

    Parties: City of Los Angeles and City of Long Beach.

    Filing Party: Heather M. McCloskey, Deputy City Attorney; Los Angeles City Attorney's Office; 425 S. Palos Verdes Street; San Pedro, CA 90731.

    Synopsis: The amendment would restate the agreement to clarify the agreement's purpose and discussion authority to include additional supply chain sectors operating in and around the two ports; to update agreement language regarding the Clean Truck Program; and to address updates to some administrative items. The parties requested expedited review.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Karen V. Gregory, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03053 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10542, CMS-10543 and CMS-209] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 or Email: OIRA_ [email protected]

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: New collection (Request for a new OMB control number); Title of Information Collection: Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) Survey Mode Experiment; Use: Hospital-level scores derived from national implementation of Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) Survey are publicly reported quality data on CMS' Hospital Compare Web site. Our HCAHPS initiative allows vendors to select one mode of survey administration from four approved administration protocols (mail only, telephone only, mail-telephone mixed mode, and touch-tone IVR only). Before public reporting, HCAHPS scores are adjusted for the selected mode of administration, using mail administration as the comparison mode, to correct for any inflation or deflation of scores that are a result of mode. The current mode adjustments employed for HCAHPS are the product of two separate mode experiments conducted using different versions of the survey and different sample. The purpose of the planned HCAHPS mode experiment is to conduct a mode experiment of sufficient sample and scale to determine if the mode adjustments currently employed for the 32-item HCAHPS core survey need revision. An additional goal is to collect empirical evidence on the effect of the number of additional supplemental items on survey response rate and patterns of response to the HCAHPS core demographic items (known as “About You” items). Form Number: CMS-10542 (OMB control number 0938-New); Frequency: Once; Affected Public: Individuals and households; Number of Respondents: 8,160; Total Annual Responses: 8,160; Total Annual Hours: 1,322. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Elizabeth Flow-Delwiche at 410-786-1718).

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: New collection (Request for a new OMB control number); Title of Information Collection: Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) Survey Mode Experiment; Use: This survey supports the six national priorities for improving care from the National Quality Strategy developed by the Department of Health and Human Services that was called for under the Affordable Care Act to create national aims and priorities to guide local, state, and national efforts to improve the quality of health care. The six priorities include: Making care safer by reducing harm caused by the delivery of care; ensuring that each person and family are engaged as partners in their care; promoting effective communication and coordination of care; promoting the most effective prevention and treatment practices for the leading causes of mortality, starting with cardiovascular disease; working with communities to promote wide use of best practices to enable healthy living; and making quality care more affordable for individuals, families, employers, and governments by developing and spreading new health care delivery models. In 2012, we launched the development of the Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care Survey (EDPEC) to measure the experiences of patients (18 and older) with emergency department care. This survey will provide patient experience with care data that enables comparisons of emergency department and support for improving the quality of patient experience in the emergency department. Form Number: CMS-10543 (OMB control number 0938-New); Frequency: Once; Affected Public: Individuals and households; Number of Respondents: 4,951; Total Annual Responses: 4,951; Total Annual Hours: 923. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Elizabeth Flow-Delwiche at 410-786-1718).

    3. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension without change of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Laboratory Personnel Report (CLIA) and Supporting Regulations; Use: The information collected on this survey form is used in the administrative pursuit of the Congressionally-mandated program with regard to regulation of laboratories participating in CLIA. The surveyor will provide the laboratory with the CMS-209 form. While the surveyor performs other aspects of the survey, the laboratory will complete the CMS-209 by recording the personnel data needed to support their compliance with the personnel requirements of CLIA. The surveyor will then use this information in choosing a sample of personnel to verify compliance with the personnel requirements. Information on personnel qualifications of all technical personnel is needed to ensure the sample is representative of the entire laboratory; Form Number: CMS-209 (OMB control number 0938-0151); Frequency: Biennially; Affected Public: Private Sector—State, Local, or Tribal Governments; and Federal Government; Number of Respondents: 19,051; Total Annual Responses: 9,526; Total Annual Hours: 4,763. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Kathleen Todd at 410-786-3385.)

    Dated: February 10, 2015. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03036 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Objective Work Plan (OWP) and Objective Progress Report (OPR).

    OMB No.: 0970-0452.

    Description: Content and formatting changes are being made to the OPR and OWP. The information in OPR is currently collected on quarterly basis to monitor the performance of grantees and better gauge grantee progress. The OWP is used by applicants when they submit their proposals and then by grantees to monitor their projects once the award is made by ANA. ANA has determined that the requirement for ANA grantees to submit information about the project activities on quarterly basis creates undue burden for Grantees. Therefore, ANA has reformatted the OPR to require Grantees submit semi-annual reports instead of quarterly report. This will reduce the administrative burden on Grantees, especially the smaller organizations. The majority of content being requested from the grantees essentially remain same except for the frequency of reporting.

    OPR: The following are proposed content changes to the document: Grantee Information: Report Frequency—This section of OPR will be reformatted to request semi-annual or final project data instead of quarterly information. The other sections of the document with reference to “quarterly” information will be changed to reflect the shift from four-times a year reporting requirement to twice per year.

    Objective Work Plan Update: Content remains the same. No changes are proposed for this section of the OPR.

    Impact indicator: Current Status of Expected Results and Current Status of Expected Benefits which are reported separately on the OPR will be combined to read “Current Status of Expected Results and Benefits.” The content requested in this section is similar to the previous OPR without the added burden of having the reporting organizations provide the analysis that distinguish between `results and benefits”. Every section of the document will be rewritten to reflect this change.

    OWP: ANA proposes to reformat the OWP (content is same) by swapping the Objective field with Problem Statement. In other words, this section will require respondents to begin with a concise statement about the problem the project is designed to address and will be followed by more details about the objectives of the project.

    The two fields “Results Expected and Benefits Expected” will be combined into one field to read “Results and benefits Expected”. This will reduce redundancy and help reduce the burden on Grantees.

    Respondents: Tribal Government, Native non-profit organizations, Tribal Colleges & Universities.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    OWP 500 1 2 1000 OPR 275 2 1 550

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,550.

    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 recommendation 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. 2015-03032 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0161] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates; Correction AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration is correcting a notice entitled “Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates ” that appeared in the Federal Register of February 6, 2015 (80 FR 6728). The document announced 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. The document was published with three errors. This document corrects those errors.

    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 the Federal Register of Friday, February 6, 2015, in FR Doc. 2015-02348, the following corrections are made:

    1. On page 6728, in the third column, under the heading Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates—(OMB Control Number 0910-0498)—Extension, the following sentence is added at the end of the first paragraph: “In January 2011, section 801(e)(4)(A) was amended by the Food Safety Modernization Act (Pub. L. 111-353) to provide authorization for export certification fees for food and animal feed.”

    2. On page 6728, in the third column, under the heading Export of Food and Drug Administration Regulated Products: Export Certificates—(OMB Control Number 0910-0498)—Extension, in the second paragraph, the first sentence is revised to read as follows: “This section of the FD&C Act authorizes FDA to issue export certificates for regulated food, animal feed, pharmaceuticals, biologics, and devices that are legally marketed in the United States, as well as for these same products that are not legally marketed but are acceptable to the importing country, as specified in sections 801(e) and 802 of the FD&C Act.”

    3. On page 6729, Table 2 is corrected as follows:

    Table 2—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 FDA center Number of respondents Number of
  • responses
  • per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average burden per response Total hours
    Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research 2,114 1 2,114 1 2,114 Center for Devices and Radiological Health 10,528 1 10,528 2 21,056 Center for Veterinary Medicine 1,848 1 1,848 1 1,848 Total 25,018 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Dated: February 9, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03005 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-P-1055] Determination That SUBUTEX (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride) Sublingual Tablets, Equivalent 2 Milligrams Base and Equivalent 8 Milligrams Base, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that SUBUTEX (buprenorphine hydrochloride (HCl)) Sublingual Tablets, Equivalent (Eq) 2 milligrams (mg) base and Eq 8 mg base, were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination means that FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) that refer to SUBUTEX, and it will allow FDA to continue to approve ANDAs that refer to SUBUTEX as long as they meet relevant legal and regulatory requirements.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ayako Sato, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6228, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4191.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) (the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA sponsors must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same strength and dosage form as the “listed drug,” which is a version of the drug that was previously approved. Sponsors of ANDAs do not have to repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain approval of a new drug application (NDA).

    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” which is known generally as the “Orange Book.” Under FDA regulations, a drug is removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).

    Under § 314.161(a) (21 CFR 314.161(a)), the Agency must determine whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness: (1) Before an ANDA that refers to that listed drug may be approved, (2) whenever a listed drug is voluntarily withdrawn from sale and ANDAs that refer to the listed drug have been approved, and (3) when a person petitions for such a determination under 21 CFR 10.25(a) and 10.30.

    SUBUTEX (buprenorphine HCl) Sublingual Tablets is the subject of NDA 20-732, held by Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Reckitt). It was approved on October 8, 2002. After Reckitt discontinued marketing SUBUTEX in 2011, FDA moved SUBUTEX to the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. Another buprenorphine-containing product, SUBOXONE (buprenorphine HCl and naloxone HCl) Sublingual Tablets, is the subject of NDA 20-733, also held by Reckitt. It was originally approved on October 8, 2002, and later approved in another dosage form (sublingual film) on August 30, 2010, under NDA 22-410. In March 2013, Reckitt discontinued marketing the sublingual tablet dosage form of SUBOXONE.1 All three products are approved for treatment of opioid dependence.2

    1 On September 27, 2012, after Reckitt publicly announced that it was planning to discontinue the product, Lachman Consultant Services Inc. (Lachman) submitted a citizen petition requesting that the Agency determine whether SUBOXONE Sublingual Tablets were withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (Docket No. FDA-2012-P-1034). After considering Lachman's citizen petition and reviewing our records, including the analysis that the Agency prepared in connection with Reckitt's citizen petition (Docket No. FDA-2012-P-1028), FDA determined that SUBOXONE Sublingual Tablets was not discontinued for reasons of safety or effectiveness (78 FR 34108).

    2 On September 25, 2012, Reckitt submitted a citizen petition requesting that FDA not approve any new drug application or abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) for a buprenorphine product for treatment of opioid dependence unless the applications and products met certain criteria. On February 22, 2013, FDA denied Reckitt's petition (Docket No. FDA-2012-P-1028).

    Actavis Elizabeth LLC submitted a citizen petition dated August 16, 2013 (Docket No. FDA-2013-P-1055), under 21 CFR 10.30, requesting that FDA determine whether SUBUTEX was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. The petition contains no data or other information suggesting that SUBUTEX was withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    We have carefully reviewed our records concerning the withdrawal of SUBUTEX from sale. Based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined under § 314.161 that SUBUTEX was not withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    The buprenorphine in both SUBUTEX and SUBOXONE is a mu opioid partial agonist that can precipitate withdrawal in patients physically dependent on full opioid agonists. That is, the relative reduction in activity at the mu receptor when buprenorphine replaces a full opioid agonist can cause symptoms of opioid withdrawal. SUBOXONE also contains naloxone. Naloxone is a potent opioid antagonist with high affinity for the mu opioid receptor. The naloxone is intended to be inactive when SUBOXONE is used appropriately, but to precipitate more severe withdrawal symptoms if the product is crushed and injected by an individual dependent on full opioid agonists. A variety of factors such as degree of opioid dependence, relative amount of buprenorphine exposure, and route of administration influence the antagonist effect of naloxone. As a result, buprenorphine/naloxone combination products may not have the same effect on non-dependent opioid abusers or abusers of buprenorphine. As stated in the approved SUBOXONE labeling in section 12.2, “naloxone in buprenorphine/naloxone tablets may deter injection of buprenorphine/naloxone tablets by persons with active substantial heroin or other full mu-opioid dependence,” but “some opioid-dependent persons, particularly those with a low level of full mu-opioid physical dependence or those whose opioid physical dependence is predominantly to buprenorphine, abuse buprenorphine/naloxone combinations by the intravenous or intranasal route.”

    SUBUTEX has important therapeutic benefits for certain patient populations that may not tolerate or should not be exposed to the naloxone in SUBOXONE. Specifically, as explained in section 5.11 of the approved labeling for SUBOXONE, “[b]uprenorphine/naloxone products are not recommended in patients with severe hepatic [liver] impairment and may not be appropriate for patients with moderate hepatic impairment.” Section 5.11 further states that “hepatic impairment results in a reduced clearance of naloxone to a much greater extent than buprenorphine,” and thus, “patients with severe hepatic impairment will be exposed to substantially higher levels of naloxone than patients with normal hepatic function.” SUBUTEX also is preferred to SUBOXONE for patients transitioning from treatment with methadone or other long-acting opioid products because they are at higher risk for precipitated and prolonged withdrawal, and the naloxone in buprenorphine/naloxone combination products may cause worse withdrawal in this population.

    Although Reckitt has publicly stated that SUBUTEX “creates a greater risk of misuse, abuse, and diversion” than SUBOXONE (please refer to letter from Reckitt to Health Care Providers, available at http://buprenorphine.samhsa.gov/SubutexDiscontinuation9-16-11.pdf), Reckitt has not submitted any data, information, or analysis to support this claim. Based on our independent review of the available data and the published studies on the relative abuse liability of SUBUTEX and SUBOXONE, we do not have sufficient information at this time to determine that SUBUTEX poses an increased potential for abuse or misuse relative to SUBOXONE. Furthermore, as discussed previously, SUBUTEX has important therapeutic benefits for certain patient populations that may not tolerate or should not be exposed to the naloxone in SUBOXONE.

    For these reasons, based on the data and information available to the Agency at this time, we find that the benefits of SUBUTEX continue to outweigh the risks. Therefore, we conclude that SUBUTEX was not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list SUBUTEX in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. The “Discontinued Drug Product List” delineates, among other items, drug products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other than safety or effectiveness. FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of ANDAs that refer to SUBUTEX. Such ANDAs may continue to be approved by the Agency as long as they meet all other legal and regulatory requirements for the approval of ANDAs.

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03001 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-2187] Identifying Potential Biomarkers for Qualification and Describing Contexts of Use To Address Areas Important to Drug Development; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is seeking information to facilitate development and qualification of biomarkers in areas related to human drug therapeutics. Towards this goal, FDA is encouraging interested groups and individuals to submit information on specific medical and biological areas where novel biomarkers can be identified that would meaningfully advance drug development. FDA encourages respondents to describe evidentiary considerations that are important to qualify these biomarkers for a specific context of use. Details of information that should be provided to the Agency are described in the survey.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments by April 14, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in either of the following ways:

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

    SurveyMonkey Link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RHJLHS7. This survey may be used to provide feedback on answers to questions regarding potential biomarkers for qualification and to describe contexts of use to address areas important to drug development.

    Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2014-N-2187 for this document. All comments received may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. For additional information on submitting comments, see the “Request for Information” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marianne Noone, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 21, Rm. 4528, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-7495.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The President signed into law the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112-144) on July 9, 2012. Title I of FDASIA reauthorizes the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) and provides FDA with the user fee resources necessary to maintain an efficient review process for human drug and biological products. The reauthorization of PDUFA added performance goals and procedures for the Agency that represent FDA's commitments during fiscal years 2013 through 2017. These commitments are fully described in the document entitled “PDUFA Reauthorization Performance Goals and Procedures Fiscal Years 2013 through 2017” (PDUFA Goals Letter), available on FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/UCM270412.pdf. Section IX of the PDUFA Goals Letter entitled “Enhancing Regulatory Science and Expediting Drug Development” references support for the identification and advancement of biomarkers.

    A biomarker is an objective characteristic that is measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal biologic processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to treatment. Biomarkers can serve many purposes in clinical drug development, including the following: Defining the appropriate patient populations for study, as well as those who should receive the drug in clinical practice; pharmacodynamic markers for proof of concept and dose selection; and pharmacodynamic markers of adverse effects. A subset of pharmacodynamic biomarkers can serve as replacements for clinical efficacy endpoints that reflect how a patient feels, functions, or survives. The path to development of promising therapeutics can be enabled by the availability of biomarkers that are analytically validated and clinically qualified for a specific context of use (i.e., a comprehensive, clear, and precise statement that describes the manner of use, interpretation, and purpose of use of a biomarker in drug development).

    Qualification is based on a body of evidence that demonstrates that the biomarkers are fit for purpose in drug development and evaluation (http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/ucm284076.htm). Further, qualification is dependent on the specific proposed context of use. Biomarkers that are qualified can help to progressively reduce uncertainty about the outcome of clinical development programs.

    Public/private partnerships involving regulatory, academic, and industry scientists, collaborating within a precompetitive framework, are essential to catalyzing progress. Because of limitations in resources, such efforts must be focused on the opportunities that offer the greatest potential for impact.

    FDA intends to facilitate identification of the most promising biomarkers and the areas important to drug development and to promote efforts that will aid in the qualification and regulatory adoption of the drug development framework.

    II. Request for Information

    FDA is seeking public feedback to identify promising biomarker candidates in areas important to drug development and to identify considerations for evidence needed to qualify various types of biomarkers for specific contexts of use. FDA requests identification of specific biomarkers with a proposed context of use and of the type of evidence needed to support qualification. After reviewing the information provided, FDA will post the collated information on its Web site.

    A. Information Requirements

    In general, submitted information should include the following for each biomarker nominated, as well as any other relevant information:

    • Areas that have a critical need for biomarkers to assist drug development;

    • The name of the biomarker;

    • The proposed context of use for the biomarker (if known);

    • The reason why the biomarker should be considered, taking into account its usefulness as a drug development tool; and

    • Any evidence that should be developed to support qualification of the biomarker.

    B. Questions and Requests

    Specific questions and requests are as follows:

    1. Are there specific aspects of drug development that could be enhanced through the development of biomarkers?

    a. Please list the specific applications of biomarkers that address areas important to drug development.

    b. Please list the specific areas (for example, a specific disease area or an organ toxicity) needed for development of biomarkers important to drug development.

    c. Is there information or efforts which could be leveraged to advance these areas? If yes, please describe.

    d. Are there areas that appear to be promising for the development of new biomarkers and for which collaborative engagement from stakeholders offers a path forward? If so, please explain.

    • Are there groups positioned to accomplish this? If yes, please describe.

    e. Are there barriers that preclude engagement or investment in biomarkers for these priority areas? If yes, please explain.

    2. In each of these priority areas that are important to drug development, please provide the following information:

    a. Biomarker: What specific biomarkers do you believe represent the greatest near-term opportunity to establish utility in drug development (i.e., that could be substantially advanced by facilitating discussion and consensus building)?

    b. Rationale: Why should the biomarker(s) be included on the list, taking into account its usefulness in regulatory decisionmaking as a drug development tool?

    c. Context of use: Can you please describe/propose a specific context of use for the biomarker(s)?

    d. Evidentiary gaps: To support the proposed context of use, what do you see as the largest evidentiary gaps that need to be addressed to permit “fit for purpose” qualification?

    e. How can these evidentiary gaps be addressed?

    f. Collaborative data sharing: Can any of these gaps be addressed by collaborative data sharing of existing data versus prospective studies specifically dedicated to addressing the gap?

    3. Please indicate your affiliation from the following list: Academia, pharmaceutical sector, biotechnology sector, government, professional organization, non-profit organization, clinician, patient advocacy group, patient, or other (please provide specifics, if you choose other).

    III. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This Federal Register notice requests input from biomarker experts from academia, the pharmaceutical industry, and government organizations on the evidentiary standards for biomarkers or on the expectations about data for qualification of different types of biomarkers.

    This request is exempt from the Office of Management and Budget's review under 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4): Facts or opinions submitted in response to general solicitations of comments from the public, published in the Federal Register or other publications, regardless of the form or format thereof, provided that no person is required to supply specific information pertaining to the commenter, other than that necessary for self-identification, as a condition of the Agency's full consideration of the comment.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02976 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1049] Conditional Approval of New Animal Drugs; Public Meeting; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of public meeting; request for comments.

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting to explore the use of statutory changes to expand the use of conditional approval to additional categories of new animal drugs. This policy exploration is consistent with a stated performance goal in the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2013 (ADUFA III) goals letter. FDA is requesting that you submit any comments related to this issue by September 30, 2015.

    Date and Time: The public meeting will be held on March 16, 2015, from 1 p.m. until 4 p.m.

    Location: The public meeting will be held at the Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., 3rd Floor, Rockville, MD 20855. Parking is free.

    Contact Person: Laura Bradbard, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rm. 159, Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9109, FAX: 240-276-9020, email: [email protected]

    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in attending this meeting must register by March 10, 2015. For general questions about the meeting, for assistance to register for the meeting, to request an opportunity to make an oral presentation, or to request special accommodations due to a disability, contact Laura Bradbard (see Contact Person). Please include your name, organization, and contact information. If you are requesting an opportunity to speak, please send a brief summary of your comments. Early registration for the meeting is encouraged due to limited time and space.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA considers the timely review of the safety and effectiveness of new animal drugs to be central to the Agency's mission to protect and promote the public health. Before 2004, the timeliness and predictability of the new animal drug review program was a concern. The Animal Drug User Fee Act enacted in 2003 (Pub. L. 108-130; hereinafter referred to as “ADUFA I”), authorized FDA to collect user fees for 5 years—fiscal year (FY) 2004 to FY 2008—that were to be dedicated to expediting the review of new animal drug applications according to certain performance goals and to expand and modernize the new animal drug review program. The Agency agreed to meet a comprehensive set of performance goals established to show significant improvement in the timeliness and predictability of the new animal drug review process. The implementation of ADUFA I provided a significant funding increase that enabled FDA to increase the number of staff dedicated to the new animal drug application review process.

    In 2008, before ADUFA I expired, Congress passed the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-316; hereinafter referred to as “ADUFA II”), which included an extension of ADUFA for an additional 5 years—FY 2009 to FY 2013. ADUFA II performance goals were established based on ADUFA I FY 2008 review timeframes. In addition, FDA provided program enhancements to reduce review cycles and improve communications during reviews.

    In 2013, before ADUFA II expired, Congress passed ADUFA III (Pub. L. 113-14), which was signed by the President on June 13, 2013. Like its predecessors, ADUFA III includes its own comprehensive set of performance goals. One such goal, as stated in the ADUFA III goals letter, is: Beginning in early FY 2014, the Agency agrees to explore, in concert with industry, the feasibility of pursuing statutory revisions, consistent with the Agency's mission to protect and promote the public health, that may expand the use of conditional approvals to other appropriate categories of new animal drug applications and develop recommendations by September 30, 2015.

    Currently, the conditional approval provisions allow an applicant to market a new animal drug intended for a minor species or a minor use in a major species after the applicant has demonstrated that the drug is safe and can be manufactured according to standards applicable to approval of applications under section 512(b)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(b)(1)). FDA and members of regulated industry jointly agreed to explore, as part of the performance goals outlined in the ADUFA III goals letter, statutory changes to expand the use of conditional approval to other appropriate categories of new animal drugs.

    This public meeting is intended to provide an additional opportunity for public comment. The Agency is especially interested in receiving comments during the meeting on the categories of new animal drug applications that would be considered “appropriate” and why; concerns, if any, that might arise due to the expansion of the Conditional Approval process; and the length of marketing exclusivity, if any, that should be associated with the expansion of the Conditional Approval process.

    FDA will consider comments received at this meeting as it moves forward with this process.

    FDA has already opened public docket FDA Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1049 to receive comments on the issue (79 FR 53430, September 9, 2014). Although you can comment on this document at any time, to ensure that the Agency considers your comment before finalizing work on the exploration process described in this document, submit either electronic or written comments by September 30, 2015.

    II. Participation in a Public Meeting

    While oral presentations from specific individuals and organizations may be limited due to time constraints during the public meeting, stakeholders may submit electronic or written comments discussing any issues of concern to the administration record (the docket). All relevant data and documentation should be submitted with the comments to Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1049. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number FDA-2014-N-1049. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    III. Comments, Transcripts, and Recorded Video

    Information and data submitted voluntarily to FDA during the public meeting will become part of the administrative record and will be accessible to the public at http://www.regulations.gov. The transcript of the proceedings from the public meeting will become part of the administrative record. Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1049, and at FDA's CVM Web site at: http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/AnimalDrugUserFeeActADUFA/ucm042891.htm. It may also be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857. Additionally, FDA will be recording the meeting via Adobe Connect on March 16, 2015. Once the recording has been made 508 compliant, it will be accessible at FDA's CVM Web site at http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/AnimalDrugUserFeeActADUFA/ucm042891.htm.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03004 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1050] Regulation of Combination Drug Medicated Feeds; Public Meeting; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of public meeting; request for comments.

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting to explore the feasibility of pursuing statutory revisions that may modify the current requirement that the use of multiple new animal drugs in the same medicated feed be subject to an approved application. This policy exploration is consistent with a stated performance goal in the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2013 (ADUFA III) goals letter. FDA is requesting that you submit any comments related to this issue by March 31, 2016.

    Date and Time: The public meeting will be held on March 16, 2015, from 9 a.m. until 12 p.m.

    Location: The public meeting will be held at the Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., 3rd Floor, Rockville, MD 20855. Parking is free.

    Contact Person: Laura Bradbard, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rm. 159, Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9109, FAX: 240-276-9020, email: [email protected]

    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in attending this meeting must register by March 10, 2015. For general questions about the meeting, for assistance to register for the meeting, to request an opportunity to make an oral presentation, or to request special accommodations due to a disability, contact Laura Bradbard (see Contact Person). Please include your name, organization, and contact information. If you are requesting an opportunity to speak, please send a brief summary of your comments. Early registration for the meeting is encouraged due to limited time and space.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA considers the timely review of the safety and effectiveness of new animal drugs to be central to the Agency's mission to protect and promote the public health. Before 2004, the timeliness and predictability of the new animal drug review program was a concern. The Animal Drug User Fee Act enacted in 2003 (Pub. L. 108-130; hereinafter referred to as “ADUFA I”), authorized FDA to collect user fees for 5 years—fiscal year (FY) 2004 to FY 2008—that were to be dedicated to expediting the review of new animal drug applications (NADAs) according to certain performance goals and to expand and modernize the new animal drug review program. The Agency agreed to meet a comprehensive set of performance goals established to show significant improvement in the timeliness and predictability of the new animal drug review process. The implementation of ADUFA I provided a significant funding increase that enabled FDA to increase the number of staff dedicated to the new animal drug application review process.

    In 2008, before ADUFA I expired, Congress passed the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-316; hereinafter referred to as “ADUFA II”), which included an extension of ADUFA for an additional 5 years—FY 2009 to FY 2013. ADUFA II performance goals were established based on ADUFA I FY 2008 review timeframes. In addition, FDA provided program enhancements to reduce review cycles and improve communications during reviews.

    In 2013, before ADUFA II expired, Congress passed ADUFA III (Pub. L. 113-14), which was signed by the President on June 13, 2013. Like its predecessors, ADUFA III includes its own comprehensive set of performance goals. One such goal, as stated in the ADUFA III goals letter, is: Beginning in early FY 2014, the Agency agrees to explore, in concert with affected parties, the feasibility of pursuing statutory revisions, consistent with the Agency's mission to protect and promote the public health, that may modify the current requirement that the use of multiple new animal drugs in the same medicated feed be subject to an approved application and develop recommendations by September 30, 2016.

    Currently, the use of multiple new animal drugs in the same medicated feed (i.e., a combination drug medicated feed) requires an approved NADA for each new animal drug in the combination and a separate approved NADA for the combination new animal drug itself (21 U.S.C. 360b(d)(4); 21 CFR 514.4(c)). FDA and members of regulated industry jointly agreed to explore, as part of the performance goals outlined in the ADUFA III goals letter, potential changes to the approval process for the use of a combination drug medicated feed. The intent of this exploration is to consider changes intended to allow combination drug medicated feeds to be made available to the end user in the most efficient manner possible while protecting and promoting the public health.

    This public meeting is intended to provide an additional opportunity for public comment. Although in the ADUFA III performance goals letter FDA only agreed to explore the feasibility of pursuing statutory changes, the Agency also invites comment on potential changes to procedures and requirements related to the approval process for these products that can be accomplished under the Agency's existing statutory authority. FDA will consider comments received at this meeting as it moves forward with this process.

    FDA has already opened public docket FDA Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1050 to receive comments on the issue (79 FR 53431, September 9, 2014). Although you can comment on this document at any time, to ensure that the Agency considers your comment before finalizing work on the exploration process described in this document, submit either electronic or written comments by March 31, 2016.

    II. Participation in a Public Meeting

    While oral presentations from specific individuals and organizations may be limited due to time constraints during the public meeting, stakeholders may submit electronic or written comments discussing any issues of concern to the administration record (the docket). All relevant data and documentation should be submitted with the comments to Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1050. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number FDA-2014-N-1050. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    III. Comments, Transcripts, and Recorded Video

    Information and data submitted voluntarily to FDA during the public meeting will become part of the administrative record and will be accessible to the public at http://www.regulations.gov. The transcript of the proceedings from the public meeting will become part of the administrative record. Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1050, and at FDA's CVM Web site at: http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/AnimalDrugUserFeeActADUFA/ucm042891.htm. It may also be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857. Additionally, FDA will be recording the meeting via Adobe Connect on March 16, 2015. Once the recording has been made 508 compliant, it will be accessible at FDA's CVM Web site at http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/AnimalDrugUserFeeActADUFA/ucm042891.htm.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03002 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0001] The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). At least one portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.

    Name of Committee: The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee.

    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.

    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on April 9, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and April 10, 2015, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    Location: FDA White Oak, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Answers to commonly asked questions including information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

    Contact Person: Caryn Cohen, Office of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document Control Center, Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 1-877-287-1373, email: [email protected] A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    Agenda: On April 9 and 10, 2015, the Committee will discuss modified risk tobacco product applications submitted by Swedish Match North America Inc. for 10 tobacco products:

    • MR0000020: General Loose, smokeless tobacco, loose snus, 1.59 oz (45g), cardboard can (SKU 4852);

    • MR0000021: General Dry Mint Portion Original Mini, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.21 oz (6g), 20 0.3g portions, plastic can (SKU 4800);

    • MR0000022: General Portion Original Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.9 oz (24g), 24 1g portions, plastic can (SKU 4880);

    • MR0000023: General Classic Blend Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.48 oz (13.5g), 15 0.9g portions, plastic can (SKU 4877);

    • MR0000024: General Classic Blend Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.38 oz (10.8g), 12 0.9g portions, plastic can (SKU 4878);

    • MR0000025: General Mint Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.9 oz (24g), 24 1g portions, plastic can (SKU 4352);

    • MR0000026: General Nordic Mint Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.48 oz (13.5g), 15 0.9g portions, plastic can (SKU 4876);

    • MR0000027: General Nordic Mint Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.38 oz (10.8g), 12 0.9g portions, plastic can (SKU 4875);

    • MR0000028: General Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.9 oz (24g), 24 1g portions, plastic can (SKU 4881); and

    • MR0000029: General Wintergreen Portion White Large, smokeless tobacco, snus portions, 0.9 oz (24g), 24 1g portions, plastic can (SKU 4882).

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: On April 9, 2015, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. and on April 10, 2015, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., the meeting is open to the public. Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before March 20, 2015. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 11 a.m. and 12 p.m. on April 10, 2015. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before March 12, 2015. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by March 13, 2015.

    Closed Committee Deliberations: On April 9, 2015, between 4 p.m. and 5 p.m., the meeting will be closed to permit discussion and review of trade secret and/or confidential commercial information (see 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3) and (c)(4)). This portion of the meeting will be closed because the Committee will be discussing trade secret and/or confidential data provided by Swedish Match North America Inc.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Caryn Cohen at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: February 9, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03000 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Bethesda Campus Master Plan Record of Decision SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has decided, after completion of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and a thorough consideration of the public comments on the Draft EIS, to implement the Proposed Action, referred to as the Proposed Action in the Final EIS. This action is for a long-range physical Master Plan for National Institutes of Health Bethesda Campus (NIH) located in Bethesda, Maryland. This alternative accounts for potential growth in NIH personnel, new construction, additions, renovations, demolitions, and upgrades in site utilities.

    Responsible Official: Daniel G. Wheeland, Director, Office of Research Facilities (ORF) Development and Operations, NIH.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie Nottingham, Deputy Director, DEP, ORF, NIH, Building 13, Room 2S11, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892, Phone 301-496-7775, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Decision

    After careful review of the environmental consequences in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Master Plan, National Institutes of Health Bethesda Campus, and consideration of public comment throughout the NEPA process, the NIH has decided to implement the Proposed Action described below as the Selected Alternative.

    Selected Alternative

    The Selected Alternative is intended to be a strategic tool for the efficient allocation of campus resources, the orderly accommodation of future growth, and the creation of an environment that is both functionally and aesthetically conducive to accomplishing the NIH mission. The Selected Alternative will provide a guide for the reasoned and orderly development of the NIH campus, one that values and builds on existing resources, corrects current deficiencies and meets changing needs through new construction or renovation. The plan sets forth implementation priorities and a logical sequencing of planned development.

    The Selected Alternative is for a long-range physical Master Plan for NIH. This alternative covers a 20-year planning period, with reviews every 5 years to ensure that the plan continues to address issues affecting the campus. The alternative addresses the future development of the NIH site, including placement of future construction; vehicular and pedestrian circulation on and off-campus; parking within the property boundaries; open space in and around the campus; required setbacks; historic properties; natural and scenic resources; noise; and lighting. This alternative accounts for potential growth in NIH personnel, and consequent construction of space over the planning period. Future construction on the site could include such facilities as new animal holding, research laboratories, and support facilities.

    NIH will continue to develop the Bethesda campus to accommodate NIH's research needs and required programmatic needs consistent with the commitment to maintain the “campus” character of the site. The Selected Alternative advances this objective by programming and locating future NIH growth so that new development would tie into the existing utility services and utilities are available to support growth, and establishing development guidelines for future changes to the site that ensure that as the campus grows new development would be responsive to the context of adjacent neighborhoods or developments. Under the Selected Alternative, the total NIH population on the campus is anticipated to grow in the next twenty years to a total of approximately 23,594, which is an increase of approximately 3,000 employees. The primary growth at the campus would be in intramural research personnel and the administrative and facility staff to support them. The majority, if not all, of the employees would be coming from off-site facilities and are already employees, or contractors, of NIH.

    Alternatives Considered

    The Proposed Action Alternative, the Redevelopment Alternative and No Action Alternative were the three alternatives analyzed in the Final EIS. The Master Plan covers a 20-year planning period, but will be reviewed every 5 years to ensure that the plan continues to remain current and relevant to the key issues affecting the campus. The alternatives addressed the future development of the NIH site, including placement of future construction; vehicular and pedestrian circulation on and off-campus; parking within the property boundaries; open space in and around the campus; required setbacks; historic properties; natural and scenic resources; noise; and lighting. The alternatives account for potential growth in NIH personnel, and consequent construction of space over the planning period. Future construction on the site could include such facilities as new animal holding, research laboratories, and support facilities.

    Factors Involved in the Decision

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requires that NIH facilities have a Master Plan and, the previous Master Plan for the NIH campus was outdated. In addition, factors such as the aging of facilities that were designed only to accommodate temporary use, animal housing facilities that do not provide adequate space for projected increases in animal populations, and research support facilities not being adequate to sustain current and projected programs. The Master Plan contains information, analysis, and recommendations to guide development of individual projects. It also serves as a means of informing city and county officials and utilities of future NIH development plans so they can anticipate and plan for the potential effects of NIH proposals on their systems.

    Resources Impacted

    The Final EIS describes potential environmental effects of the Selected Alternative. These potential effects are documented in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. Any potential adverse environmental effects will be avoided or mitigated through design elements, procedures, and compliance with regulatory and NIH requirements. Potential impacts on air quality are all within government standards (federal, state, and local). NIH does not expect significant negative effects on the environment or on the citizens of Bethesda from construction and operation at NIH.

    Summary of Impacts

    The following is a summary of potential impacts resulting from the Selected Alternative that the NIH considered when making its decision. No adverse cumulative effects have been identified during the NEPA process. Likewise, no unavoidable or adverse impacts from implementation of the Selected Alternative have been identified. The Selected Alternative will be beneficial to the long-term productivity of the national and world health communities. Biomedical research conducted at the NIH facilities on the campus will have the potential to advance techniques in disease prevention and cures, develop disease immunizations, and prepare defenses against naturally emerging and re-emerging diseases and against bioweapons. Additionally, the local community will benefit from increased employment, income and, government and public finance.

    Housing

    Under the Selected Alternative, the building program would improve existing laboratory and office spaces. This would allow NIH to attract well-qualified personnel to the campus. The campus building program would be expanded with nominal population increases. These added employees would continue to seek regional housing options and use local community services. This modest expansion would have a modest beneficial economic impact with modest increased demand for housing and community services.

    Education

    The expected increases of employees on the NIH campus are from employees already working in the Bethesda area in the agency's off campus, leased facilities. If any new employees were hired, the current public school capacity in Bethesda or Montgomery County and surrounding school districts would be adequate to accommodate the expected minimal growth caused by the Selected Alternative.

    Transportation

    The potential increase in vehicular traffic generated by the additional facilities and employees envisioned in the Master Plan would only minimally contribute to the amount of traffic on the roadways in the vicinity of the campus. If the campus houses 3,000 additional staff, the impact on morning and evening rushes is estimated to be approximately 12 percent more NIH vehicles. When taking into account that NIH's contribution to local traffic constitutes only approximately 25% of the traffic, the impact on the community is estimated to be 3%. Furthermore, by the time the capital improvements contemplated under the Selected Alternative are in place, mass transit developments such as the Purple Line and Bus Rapid Transit might well be in place, thereby offsetting the 3% congestion. The Selected Alternative includes 3,000 additional employees, and would generate approximately an additional 432 a.m. and 439 p.m. trips. The seven proposed Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) improvements, discussed in the EIS, several of which were facilitated through NIH easements, would result in mitigating this slight increase AM and PM peak traffic, and also help keep the congestion standard below 1,600 Calculated Load Value (CLV). Stated differently, the modest increase in traffic would not change the intersection ratings. Lastly, if NIH increases the campus population, it will increase parking at the ration of 1 parking spot per 3 additional staff.

    Security

    The Selected Alternative would not be expected to have adverse impacts on security on the NIH Campus. No new security measures are proposed in the Master Plan.

    Employment

    If the Selected Alternative is fully implemented, an increase of up to 3,000 employees and contractors would increase the current total of 20,594 up to approximately 23,594. The increase draws from employees that are already working in the Bethesda/Montgomery County area.

    Environmental Justice

    The Selected Alternative would not be expected to have disproportionately high or adverse impacts on low income or minority populations of the affected area.

    Visual Quality

    The Master Plan's land use plan provides a framework to help organize future development at NIH so that similar land use types are consolidated while open space and natural features are preserved. NIH would exhibit the same basic types of land use as it does currently, but in a slightly different configuration. The Master Plan does not propose any land use changes outside NIH. Therefore, the NIH campus is anticipated to remain consistent with the county plan and zoning regulations.

    Noise

    To limit impacts to nearby residences, NIH would limit construction activities to normal daytime working hours. Under the Master Plan, the ambient noise levels at NIH would remain within Maryland and Montgomery County noise thresholds. Furthermore, any minor change in noise levels is not expected to affect the character of the site.

    Air Quality

    Traffic is expected to be the primary mobile source of air emissions at or near the campus. Mobile air emissions for the campus at this time are expected to originate from vehicles associated with visitors, commuter transportation, employee parking, commercial delivery, and construction vehicles. Future traffic generated carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations were predicted to be less than 2003 concentrations in the Selected Alternative due to projected vehicle emission rate reductions. Based on predicted values, the one and eight-hour average National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) CO concentrations would not be exceeded and no impacts are expected for any of the proposed Alternatives.

    Wastewater/Water Supply

    The Selected Alternative would increase the amount of wastewater generated on campus with the proposal of additional development. To facilitate the construction of the improvements under this proposed alternative, the existing wastewater distribution system would need to be relocated and upgraded as necessary. With the increase in demand, NIH will consult with the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) to ensure adequate sewer capacity is available for the campus. This consultation would also assist WSSC in determining if and when any of the public lines surrounding the campus need to be upgraded. All sanitary sewer design would be in accordance with the NIH Facilities Development Manual, “Section 8-6: Drainage Systems” of the 2008 National Institutes of Health Design Requirements for Biomedical Laboratories and Animal Research Facilities and the WSSC requirements. No significant impacts are expected for wastewater or the NIH campus water supply.

    Historic Resources

    NIH would comply with National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 by consulting with Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) on the need for particular archeological studies as individual Master Plan project elements are funded, designed, and executed. In the event that eligible prehistoric resources are identified and adverse effects are anticipated, NIH would continue Section 106 consultation with the appropriate consulting parties (which would include MHT and may also include Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and Native American tribes) to establish a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to resolve adverse effects. Mitigation measures identified through this consultation could include in-place preservation through site avoidance, protection, or easement acquisition; development and implementation of a data recovery plan to retrieve and analyze the site's resources implementation of innovative, alternative mitigation measures or a combination of these measures.

    Practicable Means To Avoid or Minimize Potential Environmental Harm From the Selected Alternative

    All practicable means to avoid or minimize adverse environmental effects from the Selected Action have been identified and incorporated into the action. The proposed Master Plan construction will be subject to the existing NIH pollution prevention, waste management, and safety, security, and emergency response policies and procedures as well as existing environmental permits. Best management practices, spill prevention and control, and stormwater management plans will be followed to appropriately address the construction and operation envisioned in [or “described in”—the Master Plan itself will not be constructed and operated] of the new Master Plan and comply with applicable regulatory and NIH requirements. No additional mitigation measures have been identified.

    Pollution Prevention

    Air quality permit standards will be met, as will all federal, state, and local requirements to protect the environment and public health.

    Conclusion

    Based upon review and careful consideration, the NIH has decided to implement the Selected Alternative for a long-range physical Master Plan for NIH Bethesda Campus located in Bethesda, Maryland. The decision accounts for potential growth of NIH personnel, and consequent construction of space over the planning period. The decision was based upon review and careful consideration of the impacts identified in the Final EIS and public comments received throughout the NEPA process.

    Separate NEPA reviews, when required, will be done on projects discussed in the Master Plan. Proper NEPA documentation will be completed based on the outcome of that review.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. Daniel G. Wheeland, P.E. Director, Office of Research Facilities Development and Operations, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02993 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Announcement of a Draft NIH Policy on Dissemination of NIH-Funded Clinical Trial Information SUMMARY:

    On November 19, 2014, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published a request for public comments in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts on a draft policy to promote broad and responsible dissemination of information on clinical trials funded by the NIH through registration and submission of summary results information to ClinicalTrials.gov. See Guide notice NOT-OD-15-019 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-15-019.html. NIH is publishing this notice in order to inform readers of the Federal Register about the draft policy and the opportunity to comment.

    DATES:

    The deadline for receiving comments on the draft policy is no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 23, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: 301-496-9839.

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier: Office of Clinical Research and Bioethics Policy, Office of Science Policy, National Institutes of Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Office of Clinical Research and Bioethics Policy, Office of Science Policy, National Institutes of Health, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9838, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is dedicated to improving the health of Americans by conducting and funding biomedical and behavioral research, including clinical trials.1 A fundamental premise of all NIH-funded research is that the results of such work must be disseminated in order to contribute to the general body of scientific knowledge and, ultimately, to the public health. NIH awardees are expected to make the results and accomplishments of their activities available to the research community and to the public at large.

    1 NIH's mission is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. See http://www.nih.gov/about/mission.htm.

    The results of NIH funded research can be disclosed in a number of ways, including through publications, presentations at scientific meetings, sharing research tools, and depositing information into databases and materials into repositories. NIH has a number of policies that promote the dissemination of research results and guide funding recipients in disseminating their results. The NIH Data Sharing Policy, the NIH Public Access Policy, the NIH Research Tools Policy, and the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy are important examples of policies to ensure that research data and materials generated using NIH funds are used productively to further scientific progress and to promote public health.2 Increasing public access to information from NIH research supports the public access and data sharing directives of the Executive Office of the President (EOP Directives).3

    2 See http://www.grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm; http://publicaccess.nih.gov/; http://grants.nih.gov/grants/intell-property_64FR72090.pdf; and http://gds.nih.gov/03policy2.html.

    3 See the Office of Science and Technology Policy's memorandum, “Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research,” (February 22, 2013), the Office of Management and Budget's memorandum, “Open Data Policy—Managing Information as an Asset,” M-13-13 (May 9, 2013) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2013/m-13-13.pdf, and Executive Order No. 13,642 (May 9, 2013) http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/DCPD-201300318/pdf/DCPD-201300318.pdf.

    Traditionally, scientists fulfill their obligation to contribute to the general body of knowledge through peer reviewed journal publications. However, journal publication is not always possible, and many clinical trials are not being published or published in a timely manner. A recent study found that the results of less than half of NIH-funded clinical trials had been published in a peer-reviewed biomedical journal within 30 months of trial completion.4 Selective publication of the results of some trials and not others—or publication of incomplete or partial findings from a particular trial—can lead to inappropriate conclusions about the usefulness of particular therapies.5

    4 Ross JS, Tse T, Zarin DA, Xu H, Zhou L, Krumholz HM. Publication of NIH funded trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: cross-sectional analysis. BMJ. 2012;344:d7292.

    5 Nissen S, Biomarkers in Cardiovascular Medicine, The Shame of Publication Bias, JAMA Intern Med 2013 March 25; doi:10.001/jamainternmed.2013.4074; Dwan K et al., Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias, PLoS One 2008 Aug 28;3(8):e3081. doi: 0.1371/journal.pone.0003081; Begg C, Berlin J, Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research, J Natl Cancer Inst 1989, Jan 18;81(2):107-15.

    Public access to clinical trial information drives scientific progress and optimizes the return on the nation's investment in clinical trials. It helps inform future research, improve study design, and prevent duplication of unsafe and unsuccessful trials. In addition, there is an important ethical dimension to dissemination of clinical trial results because individuals who volunteer to participate in such studies, and who may assume risks, trust that what we learn will contribute to generalizable knowledge about human health. Finally, enhancing transparency also increases public trust in clinical research. It is, therefore, important to provide other ways for clinical trial results to be disseminated and publicly available to researchers, health care providers, and patient communities.

    Some NIH-funded clinical trials are subject to mandatory registration and reporting of results under federal law, i.e., Title VIII of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA). FDAAA applies, in general, to controlled, interventional studies of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-regulated drugs, biological products, and devices, excluding phase 1 studies of drugs and biological products and small feasibility studies of devices. Under FDAAA, a minimal set of summary information about such clinical trials must be submitted in a structured, tabular format to ClinicalTrials.gov, a freely accessible and searchable registry and results data bank operated by the National Library of Medicine (NLM), NIH.

    NIH is proposing to issue a policy to ensure that all NIH-funded clinical trials are registered and have summary results, including adverse event information, submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov. Compliance with this policy will be a term and condition in the Notice of Grant Award and a contract requirement in the Contract Award. This proposed policy supports the NIH mission and is essential to facilitate the translation of research results into knowledge, products, and procedures that improve human health.

    Request for Comments

    NIH encourages the public to provide comments on any aspect of the draft policy, described below. Comments should be submitted electronically to the Office of Clinical Research and Bioethics Policy (OCRBP), Office of Science Policy, NIH, via email at email at [email protected], mail at 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20892, or by fax at 301-496-9839. Submitted comments are considered public information; private or confidential information should not be submitted. Comments may be posted along with the submitter's name and affiliation on the OCRBP Web site after the public comment period closes.

    Draft NIH Policy on Dissemination of NIH-Funded Clinical Trial Information

    Purpose. The purpose of this Policy is to promote broad and responsible dissemination of information from NIH-funded clinical trials through ClinicalTrials.gov, the clinical trial registry and results databank operated by the National Library of Medicine (NLM). Disseminating this information supports the NIH mission to advance the translation of research results into knowledge, products, and procedures that improve human health. This Policy is intended to complement the statutory mandate under Title VIII of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) that requires registration and submission of summary results for certain clinical trials, whether funded by NIH or by other entities, to be registered and have summary results submitted to ClincalTrials.gov.6

    6 The mandate applies to certain “applicable clinical trials” (ACTs) of drugs (defined by section 402(j)(1)(A)(vii) of the Public Health Service Act to include biological products) and devices, including any pediatric postmarket surveillance of a device required by FDA under section 522 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). See 42 U.S.C. 282(j).

    Scope and Applicability. This Policy applies to all NIH-funded awardees and investigators conducting clinical trials, funded in whole or in part by NIH, regardless of study phase, type of intervention, or whether they are subject to the FDAAA registration and results submission requirements set forth in Section 402(j) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 282(j)). For purposes of this Policy, a clinical trial is defined as “a research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioral outcomes.7

    7 Several terms within the NIH definition of clinical trial definition mean are defined as follows. “Research” and “human subject” are defined in the Common Rule at 45 CFR 46.102(d) and 45 CFR 46.102(f), respectively. “Prospectively assigned” refers to a pre-defined process (e.g., randomization) specified in an approved protocol that stipulates the assignment of research subjects (individually or in clusters) to one or more arms (e.g., intervention, placebo or other control) of the clinical trial. An “intervention” is defined as a manipulation of the subject or subject's environment for the purpose of modifying one or more health-related biomedical or behavioral processes and/or endpoints. Examples include drugs/small molecules/compounds; biologics; devices; procedures (e.g., surgical techniques); delivery systems (e.g., telemedicine, face-to-face interviews); strategies to change health-related behavior (e.g., diet, cognitive therapy, exercise, development of new habits); treatment strategies; prevention strategies; and, diagnostic strategies. A “health-related biomedical or behavioral outcome” is defined as the pre-specified goal(s) or condition(s) that reflect the effect of one or more interventions on human subjects' biomedical or behavioral status or quality of life. Examples include positive or negative changes to physiological or biological parameters (e.g., improvement of lung capacity, gene expression); positive or negative changes to psychological or neurodevelopmental parameters (e.g., mood management intervention for smokers; reading comprehension and/or information retention); positive or negative changes to disease processes; positive or negative changes to health-related behaviors; and, positive or negative changes to quality of life. See http://osp.od.nih.gov/office-clinical-research-and-bioethics-policy/clinical-research-policy/clinical-trials>

    Effective Date. This Policy is effective for:

    • Competing grant applications that include clinical trials and are submitted to the NIH for the [date to be determined] receipt date and subsequent receipt dates;

    • Proposals for contracts that include clinical trials and are submitted to the NIH on or after [date to be determined]; and

    • NIH intramural research projects that include clinical trials for which Institutional Review Board review is initiated after [date to be determined].

    Responsibilities. As set forth in the terms and conditions of grant and contract awards, all NIH-funded awardees and investigators conducting clinical trials, funded in whole or in part by NIH, who have committed to NIH that they will comply with NIH policies, are expected to ensure that their NIH-funded clinical trials are registered and summary results, including adverse event information, are submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov in accord with the timelines that will be set forth at ClinicalTrials.gov. Generally, this means registration of the clinical trial not later than 21 days after enrollment of the first participant and submission of summary results information not later than one year after the completion date. “Completion date” is defined to be the date that the final subject was examined or received an intervention for the purpose of final collection of data for the primary outcome, whether the clinical trial concluded according to the pre-specified protocol or was terminated. It will be possible to delay results submission for up to two years beyond the initial deadline with a certification that regulatory approval of the product is being sought. Clinical trials covered by the policy will be expected to submit the same type of registration and results data and in the same timeframes as the trials subject to FDAAA. The specific registration and results information to be submitted will be made available at the ClinicalTrials.gov site.

    Institutions and investigators should submit information directly to ClinicalTrials.gov. If the trial is subject to FDAAA, i.e., section 402(j) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 282(j)), submissions must be made by the Responsible Party, as defined at 42 U.S.C. 282(j)(1)(A)(ix). If an NIH-funded clinical trial is also subject to FDAAA, it needs to have only one entry in ClinicalTrials.gov that contains its registration and results information. Investigators and funding recipients are expected to cooperate with NLM to address any data curation or quality control issues to facilitate timely posting.

    In general, NIH expects to make clinical trial registration and results information publicly available through ClinicalTrials.gov within 30 days after receipt by ClinicalTrials.gov.8 For NIH-funded trials that are subject to section 402(j) of the Public Health Services Act (42 U.S.C. 282(j)), submitted information will be posted in compliance with the relevant requirements of that section.

    8 For clinical trials funded through SBIRs, the timeframe for posting results will be consistent with the SBIR Policy Directive, which generally prohibits the agency from posting SBIR data for at least 4 years from completion of the study unless the awardee consents to an earlier release. See SBIR Policy Directive, Sections 8(b)(2) and (4).

    Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of NIH awards may provide a basis for enforcement actions, including termination, consistent with 45 CFR 74.62 and/or other authorities, as appropriate.9

    9 When the final policy is issued, NIH will also provide more specific procedural guidance to facilitate implementation.

    Dated: January 8, 2015. Lawrence Tabak, Principal Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2015-02994 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary [AAK6006201 1565A2100DD AOR3030.999900] National Environmental Policy Act: Implementing Procedures; Additions to Categorical Exclusions for Bureau of Indian Affairs (516 DM 10) AGENCY:

    Department of the Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Final National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA, and Department of the Interior (Department) NEPA implementing regulations, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) in the Department is adding three categorical exclusions (CE) to the Departmental Manual 516 DM 10. The three proposed CEs pertain to timber harvesting on Indian lands.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: The categorical exclusions are effective February 13, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To obtain a copy of the new categorical exclusions contact Mr. David Koch, Acting Chief Forester, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street, Washington, DC 20240; email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. David Koch, Acting Chief Forester, (202) 208-4837.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Harvesting timber on Indian lands, as defined in 25 CFR 163.1, allows landowners to realize value from lands held in trust for them by the Federal Government or subject to restrictions against alienation. The National Indian Forest Resources Management Act, and its implementing regulations, require the Secretary, with the participation of the landowners, to undertake forest land management activities on Indian forest lands, including the approval of timber harvests. As a result of the need for Federal permits and contracts, such projects are Federal actions that require compliance with the NEPA. The BIA has typically conducted NEPA reviews of actions associated with timber harvesting by preparing Environmental Assessments (EA). The addition of CEs to cover these three categories of small actions will allow for a more efficient NEPA review because those EAs resulted in findings of no significant impacts which were substantiated over time. The three proposed CEs were developed based on CEs currently used by the United States Forest Service (FS), as described in FS regulations 36 CFR 220, and adopted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), as described the Departmental Manual, 516 DM 11. The BIA relied on the experience of the FS and BLM and applied its expertise to benchmark these CEs and determined these are appropriate to establish as BIA CEs.

    Because these CEs have important implications for actions occurring on Indian lands, the BIA initiated consultation and requested comments from all federally recognized tribes. This consultation period began on July 23, 2014, and concluded on September 21, 2014. Public comments were also solicited through a notice placed in the Federal Register on November 14, 2014 [79 FR 68287].

    Comments on the Proposal

    The BIA received no comments from tribes, and no public comments.

    Conclusion

    The Department and the BIA determined that the actions defined in the CEs presented at the end of this notice normally do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and, absent extraordinary circumstances, do not require preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement. This finding is based on the analysis of the application of similar CEs established and used by other Federal departments and agencies; and the professional judgment of BIA environmental and forestry personnel who conducted environmental reviews of similar actions that resulted in Findings of No Significant Impact.

    Categorical Exclusions

    The Department will add the following categorical exclusions to the Departmental Manual at 516 DM 10.5: H. Forestry.

    (11) Harvesting live trees not to exceed 70 acres, requiring no more than 0.5 mile of temporary road construction. Such activities:

    (a) Shall not include even-aged regeneration harvests or vegetation type conversions.

    (b) May include incidental removal of trees for landings, skid trails, and road clearing.

    (c) May include temporary roads which are defined as roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, other written authorization, or emergency operation not intended to be part of the BIA or Tribal transportation systems and not necessary for long-term resource management. Temporary roads shall be designed to standards appropriate for the intended uses, considering safety, cost of transportation, and impacts on land and resources; and

    (d) Shall require the treatment of temporary roads constructed or used so as to permit the reestablishment by artificial or natural means, of vegetative cover on the roadway and areas where the vegetative cover was disturbed by the construction or use of the road, as necessary to minimize erosion from the disturbed area. Such treatment shall be designed to reestablish vegetative cover as soon as practicable, but at least within 10 years after the termination of the contract.

    Examples include, but are not limited to:

    (a) Removing individual trees for sawlogs, specialty products, or fuelwood.

    (b) Commercial thinning of overstocked stands to achieve the desired stocking level to increase health and vigor.

    (12) Salvaging dead or dying trees not to exceed 250 acres, requiring no more than 0.5 mile of temporary road construction. Such activities:

    (a) May include incidental removal of live or dead trees for landings, skid trails, and road clearing.

    (b) May include temporary roads which are defined as roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, other written authorization, or emergency operation not intended to be part of the BIA or Tribal transportation systems and not necessary for long-term resource management. Temporary roads shall be designed to standards appropriate for the intended uses, considering safety, cost of transportation, and impacts on land and resources; and

    (c) Shall require the treatment of temporary roads constructed or used so as to permit the reestablishment, by artificial or natural means, of vegetative cover on the roadway and areas where the vegetative cover was disturbed by the construction or use of the road, as necessary to minimize erosion from the disturbed area. Such treatment shall be designed to reestablish vegetative cover as soon as practicable, but at least within 10 years after the termination of the contract.

    (d) For this CE, a dying tree is defined as a standing tree that has been severely damaged by forces such as fire, wind, ice, insects, or disease, such that in the judgment of an experienced forest professional or someone technically trained for the work, the tree is likely to die within a few years.

    Examples include, but are not limited to:

    (a) Harvesting a portion of a stand damaged by a wind or ice event.

    (b) Harvesting fire damaged trees.

    (13) Commercial and non-commercial sanitation harvest of trees to control insects or disease not to exceed 250 acres, requiring no more than 0.5 miles of temporary road construction. Such activities:

    (a) May include removal of infested/infected trees and adjacent live uninfested/uninfected trees as determined necessary to control the spread of insects or disease; and

    (b) May include incidental removal of live or dead trees for landings, skid trails, and road clearing.

    (c) May include temporary roads which are defined as roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, other written authorization, or emergency operation not intended to be part of the BIA or tribal transportation systems and not necessary for long-term resource management. Temporary roads shall be designed to standards appropriate for the intended uses, considering safety, cost of transportation, and impacts on land and resources; and

    (d) Shall require the treatment of temporary roads constructed or used so as to permit the reestablishment, by artificial or natural means, of vegetative cover on the roadway and areas where the vegetative cover was disturbed by the construction or use of the road, as necessary to minimize erosion from the disturbed area. Such treatment shall be designed to reestablish vegetative cover as soon as practicable, but at least within 10 years after the termination of the contract.

    Examples include, but are not limited to:

    (a) Felling and harvesting trees infested with mountain pine beetles and immediately adjacent uninfested trees to control expanding spot infestations (a buffer); and

    (b) Removing or destroying trees infested or infected with a new exotic insect or disease, such as emerald ash borer, Asian longhorned beetle, or sudden oak death pathogen.

    Dated: February 5, 2015. Willie R. Taylor, Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03039 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-A2-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R1-ES-2014-N247; FXES11130100000C4-156-FF01E00000] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Initiation of 5-Year Status Reviews of 133 Species in Hawaii, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of initiation of reviews; request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are initiating 5-year status reviews for 133 species in Hawaii, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). A 5-year status review is based on the best scientific and commercial data available at the time of the review; therefore, we are requesting submission of any new information on these species that has become available since the last review.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration in our reviews, we are requesting submission of new information no later than April 14, 2015. However, we will continue to accept new information about any listed species at any time.

    ADDRESSES:

    For the 130 species in Hawaii (see table below), submit information to: Deputy Field Supervisor—Programmatic, Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3-122, Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850.

    For Bradshaw's desert-parsley and Howell's spectacular thelypody, submit information to: Field Supervisor, Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, 2600 SE 98th Avenue, Suite 100, Portland, OR 97266. Alternatively you may submit information on the Oregon species by email to: [email protected]

    For MacFarlane's four-o'-clock, submit information to: Field Supervisor, Attention: 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Suite 368, Boise, ID 83709.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marie Bruegmann, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES), 808-792-9400 (for species in Hawaii); Jeff Dillon, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, 503-231-6179 (for Bradshaw's desert-parsley and Howell's spectacular thelypody); or Kim Garner, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, 208-378-5243 (for MacFarlane's four-o'-clock). Individuals who are hearing impaired or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 for TTY assistance.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Why do we conduct 5-year reviews?

    Under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we maintain Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (which we collectively refer to as the List) in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17.11 (for animals) and 17.12 (for plants). Section 4(c)(2) of the Act requires us to review each listed species' status at least once every 5 years to determine whether it should be removed from the List; or be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or from threatened to endangered. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing those species under active review.

    What information do we consider in the review?

    A 5-year review considers all new information available at the time of the review. In conducting these reviews, we consider the best scientific and commercial data that has become available since the listing determination or most recent status review, such as:

    (A) Species biology, including but not limited to population trends, distribution, abundance, demographics, and genetics;

    (B) Habitat conditions, including but not limited to amount, distribution, and suitability;

    (C) Conservation measures that have been implemented that benefit the species;

    (D) Threat status and trends in relation to the five listing factors (as defined in section 4(a)(1) of the Act); and

    (E) Other new information, data, or corrections, including but not limited to, taxonomic or nomenclatural changes, identification of erroneous information contained in the List, and improved analytical methods.

    Any new information will be considered during the 5-year review and will also be useful in evaluating the ongoing recovery programs for these species.

    What species are under review?

    This notice announces our active review of the 133 species listed in the table below.

    Species for Which We Are Initiating a 5-Year Status Review Common name Scientific name Status Where listed Final listing rule ANIMALS Millerbird, Nihoa Acrocephalus familiaris kingi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. Wolf spider, Kauai cave Adelocosa anops Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 65 FR 2348; 01/14/2000. Duck, Laysan Anas laysanensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. Pomace fly [unnamed] Drosophila musaphilia Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 71 FR 26835; 05/09/2006. Fly, Hawaiian picture-wing Drosophila sharpi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Newcomb's snail Erinna newcombi Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 65 FR 4162; 01/26/2000. Nukupu`u (honeycreeper) Hemignathus lucidus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 35 FR 16047; 10/13/1970. `Akialoa, Kauai Hemignathus procerus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. Akekee Loxops caeruleirostris Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. `O`o, Kauai Moho braccatus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. Thrush, large Kauai Myadestes myadestinus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 35 FR 16047; 10/13/1970. Thrush, small Kauai Myadestes palmeri Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. `Akikiki Oreomystis bairdi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Amphipod, Kauai cave Spelaeorchestia koloana Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 65 FR 2348; 01/14/2000. Finch, Laysan Telespyza cantans Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. Finch, Nihoa Telespyza ultima Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 32 FR 4001; 03/11/1967. PLANTS No common name Amaranthus brownii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 43178; 08/21/1996. No common name Asplenium dielmannii (=Diellia mannii) Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Asplenium dielpallidum (=Diellia pallida) Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Pa`iniu Astelia waialealae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Olulu Brighamia insignis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. `Awikiwiki Canavalia napaliensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Papala Charpentiera densiflora Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Haha Cyanea asarifolia Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Haha Cyanea dolichopoda Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Haha Cyanea eleeleensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Haha Cyanea kolekoleensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Haha Cyanea kuhihewa Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Haha Cyanea recta Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Haha Cyanea remyi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Cyanea (=Delissea) rivularis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Haha Cyanea undulata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 47695; 09/20/1991. Mapele Cyrtandra cyaneoides Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Ha`iwale Cyrtandra kealiae ssp. kealiae (=Cyrtandra limahuliensis) Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Ha`iwale Cyrtandra oenobarba Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Ha`iwale Cyrtandra paliku Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Delissea rhytidosperma Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Doryopteris angelica Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Aumakua, Palapalai Dryopteris crinalis var. podosorus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Na`ena`e Dubautia imbricata ssp. imbricata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Na`ena`e Dubautia kalalauensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Na`ena`e Dubautia kenwoodii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Na`ena`e Dubautia latifolia Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. Na`ena`e Dubautia pauciflorula Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 47695; 09/20/1991. Na`ena`e Dubautia plantaginea ssp. magnifolia Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Na`ena`e Dubautia waialealae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. `Akoko Euphorbia (=Chamaesyce) eleanoriae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. `Akoko Euphorbia haeleeleana Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53108; 10/10/1996. No common name Euphorbia (=Chamaesyce) halemanui Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. `Akoko Euphorbia (=Chamaesyce) remyi var. kauaiensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. `Akoko Euphorbia (=Chamaesyce) remyi var. remyi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Heau Exocarpos luteolus Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Nohoanu Geranium kauaiense Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Gouania meyenii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 55770; 10/29/1991. No common name Hesperomannia lydgatei Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 47695; 09/20/1991. Kauai hau kuahiwi Hibiscadelphus distans Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 51 FR 15903; 04/29/1986. Hau kuahiwi Hibiscadelphus woodii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Hibiscus, Clay's Hibiscus clayi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Koki`o ke`oke`o Hibiscus waimeae ssp. hannerae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Wawae`iole Huperzia (=Lycopodium) nutans Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 14482; 03/28/1994. Aupaka Isodendrion laurifolium Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53108; 10/10/1996. Aupaka Isodendrion longifolium Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53108; 10/10/1996. Hedyotis, Na Pali Beach Kadua (=Hedyotis) st.-johnii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 49639; 09/30/1991. No common name Keysseria erici Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Keysseria helenae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Koki`o Kokia kauaiensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Kamakahala Labordia helleri Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Kamakahala Labordia lydgatei Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 47695; 09/20/1991. Kamakahala Labordia pumila Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Kamakahala Labordia tinifolia var. wahiawaensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Lobelia niihauensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 55770; 10/29/1991. Desert-parsley, Bradshaw's Lomatium bradshawi Endangered U.S.A. (OR, WA) 53 FR 38448; 09/30/1988. Lehua makanoe Lysimachia daphnoides Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Lysimachia filifolia Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Lysimachia iniki Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Lysimachia pendens Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Lysimachia scopulensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Lysimachia venosa Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Nehe Melanthera (=Lipochaeta) fauriei Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Nehe Melanthera (=Lipochaeta) micrantha Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Nehe Melanthera (=Lipochaeta) waimeaensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Alani Melicope degeneri Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Alani Melicope haupuensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Alani Melicope pallida Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Alani Melicope paniculata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Alani Melicope puberula Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Alani Melicope quadrangularis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Four-o'-clock, MacFarlane's Mirabilis macfarlanei Threatened U.S.A. (ID, OR) 61 FR 10693; 03/15/1996. Kolea Myrsine knudsenii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Kolea Myrsine linearifolia Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Kolea Myrsine mezii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. `Aiea Nothocestrum peltatum Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Lau `ehu Panicum niihauense Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53108; 10/10/1996. No common name Phyllostegia knudsenii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Phyllostegia renovans Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Phyllostegia waimeae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Phyllostegia wawrana Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Ho`awa Pittosporum napaliense Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Pilo kea lau li`i Platydesma rostrata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Bluegrass, Mann's Poa mannii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 56330; 11/10/1994. Bluegrass, Hawaiian Poa sandvicensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. No common name Poa siphonoglossa Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. No common name Polyscias (=Tetraplasandra) bisattenuata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Polyscias (=Tetraplasandra) flynnii Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Polyscias racemosa (=Munroidendron racemosum) Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Lo`ulu, (=Na`ena`e) Pritchardia hardyi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Lo`ulu Pritchardia napaliensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Lo`ulu Pritchardia viscosa Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Lo`ulu Pritchardia remota Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 43178; 08/21/1996. Kopiko Psychotria grandiflora Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Kopiko Psychotria hobdyi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Kaulu Pteralyxia kauaiensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Remya kauaiensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 1450; 01/14/1991. No common name Remya montgomeryi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 1450; 01/14/1991. Ma`oli`oli Schiedea apokremnos Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 49639; 09/30/1991. No common name Schiedea attenuata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. No common name Schiedea helleri Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Schiedea kauaiensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53108; 10/10/1996. Kuawawaenohu Schiedea (=Alsinidendron) lychnoides Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Schiedea membranacea Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina Threatened U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. Laulihilihi Schiedea stellarioides Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. No common name Schiedea verticillata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 43178; 08/21/1996. No common name Schiedea viscosa (=Alsinidendron viscosum) Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. `Aiakeakua, popolo Solanum sandwicense Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 59 FR 9304; 02/25/1994. No common name Stenogyne campanulata Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. No common name Stenogyne kealiae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 75 FR 18960; 04/13/2010. Thelypody, Howell's spectacular Thelypodium howellii ssp. spectabilis Threatened U.S.A. (OR) 64 FR 28393; 5/26/1999. No common name Viola helenae Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 56 FR 47695; 09/20/1991. Nani wai`ale`ale Viola kauaensis var. wahiawaensis Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 61 FR 53070; 10/10/1996. Iliau, dwarf Wilkesia hobdyi Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 27859; 06/22/1992. No common name Xylosma crenatum Endangered U.S.A. (HI) 57 FR 20580; 05/13/1992. Request for New Information

    To ensure that a 5-year review is complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, we request new information from all sources. See “What Information Do We Consider in Our Review?” for specific criteria. If you submit information, please support it with documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, methods used to gather and analyze the data, and/or copies of any pertinent publications, reports, or letters by knowledgeable sources.

    If you wish to provide information for any species listed above, please submit your comments and materials to the appropriate contact in the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, or Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).

    Public Availability of Comments

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

    Comments and materials received will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the offices where the comments are submitted.

    Completed and Active Reviews

    A list of all completed and currently active 5-year reviews addressing species for which the Pacific Region of the Service has lead responsibility is available at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/5year.html.

    Authority

    This document is published under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: January 6, 2015. Richard Hannan, Acting Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03015 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R1-ES-2015-N027; FXES11130100000-156-FF01E00000] Endangered Species; Recovery Permit Application AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following application for a recovery permit to conduct activities with the purpose of enhancing the survival of an endangered species. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), prohibits certain activities with endangered species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. The Act also requires that we invite public comment before issuing such permits.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Program Manager for Restoration and Endangered Species Classification, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Regional Office, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colleen Henson, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address, or by telephone (503-231-6131) or fax (503-231-6243).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) prohibits certain activities with respect to endangered and threatened species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. Along with our implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR part 17, the Act provides for certain permits, and requires that we invite public comment before issuing these permits for endangered species.

    A permit granted by us under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes the permittee to conduct activities (including take or interstate commerce) with respect to U.S. endangered or threatened species for scientific purposes or enhancement of propagation or survival. Our regulations implementing section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act for these permits are found at 50 CFR 17.22 for endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant species.

    Application Available for Review and Comment

    We invite local, State, and Federal agencies and the public to comment on the following application. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    Documents and other information submitted with this application are available for review by request from the Program Manager for Restoration and Endangered Species Classification at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) and the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

    Permit Number: TE-003483

    Applicant: U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaii National Park, Hawaii.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take (capture, band, mark, measure, weigh, collect blood samples, radio-tag, release, recapture, and search for and monitor nests) the Hawaiian coot (Fulica americana alai) and the Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni) on the island of Oahu, in conjunction with scientific research, for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

    Public Availability of Comments

    All comments and materials we receive in response to this request will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section.

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

    Authority:

    We provide this notice under section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: January 30, 2015. Theresa E. Rabot, Acting Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03024 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R1-ES-2015-N004; FXES11130100000-156-FF01E00000] Endangered Species; Recovery Permit Application AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following application for a recovery permit to conduct activities with the purpose of enhancing the survival of an endangered species. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), prohibits certain activities with endangered species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. The Act also requires that we invite public comment before issuing such permits.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Program Manager for Restoration and Endangered Species Classification, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Regional Office, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colleen Henson, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address, or by telephone (503-231-6131) or fax (503-231-6243).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) prohibits certain activities with respect to endangered and threatened species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. Along with our implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17, the Act provides for certain permits, and requires that we invite public comment before issuing these permits for endangered species.

    A permit granted by us under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes the permittee to conduct activities (including take or interstate commerce) with respect to U.S. endangered or threatened species for scientific purposes or enhancement of propagation or survival. Our regulations implementing section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act for these permits are found at 50 CFR 17.22 for endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant species.

    Application Available for Review and Comment

    We invite local, State, and Federal agencies and the public to comment on the following application. Please refer to the permit number for the application when submitting comments.

    Documents and other information submitted with this application are available for review by request from the Program Manager for Restoration and Endangered Species Classification at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) and the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

    Permit Number: TE-017352 Applicant: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Saipan, MP

    The applicant requests amendment of a permit to take (playback survey) Mariana common moorhens (Gallinula chloropus guami) and to take (playback survey, photograph, and videograph) Micronesian megapodes (Megapodius laperouse) throughout the Commonwealth of the Northern Islands in conjunction with research for the purpose of enhancing species' survival.

    Public Availability of Comments

    All comments and materials we receive in response to this request will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section.

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

    Authority

    We provide this notice under section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: January 21, 2015. Richard R. Hannan, Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03016 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [145A2100DD AAK4000000 A0R9B0000.999900] Renewal of Agency Information Collection for Probate of Indian Estates AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of submission to OMB.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for renewal for the collection of information titled “Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and the Five Civilized Tribes.” The information collection is currently authorized by OMB Control Number 1076-0169, which expires February 28, 2015.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 16, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the information collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at the Office of Management and Budget, by facsimile to (202) 395-5806 or you may send an email to: [email protected] Please send a copy of your comments to Charlene Toledo, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services, Division of Probate Services 2600 N Central Ave STE MS 102, Phoenix, AZ 85004: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charlene Toledo, (505) 563-3371. You may review the information collection request online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The Secretary of the Interior probates the estates of individual Indians owning trust or restricted property in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 372-373. In order to compile the probate file, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) must obtain information regarding the deceased from individuals and the tribe. This request for renewal makes adjustments to reflect the accurate number of respondents. As a result, the estimated burden hours has increased from 1,037,493 to 1,037,513 hours. No other changes were made to the information collection.

    II. Request for Comments

    On October 28, 2014, the BIA published a notice announcing the renewal of this information collection and provided a 60-day comment period in the Federal Register (79 FR 64210). The BIA received one comment in response to this notice. The commenter expressed disagreement with the application of the Act of August 4, 1947, 61 Stat. 731, and proposed repealing of the 1947 Act would reduce the burden in collecting information for probate of restricted land. However, the data for this information collection is collected under 25 U.S.C. 372-373, which does not apply to members of the Five Civilized Tribes. Therefore, no changes were made to this information collection.

    The BIA requests your comments on this collection concerning: (a) The necessity of this information collection for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (hours and cost) of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Ways we could enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways we could minimize the burden of the collection of the information on the respondents.

    Please note that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and an individual need not respond to, a collection of information unless it has a valid OMB Control Number.

    It is our policy to make all comments available to the public for review at the location listed in the ADDRESSES section. Before including your address, phone number, email address or other personally identifiable 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.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1076-0169.

    Title: Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and Five Civilized Tribes.

    Brief Description of Collection: This part contains the procedures that the Secretary of the Interior follows to initiate the probate of the trust estate for a deceased person who owns an interest in trust or restricted property. The Secretary must perform the information collection requests in this part to obtain the information necessary to compile an accurate and complete probate file. This file will be forwarded to the Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) for disposition. Responses to these information collection requests are required to create a probate file for the decedent's estate so that OHA can determine the heirs of the decedent and order distribution of the trust assets in the decedent's estate. A response is required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Type of Review: Extension without change of currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Indians, businesses, and tribal authorities.

    Number of Respondents: 65,751.

    Frequency of Response: One per respondent each year with the exception of tribes that may be required to provide enrollment information on an average of approximately 10 times/year.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 76,695.

    Estimated Time per Response: Ranges from 0.5 hours to 45.5 hours (see table below).

    CFR Section Description of info collection requirement Number of
  • responses
  • per yr
  • Hours per
  • response
  • Total burden hours
    15.9 File affidavit to self-prove will, codicil, or revocation 1,000 0.5 500 15.9 File supporting affidavit to self-prove will, codicil, or revocation 2,000 0.5 1,000 15.104 Reporting req.-death certificate 5,850 5 29,250 15.105 Provide probate documents 21,235 45.5 966,193 15.203 Provide tribal information for probate file 5,660 2 11,320 15.301 Reporting funeral expenses 5,850 2 11,700 15.305 Provide info on creditor claim (6 per probate) 35,100 0.5 17,550 Total 76,695 1,037,513

    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 1,037,513.

    Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour Dollar Cost: $0.

    Dated: February 10, 2015. Elizabeth K. Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-03045 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-W7-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCOS06000 L10200000.EE0000] Notice of Intent To Amend the Resource Management Plan for the Bureau of Land Management Gunnison Field Office and Prepare an Associated Environmental Impact Statement, Colorado AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Gunnison Field Office, Gunnison, Colorado, intends to prepare a Resource Management Plan (RMP) amendment with an associated Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and by this notice is announcing the beginning of the scoping process to solicit public comments and identify issues.

    DATES:

    This notice initiates the public scoping process for the RMP amendment with associated EIS. Comments on issues may be submitted in writing until March 16, 2015. The date(s) and location(s) of any scoping meetings will be announced at least 15 days in advance through local media, newspapers and the BLM Web site at: http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/gfo.html. In order to be included in the Draft EIS, all comments must be received prior to the close of the 30-day scoping period or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever is later. The BLM will provide additional opportunities for public participation as appropriate.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on issues and planning criteria related to the Gunnison Field Office RMP amendment/EIS by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: 970-642-4990.

    Mail: 210 West Spencer Street, Suite A, Gunnison, CO 81230.

    Documents pertinent to this proposal may be examined at the BLM Gunnison Field Office at the address above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kristi Murphy, Outdoor Recreation Planner; telephone, 970-642-4955; address, 210 West Spencer Street, Suite A, Gunnison, CO 81230; email, blm_co_ [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:

    This document provides notice that the BLM Gunnison Field Office intends to prepare an RMP amendment with an associated EIS for 16 domestic sheep grazing allotments, announces the beginning of the scoping process and seeks public input on issues and planning criteria. The planning area is located in Gunnison, Hinsdale, and portions of Montrose, Ouray, and San Juan counties, Colorado. The planning area encompasses approximately 115,000 acres of public land. The BLM will analyze grazing that is currently authorized by five livestock grazing permits in the planning area. The five livestock grazing permits authorize sheep grazing on twelve grazing allotments. Eight of those allotments completely or partly overlap with mapped Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (RMBS) habitat. Livestock grazing authorized by these five permits has not yet been fully analyzed in compliance with NEPA; therefore, these permits are currently being authorized under the authority of Public Law 108-108 and Public Law 111-8. In addition, the BLM will analyze livestock grazing on four other livestock grazing allotments located in areas south and west of Lake City, Colorado, which are currently vacant (domestic livestock grazing is not currently permitted on those allotments). Although there is no demand for livestock grazing on these four vacant allotments, the risk of contact with RMBS is high if permitted. Because the BLM may change livestock grazing allocations through this process, the BLM may need to amend its Resource Management Plan. These changes could include making some areas and related allotments unavailable to livestock grazing; adjusting area-wide forage availability for livestock; and making some areas or allotments that are currently unavailable to livestock grazing available for that use.

    Over the past 30 years, the bighorn sheep population in the area has increased to a level indicating a healthy, stable population. New information about disease transmission between domestic sheep and RMBS indicates that contact between the species can pose a risk to the health of the RMBS population. The potential for disease transmission is a particular concern in areas where the risk of contact between species is high and design criteria or mitigation measures to achieve separation may not be effective. To fully analyze the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of authorizing livestock grazing in bighorn sheep habitat areas, the EIS will consider the five livestock grazing permits, including the associated grazing allotments outside of RMBS habitat, as well as four allotments that are currently vacant and unpermitted.

    The purpose of the public scoping process is to determine relevant issues that will influence the scope of the environmental analysis, including alternatives, and guide the planning process. Preliminary issues for the plan amendment area have been identified by BLM personnel; Federal, State, and local agencies; and other stakeholders. The issues include: RMBS population health, domestic sheep grazing, socio-economics, riparian area conditions, noxious weeds, Canada lynx habitat, Gunnison Sage-Grouse habitat and upland soils. Preliminary planning criteria include:

    1. The BLM will continue to manage the Gunnison Field Office in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1701 (et seq.), other applicable laws and regulations and all existing public land laws.

    2. The RMP amendment will be developed using an interdisciplinary approach to identify alternatives and analyze resource impacts, including cumulative impacts to natural and cultural resources and the social and economic environment.

    3. The amendment process will follow the FLPMA planning process and the BLM will develop an EIS analyzing the amendment, consistent with NEPA.

    You may submit comments on issues and planning criteria in writing to the BLM at any public scoping meeting, or you may submit them to the BLM using one of the methods listed earlier in the ADDRESSES section. To be most helpful, you should submit comments by the close of the 30-day scoping period or within 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever is later.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. The minutes and list of attendees for each scoping meeting will be available to the public and open for 30 days after the meeting to any participant who wishes to clarify the views he or she expressed.

    The BLM will evaluate identified issues to be addressed in the plan amendment, and will place them into one of three categories:

    1. Issues to be resolved in the plan amendment;

    2. Issues to be resolved through policy or administrative action; or

    3. Issues beyond the scope of this plan amendment.

    The BLM will provide an explanation in the Draft RMP amendment/Draft EIS as to why an issue was placed in category two or three. The public is also encouraged to help identify any management questions and concerns that should be addressed in the plan amendment. The BLM will work collaboratively with interested par