Federal Register Vol. 80, No.76,

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 76 (April 21, 2015)

Page Range22087-22356
FR Document

80_FR_76
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
80 FR 22089 - Presidential Determination on the Proposed Agreement for Cooperation Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the People's Republic of China Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear EnergyPDF
80 FR 22087 - Delegation of Authority Pursuant to Section 1236(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015PDF
80 FR 22254 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
80 FR 22103 - Cincinnati Reds Season Fireworks; Ohio River Mile 470.1-470.4; Cincinnati, OHPDF
80 FR 22228 - Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Licenses and Conforming AmendmentPDF
80 FR 22097 - Great Steam Boat Race/Kentucky Derby Festival, Louisville, KYPDF
80 FR 22231 - Bell Bend Nuclear Power PlantPDF
80 FR 22227 - Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLCPDF
80 FR 22224 - Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming AmendmentPDF
80 FR 22231 - Crow Butte Resources, Inc. (North Trend Expansion Project); Notice of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ReconstitutionPDF
80 FR 22214 - Board of Visitors for the National Fire AcademyPDF
80 FR 22220 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Procedures for Appealing Rent AdjustmentsPDF
80 FR 22116 - Suspension of Community EligibilityPDF
80 FR 22218 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Family Unification ProgramPDF
80 FR 22216 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Write Your Own (WYO) Company Participation Criteria; New ApplicantPDF
80 FR 22215 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request, Integrated Public Alert and Warning Systems (IPAWS) Memorandum of Agreement ApplicationsPDF
80 FR 22168 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 22091 - Homeownership Counseling Organizations Lists and High-Cost Mortgage Counseling Interpretive RulePDF
80 FR 22176 - Applicability Determination Index (ADI) Database System Recent Posting: Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations Pertaining to Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection ProgramPDF
80 FR 22191 - Submission to OMB for Review; Federal Acquisition Regulation; Progress Payments (SF-1443)PDF
80 FR 22162 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Management and Organizational Practices SurveyPDF
80 FR 22116 - Sulfur Dioxide Allowance SystemPDF
80 FR 22191 - Public Availability of General Services Administration FY 2014 Service Contract InventoryPDF
80 FR 22165 - Laminated Woven Sacks From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014PDF
80 FR 22256 - U.S. Department of State Advisory Committee on Private International Law (ACPIL): Public Meeting on Insolvency-Related Judgments and Enterprise Group Insolvency IssuesPDF
80 FR 22256 - U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy; Notice of Charter RenewalPDF
80 FR 22164 - Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Rescission of 2013-2014 Antidumping Duty New Shipper ReviewPDF
80 FR 22254 - Data Collection Available for Public CommentsPDF
80 FR 22257 - Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Surplus Property Release at Jack Edwards Airport, Gulf Shores, ALPDF
80 FR 22116 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source CategoriesPDF
80 FR 22115 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation of Authority to OklahomaPDF
80 FR 22119 - Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery and Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Framework Adjustment 26; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Sea Turtle ConservationPDF
80 FR 22264 - Agency Information Collection; Activity Under OMB Review; Submission of Audit Reports-Part 248PDF
80 FR 22265 - Agency Information Collection; Activity Under OMB Review; Reporting Required for International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)PDF
80 FR 22222 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Pistols and RevolversPDF
80 FR 22167 - Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
80 FR 22265 - Agency Information Collection; Activity Under OMB Review; Report of Extension of Credit to Political Candidates-Form 183PDF
80 FR 22186 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Approval Under Delegated Authority and Submission to OMBPDF
80 FR 22200 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 22198 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
80 FR 22255 - Data Collection Available for Public CommentsPDF
80 FR 22209 - National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics: Meeting; Privacy, Security & Confidentiality SubcommitteePDF
80 FR 22266 - Joint Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development and Clinical Science Research and Development Services Scientific Merit Review Board; Notice of MeetingsPDF
80 FR 22189 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies; CorrectionPDF
80 FR 22189 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking ActivitiesPDF
80 FR 22267 - Advisory Committee on the Readjustment of Veterans; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 22169 - Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory CommitteesPDF
80 FR 22175 - North Star Solar, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 22171 - Emera Maine; Notice of FilingPDF
80 FR 22175 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
80 FR 22173 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 22205 - Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data From Studies Conducted Outside the United States; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; AvailabilityPDF
80 FR 22170 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application for Grants Under the Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions ProgramPDF
80 FR 22167 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; NOAA Satellite Ground Station Customer QuestionnairePDF
80 FR 22209 - Request for Comments on Deliberation and Bioethics EducationPDF
80 FR 22217 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Advance Permission To Enter as Nonimmigrant Pursuant to Section 212(d)(3)(A)(ii) of the INA, Section 212(d)(13) of the INA, or Section 212(d)(14) of the INA, Form I-192, Form I-192; Revision of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
80 FR 22169 - Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Patent License to Hydro-Québec; Montreal CanadaPDF
80 FR 22218 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service, Form N-426; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
80 FR 22190 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 22221 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Channel Islands National Park General Management Plan/Wilderness Study, Santa Barbara County, CaliforniaPDF
80 FR 22256 - Interest Rates: CorrectionPDF
80 FR 22254 - Rhode Island Disaster #RI-00014PDF
80 FR 22255 - Massachusetts Disaster #MA-00063PDF
80 FR 22256 - Midwest Mezzanine Fund V SBIC, L.P., License No. 05/05-0318; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of InterestPDF
80 FR 22255 - Surrender of License of Small Business Investment CompanyPDF
80 FR 22263 - Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology; Advisory Council on Transportation Statistics; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 22258 - Notice of Scoping for Highway Project in Pierce County, WashingtonPDF
80 FR 22163 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Licensing Responsibilities and EnforcementPDF
80 FR 22263 - Pipeline Safety: Information Collection ActivitiesPDF
80 FR 22156 - Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Species FisheriesPDF
80 FR 22202 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments and Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco ProductsPDF
80 FR 22204 - Generic Drug User Fees; Public Meeting; Request for CommentsPDF
80 FR 22211 - Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) (NCI)PDF
80 FR 22210 - Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Assessing an Online Process To Study the Prevalence of Drugged Driving in the U.S.: Development of the Drugged Driving Reporting System (NIDA)PDF
80 FR 22197 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
80 FR 22195 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
80 FR 22192 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
80 FR 22193 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
80 FR 22194 - Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial ReviewPDF
80 FR 22196 - Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial ReviewPDF
80 FR 22201 - Request for Nominations on the Allergenic Products Advisory CommitteePDF
80 FR 22261 - Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB ReviewPDF
80 FR 22206 - National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 22207 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Public Comment RequestPDF
80 FR 22207 - National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 22223 - Occupational Safety and Health State Plans; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) RequirementsPDF
80 FR 22258 - Ninth Meeting: RTCA Tactical Operations Committee (TOC)PDF
80 FR 22096 - Amendment of Restricted Area Boundary Descriptions; Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WAPDF
80 FR 22199 - Announcing the Award of Six Single-Source Expansion Supplement Grants Under the Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (Tribal MIECHV) ProgramPDF
80 FR 22257 - Notice of Request To Release Airport PropertyPDF
80 FR 22233 - Annual Public Meeting; Reagan-Udall Foundation for the Food and Drug AdministrationPDF
80 FR 22163 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Current Population Survey (CPS) School Enrollment SupplementPDF
80 FR 22243 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Waive Trade Reporting Fees Under Rule 7710 Due to an OTC Reporting Facility Systems IssuePDF
80 FR 22251 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees SchedulePDF
80 FR 22259 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Implantable Cardioverter DefibrillatorsPDF
80 FR 22245 - Voya Retirement Insurance and Annuity Company et al.;PDF
80 FR 22234 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, and Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To List and Trade Shares of the iShares iBonds Dec 2021 AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF and iShares iBonds Dec 2022 AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)PDF
80 FR 22242 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 to Proposed Rule Change Relating to Listing and Trading of Shares of the SPDR SSgA Global Managed Volatility ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600PDF
80 FR 22249 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF of ETF Series SolutionsPDF
80 FR 22213 - National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Notice of MeetingPDF
80 FR 22212 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 22211 - National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 22213 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
80 FR 22213 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 22214 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 22212 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 22212 - National Library of Medicine; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
80 FR 22158 - Pacific Island Fisheries; 2014-15 Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures; Main Hawaiian Islands Deep 7 BottomfishPDF
80 FR 22221 - Invasive Species Advisory Committee; Notice of a MeetingPDF
80 FR 22118 - Policy for Evaluating Sea Service Aboard LiftboatsPDF
80 FR 22107 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone StandardPDF
80 FR 22147 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone StandardPDF
80 FR 22142 - Safety Zone, Low Country Splash, Wando River, Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, Charleston, SCPDF
80 FR 22103 - Safety Zone; Xterra Swim, Myrtle Beach, SCPDF
80 FR 22171 - Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public NoticePDF
80 FR 22171 - Blue Sky West, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 22176 - Triton Energy, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
80 FR 22173 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
80 FR 22172 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
80 FR 22172 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
80 FR 22105 - Safety Zones; Fireworks Events in Captain of the Port New York ZonePDF
80 FR 22100 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation, York River; Yorktown and Gloucester Point, VAPDF
80 FR 22097 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mantua Creek, Paulsboro, NJPDF
80 FR 22101 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal), TXPDF
80 FR 22144 - Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RIPDF
80 FR 22148 - Oil and Gas Leasing; Royalty on Production, Rental Payments, Minimum Acceptable Bids, Bonding Requirements, and Civil Penalty AssessmentsPDF
80 FR 22232 - New Postal ProductPDF
80 FR 22186 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
80 FR 22189 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
80 FR 22106 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode Island: Prevention of Significant DeteriorationPDF
80 FR 22303 - Endangered and Threatened Species; Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliaePDF
80 FR 22112 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter StandardPDF
80 FR 22136 - Airworthiness Directives; GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. Turboprop EnginesPDF
80 FR 22137 - Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc Turbofan EnginesPDF
80 FR 22140 - Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan EnginesPDF
80 FR 22269 - Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan; Trawl Rationalization Program; Catch Monitor Program; Observer ProgramPDF
80 FR 22094 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. AirplanesPDF

Issue

80 76 Tuesday, April 21, 2015 Contents Army Army Department NOTICES Exclusive Patent Licenses: Hydro-Quebec; Montreal, Canada, 22169 2015-09170 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection RULES Homeownership Counseling Organizations Lists and High-Cost Mortgage Counseling Interpretive Rule, 22091-22094 2015-09244 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22168-22169 2015-09251 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Current Population Survey; School Enrollment Supplement, 22163 2015-09071 Management and Organizational Practices Survey, 22162-22163 2015-09234 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22192-22199 2015-09191 2015-09085 2015-09086 2015-09087 2015-09088 Meetings: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel; Corrections, 22196 2015-09083 Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel, 22194-22195 2015-09084 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22200-22201 2015-09189 2015-09192 Awards of Single-Source Expansion Supplement Grants: Tribal Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program, 22199-22200 2015-09074 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Mantua Creek, Paulsboro, NJ, 22097-22100 2015-09038 Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal), TX, 22101-22103 2015-09037 York River, Yorktown and Gloucester Point, VA, 22100-22101 2015-09039 Evaluating Sea Service Aboard Liftboats, 22118-22119 2015-09052 Safety Zones: Cincinnati Reds Season Fireworks; Ohio River Mile 470.1-470.4; Cincinnati, OH, 22103 2015-09279 Fireworks Events in Captain of the Port New York Zone, 22105-22106 2015-09040 Great Steam Boat Race/Kentucky Derby Festival, Louisville, KY, 22097 2015-09277 Xterra Swim, Myrtle Beach, SC, 22103-22105 2015-09047 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI, 22144-22147 2015-09036 Low Country Splash, Wando River, Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, Charleston, SC, 22142-22144 2015-09048 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Defense Department Defense Department See

Army Department

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Acquisition Regulation; Progress Payments, 22191 2015-09240 Charter Renewals: Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees, 22169-22170 2015-09182
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Grants under the Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions Program, 22170 2015-09175 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 22107-22111 2015-09050 Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for the PA Portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 22112-22115 2015-09005 Rhode Island; Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 22106-22107 2015-09017 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Oklahoma; Delegation of Authority, 22115 2015-09201 Source Categories; CFR Correction, 22116 2015-09202 Sulfur Dioxide Allowance System; CFR Correction, 22116 2015-09232 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 22147-22148 2015-09049 NOTICES Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations: Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program, 22176-22186 2015-09242 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes, 22094-22096 2015-08718 Restricted Area Boundary Descriptions: Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA; Amendment, 22096-22097 2015-09075 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. Turboprop Engines, 22136-22137 2015-09002 Pratt and Whitney Turbofan Engines, 22140-22142 2015-08995 Rolls-Royce plc Turbofan Engines, 22137-22140 2015-09001 NOTICES Meetings: Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics Tactical Operations Committee, 22258 2015-09076 Requests to Release Airport Properties: Colonel James Jabara Airport, Wichita, KS, 22257 2015-09073 Surplus Property Releases: Jack Edwards Airport, Gulf Shores, AL, 22257-22258 2015-09203 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Suspensions of Community Eligibility, 22116-22118 2015-09257 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Integrated Public Alert and Warning Systems Memorandum of Agreement Applications, 22215-22216 2015-09252 Write Your Own Company Participation Criteria; New Applicant, 22216-22217 2015-09255 Meetings: Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy, 22214-22215 2015-09259 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 22172-22176 2015-09041 2015-09042 2015-09043 2015-09177 2015-09178 Filings: Emera Maine, 22171 2015-09179 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Blue Sky West, LLC, 22171-22172 2015-09045 North Star Solar, LLC, 22175 2015-09180 Triton Energy, Inc., 22176 2015-09044 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 22171 2015-09046 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Environmental Assessments/Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Proposed Highway Project in Pierce County, WA, 22258-22259 2015-09096 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators, 22259-22261 2015-09068 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Board Approval under Delegated Authority and Submission to the Office of Management and Budget, 22186-22189 2015-09193 Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 22189 2015-09020 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 22186 2015-09021 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies; Correction, 22189 2015-09185 Proposals to Engage in or to Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 22189-22190 2015-09019 2015-09184 Financial Stability Financial Stability Oversight Council NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22190-22191 2015-09145 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments and Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco Products, 22202-22204 2015-09092 Guidance: Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data from Studies Conducted Outside the United States, 22205-22206 2015-09176 Meetings: Generic Drug User Fees, 22204-22205 2015-09091 Requests for Nominations: Allergenic Products Advisory Committee, 22201-22202 2015-09082 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Acquisition Regulation; Progress Payments, 22191 2015-09240 Service Contract Inventories; FY 2014, 22191-22192 2015-09230 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Deliberation and Bioethics Education, 22209 2015-09172 Meetings: National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics Subcommittee on Privacy, Confidentiality and Security, 22209-22210 2015-09187
Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22207-22209 2015-09079 Meetings: National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services, 22206-22207 2015-09080 National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps, 22207 2015-09078 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Family Unification Program, 22218-22220 2015-09256 Procedures for Appealing Rent Adjustments, 22220-22221 2015-09258 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Licensing Responsibilities and Enforcement, 22163-22164 2015-09095 Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

NOTICES Meetings: Invasive Species Advisory Committee, 22221 2015-09054
International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People's Republic of China; Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 22164-22165 2015-09206 Laminated Woven Sacks from the People's Republic of China; Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 22165-22167 2015-09229 Justice Department Justice Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Pistols and Revolvers, 22222-22223 2015-09196 Labor Department Labor Department See

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Land Land Management Bureau PROPOSED RULES Oil and Gas Leasing: Royalty on Production, Rental Payments, Minimum Acceptable Bids, Bonding Requirements, and Civil Penalty Assessments, 22148-22156 2015-09033 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Acquisition Regulation; Progress Payments, 22191 2015-09240 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22261-22263 2015-09081 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Online Process to Study the Prevalence of Drugged Driving in the U.S.: Development of the Drugged Driving Reporting System, 22210-22211 2015-09089 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, 22211-22212 2015-09090 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 22213 2015-09059 2015-09060 Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 22212-22214 2015-09057 2015-09058 National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, 22213-22214 2015-09063 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 22211 2015-09061 National Institute on Aging, 22212 2015-09062 National Library of Medicine, 22212 2015-09056 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery and Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Framework Adjustment 26; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Sea Turtle Conservation, 22119-22135 2015-09199 Fisheries off West Coast States: Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan; Trawl Rationalization Program; Catch Monitor Program; Observer Program, 22270-22302 2015-08814 PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Species: Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae); Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments and Revision of Species-wide Listing, 22304-22356 2015-09010 Fisheries Off West Coast States: Highly Migratory Species Fisheries, 22156-22158 2015-09093 Pacific Island Fisheries: Main Hawaiian Islands Deep 7 Bottomfish; Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures, 22158-22161 2015-09055 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: NOAA Satellite Ground Station Customer Questionnaire, 22167 2015-09173 Meetings: Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 22167-22168 2015-09195 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Channel Islands National Park General Management Plan/Wilderness Study, Santa Barbara County, CA, 22221-22222 2015-09107 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC, 22227-22228 2015-09273 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Reconstitution: Crow Butte Resources, Inc., 22231 2015-09261 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Bell Bend Nuclear Power Plant, 22231-22232 2015-09274 Facility Operating Licenses: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2; Transfer of Licenses and Conforming Amendment, 22228-22231 2015-09278 License Transfers: Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, 22224-22227 2015-09262 Occupational Safety Health Adm Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: State Plans, 22223-22224 2015-09077 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Pipeline Safety, 22263 2015-09094 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 22232-22233 2015-09031 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS China; Proposed Agreement for Cooperation With the U.S. Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (Presidential Determination) No. 2015-05 of April 10, 2015, 22089 2015-09367 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015; Delegation of Authority (Memorandum of March 25, 2015), 22087 2015-09363 Reagan-Udall Reagan-Udall Foundation NOTICES Meetings, 22233 2015-09072 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: Voya Retirement Insurance and Annuity Co.; et al., 22245-22249 2015-09067 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 22254 2015-09320 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: C2 Options Exchange, Inc., 22251-22254 2015-09069 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 22243-22245 2015-09070 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 22249-22251 2015-09064 NYSE Arca, Inc., 22234-22243 2015-09065 2015-09066 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 22254 2015-09205 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Disaster Survey Worksheet, 22255 2015-09190 Disaster Declaration: Massachusetts, 22255-22256 2015-09104 Rhode Island, 22254-22255 2015-09105 Interest Rates; Correction, 22256 2015-09106 Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of Interest; Exemptions: Midwest Mezzanine Fund V SBIC, L.P., 22256 2015-09101 Surrender of License of Small Business Investment Company, 22255 2015-09099 State Department State Department NOTICES Charter Renewals: U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, 22256 2015-09210 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Private International Law; Insolvency-Related Judgments and Enterprise Group Insolvency Issues, 22256-22257 2015-09215 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

See

Transportation Statistics Bureau

NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Council on Transportation Statistics, 22263-22264 2015-09097
Transportation Statistics Transportation Statistics Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Report of Extension of Credit to Political Candidates, 22265-22266 2015-09194 Reporting Required for International Civil Aviation Organization, 22265 2015-09197 Submission of Audit Reports, 22264-22265 2015-09198 U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant, 22217-22218 2015-09171 Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service; Extension, 22218 2015-09157 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on the Readjustment of Veterans, 22267-22268 2015-09183 Joint Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development and Clinical Science Research and Development Services Scientific Merit Review Board, 22266-22267 2015-09186 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 22270-22302 2015-08814 Part III Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 22304-22356 2015-09010 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 76 Tuesday, April 21, 2015 Rules and Regulations BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 12 CFR Parts 1024 and 1026 RIN 3170-AA52 Homeownership Counseling Organizations Lists and High-Cost Mortgage Counseling Interpretive Rule AGENCY:

Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is reissuing a prior interpretive rule regarding the provision of lists of HUD-approved housing counseling agencies to mortgage loan applicants with additional interpretations describing permissible addresses for list generation, as well as additional details for generation. This interpretive rule also provides guidance, in addition to existing commentary, on the qualifications for providing high-cost mortgage counseling and on lender participation in such counseling. This interpretive rule continues to describe data instructions for lenders to use in complying with the requirement under the High-Cost Mortgage and Homeownership Counseling Amendments to the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) and Homeownership Counseling Amendments to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments) Final Rule to provide a homeownership counseling list using data made available by the Bureau or Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

DATES:

This rule is effective April 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rachel Ross, Special Assistant; Nicholas Hluchyj, Senior Counsel; Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., at (202) 435-7700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

The Bureau previously issued an interpretive rule 1 (2013 HC Interpretive Rule) to assist lender compliance with the homeownership counseling list requirements of High-Cost Mortgage and Homeownership Counseling Amendments to the Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) and Homeownership Counseling Amendments to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments) Final Rule (2013 HOEPA Final Rule). Based on input the Bureau has received through informal discussion and outreach with stakeholders, the Bureau is issuing this interpretive rule, which substantively restates the guidance in the 2013 HC Interpretive Rule and adds further guidance to address additional questions stakeholders have raised. Specifically, the Bureau has received questions about: (1) How to provide applicants abroad with homeownership counseling lists; (2) permissible geolocation tools; (3) combining the homeownership counseling list with other disclosures; and (4) use of a consumer's mailing address to provide the list. The Bureau has also received questions and requests for guidance about the high-cost mortgage counseling requirements in the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule, specifically concerning counselor qualifications to provide such counseling and lender participation in high-cost mortgage counseling.

1 78 FR 68343 (Nov. 14, 2013).

To facilitate compliance and make the Bureau's guidance on these questions more generally accessible, the Bureau is issuing this official Bureau interpretation to add guidance to the 2013 HC Interpretive Rule to address these additional issues. Along with the new guidance, the instructions in the 2013 HC Interpretive Rule are republished here substantively as previously issued to keep all of this related information together for the convenience of stakeholders. New material is added to parts II. B, Location by Zip Code, and D, Accompanying Information, and new parts II. E and III. are added to discuss combining the homeownership counseling list with other disclosures and high-cost mortgage counseling, respectively.2

2 The discussion in this interpretive rule uses the terms “lender” or “creditor,” as appropriate. Part II, which addresses Regulation X, uses the term “lender” consistent with Regulation X. Part III, which addresses Regulation Z, uses the term “creditor” consistent with Regulation Z.

In January 2013, pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1375 (2010), the Bureau issued the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule.3 The 2013 HOEPA Final Rule implemented numerous Dodd-Frank Act requirements. Section 1450 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended section 5(c) of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) to require lenders to provide federally related mortgage loan applicants with a “reasonably complete or updated list of homeownership counselors who are certified pursuant to section 106(e) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701x(e)) and located in the area of the lender.” 4 The RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments implement this section 1450 amendment in Regulation X § 1024.20(a).

3 78 FR 6855 (Jan. 31, 2013).

4 Section 106(e) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, 12 U.S.C. 1701x(e), requires that homeownership counseling provided under programs administered by HUD can be provided only by organizations or individuals certified by HUD as competent to provide homeownership counseling. Section 106(e) also requires HUD to establish standards and procedures for testing and certifying counselors.

In implementing this Dodd-Frank Act requirement, § 1024.20(a)(1) requires lenders to provide the loan applicant with a written list of homeownership counseling organizations that provide relevant services in the loan applicant's location. The Bureau specified two compliance methods for obtaining this list: (1) Using a tool developed and maintained by the Bureau on its Web site,5 or (2) using data made available by the Bureau or HUD, provided that the data are used in accordance with instructions provided with the data.6 The Bureau noted the use of the data in accordance with these instructions would produce a list consistent with what would have been generated if the tool had been used.7 This rule interprets § 1024.20(a)(1) of Regulation X, as adopted by the RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments, and describes those data instructions.

5See www.consumerfinance.gov/find-a-housing-counselor.

6 These two pathways are specified in § 1024.20(a)(1)(i) and (ii), respectively.

7 78 FR 6865 (Jan. 31, 2013).

The Bureau's tool, as discussed in § 1024.20(a)(1)(i), follows these data instructions.

II. List and Data Instructions

This rule interprets the Regulation X § 1024.20(a)(1) requirement for lenders to provide a list of homeownership counseling organizations and to obtain the list from data made available by the Bureau or HUD, provided the data are used in accordance with instructions provided with the data.8 This rule describes instructions for lenders to use in complying with the § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) requirement to generate a list of homeownership counseling organizations by using data provided by the Bureau or HUD.

8 RESPA and § 1024.20(a)(1) refer to counseling entities as Homeownership Counseling Organizations. HUD refers to them as HUD-approved Housing Counseling Agencies. Homeownership Counseling Organizations as referred to in § 1024.20(a)(1) and this rule are HUD-approved Housing Counseling Agencies.

HUD currently provides the data needed to comply with the Regulation X § 1024.20(a)(1) list requirement. HUD maintains a free and publicly available application programming interface (API) containing data on HUD-approved housing counseling agencies (HUD API). Although it appears on this site that a token is required to use the data, credentials are not required to access and use the data. These data instructions are designed to be applied with publicly available homeownership counselor agency data from HUD,9 as referenced in § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii). The Bureau also has a summary of the data instructions available on the Bureau's Web site, along with a link to the publicly available housing counseling agency data.10

9 Available at: http://data.hud.gov/housing_counseling.html.

10 Summary of Data instructions available at http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201311_cfpb_summary_homeownership-counseling.pdf. Homeownership Counseling Organization data is available at http://data.hud.gov/housing_counseling.html.

A. Number of Homeownership Counselors To Appear on List

Regulation X § 1024.20(a)(1) requires lenders to provide a written list of homeownership counseling organizations. Consistent with § 1024.20(a)(1), lenders comply with this requirement when they provide a list of ten HUD-approved housing counseling agencies. The tool maintained by the Bureau will generate a list of ten HUD-approved housing counseling agencies. A lender-generated list under § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) complies with § 1024.20(a)(1) when the same number of counseling agencies are provided. Listing ten housing counseling agencies ensures fairness and equity among housing counseling agencies, by offering loan applicants a thorough and diverse list of counseling options.

B. Location by Zip Code

Regulation X 1024.20(a)(1) requires lenders to provide a written list of homeownership counseling organizations in the loan applicant's location. As the Bureau discussed in the RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments, lenders comply with § 1024.20(a)(1) when they use the loan applicant's five-digit zip code to generate a list of the ten closest HUD-approved housing counseling agencies to the centroid of the zip code of the loan applicant's current address, in descending order of proximity to the centroid. Lenders are also permitted to generate the list from a more precise geographic marker, such as a street address. The loan applicant's current zip code satisfies the requirement that the homeownership counseling organizations be in the loan applicant's location. The zip code of the loan applicant's current address generally is the default to be entered for list generation, subject to additional guidance below concerning use of the loan applicant's mailing address and circumstances where a zip code is not available. Lenders may offer loan applicants the option of generating the list from a zip code different than their home address or from a more precise geographic marker such as a street address, but lenders are not required to offer such an option. The Bureau's tool will permit generating the list of HUD-approved housing counseling agencies through entry of zip code. A lender-generated list pursuant to § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) complies with § 1024.20(a)(1) when the lender generates the list through entry of zip code or from a more precise geographic marker such as a street address. Lenders generating a list pursuant to § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) through zip code or from a more precise geographic marker such as a street address will ensure that lists generated under this provision are obtained through similar means as those generated through the Bureau's tool, pursuant to § 1024.20(a)(1)(i), thus ensuring consistency.

In circumstances where the applicant's current address does not include a five-digit zip code, e.g., the applicant currently lives overseas, making it impossible to generate a list based on the zip code of the applicant's current address, the lender may use the five-digit zip code of the property securing the mortgage to generate the list.

Additionally, there may be circumstances where an applicant's current and mailing addresses are different. For example, an applicant residing in a remote area may receive mail at a post office box. In the case in which an applicant's current and mailing address are different, a lender using an applicant's mailing address instead of the current address to generate the list would be consistent with the requirement that the list be generated based upon the loan applicant's location. Consistent with the previous paragraph, a lender may also use an applicant's mailing address to generate a list if the mailing address includes a zip code but the current address does not.

The Bureau's tool, as discussed in § 1024.20(a)(1)(i) and above, uses a third-party, commercially-available geolocation tool to match counseling organizations to a zip code. A lender is not required to use the same geolocator or geocoding system as the Bureau, so long as the results are generated in accordance with § 1024.20 and these instructions, thus ensuring general consistency.

C. Homeownership Counselor Contact Information

Regulation X § 1024.20(a)(1) requires lenders to provide a written list of homeownership counseling organizations that provide relevant services in the loan applicant's location. Consistent with § 1024.20(a)(1), lenders comply when they provide the following data fields for each housing counseling agency on the list to the extent that they are available through the HUD API: Agency name, phone number, street address, street address continued, city, state, zip code, Web site URL, email address, counseling services provided, and languages spoken. Providing a street address is preferable to providing a mailing address, as available. The tool maintained by the Bureau will provide these data fields to the extent that they are available through the HUD API. A lender-generated list under § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) complies with § 1024.20(a)(1) when these data fields are provided to the extent that they are available through the HUD API. The table below describes how the HUD API data fields relate to the above required data fields:

Data element required for list for each agency HUD API field name HUD field definition Example Agency name nme Agency name “Local Counseling Agency” Phone number phone1 Phone number “555-555-5555” Street address adr1 Street Address “1234 Main Street” Street address continued adr2 Street Address continued City city City “Anytown” State statecd Code for state in which agency is located “PA” Zip code zipcd Zip Code “12345” Website URL weburl Agency Web Site address http://www.counselor.org Email address email Email address [email protected] Counseling services provided Services Types of Counseling Services available “DFC, FBC, FHW, HIC, HMC, NDW, PLW, PPC, PPW, RHC” 11 Languages spoken languages The languages in which agency provides services “ENG”

Data fields that are populated with codes not commonly understood by loan applicants, including the data fields “Counseling services provided” and “Languages spoken,” should be translated into their definitional meanings, according to the Data Dictionary,7 to ensure clarity.

11 A data dictionary for the Field “Services” can be found at http://data.hud.gov/Housing_Counselor/getServices, and a data dictionary for “Languages” can be found at http://data.hud.gov/Housing_Counselor/getLanguages.

D. Accompanying Information

Lenders comply with Regulation X § 1024.20(a)(1) when the following language is included: “The counseling agencies on this list are approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and they can offer independent advice about whether a particular set of mortgage loan terms is a good fit based on your objectives and circumstances, often at little or no cost to you. This list shows you several approved agencies in your area. You can find other approved counseling agencies at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) Web site: consumerfinance.gov/mortgagehelp or by calling 1-855-411-CFPB (2372). You can also access a list of nationwide HUD-approved counseling intermediaries at http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/ohc_nint.”

Including information about where loan applicants can gain additional information is consistent with the Bureau's preamble discussion of how it envisioned implementing the § 1024.20(a)(1) list requirement in the RESPA Homeownership Counseling Amendments.12 Giving loan applicants the link to HUD-approved national counseling intermediaries offers loan applicants additional housing counseling options, as national intermediaries often offer phone counseling and online counseling services, which are particularly useful to loan applicants in remote areas or areas with fewer counseling agencies or loan applicants who work during normal business hours and require alternative meeting time options. The Bureau's tool will generate lists under § 1024.20(a)(1)(i) that include this text above. By including this information, lenders generating lists under § 1024.20(a)(1)(ii) will comply with § 1024.20(a)(1). This will ensure that information provided under this provision is consistent with information accompanying lists generated by the Bureau's Web site, thus ensuring consistency.

12 See 78 FR 6855 (Jan. 31, 2013) (“The Bureau anticipates the lists generated through its tool will also include information enabling the consumer to access the Bureau or HUD list of homeownership counseling organizations, so that an applicant who receives the list can obtain information about additional counseling organizations if desired.”).

E. Combining the List With Other Disclosures.

Section 5(c) of RESPA does not specify whether the written list may be combined with other disclosures. In the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule, the Bureau noted it did not receive any comments concerning the ability to combine disclosures. The Bureau finalized the combined disclosure allowance in § 1024.20(a)(2), which provides that the “list of homeownership counseling organizations provided under this section may be combined and provided with other mortgage loan disclosures required pursuant to Regulation Z, 12 CFR part 1026, or this part [1024] unless prohibited by Regulation Z or this part.”

Since the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule went into effect, the Bureau has received questions as to whether the list of counseling organizations may be combined with other disclosures besides those required pursuant to Regulations X and Z. Although only disclosures pursuant to Regulations X and Z are specifically referenced in the rule, the Bureau does not consider combining the list of organizations with other mortgage loan disclosures to be a violation of § 1024.20(a), unless otherwise prohibited. As long as the other requirements of § 1024.20(a) are met, and if not otherwise prohibited, combining the list with another disclosure does not violate the rule.

III. High-Cost Mortgage Counseling

This rule also interprets the Regulation Z § 1026.34(a)(5) pre-loan counseling requirement for high-cost mortgages. Specifically, this rule clarifies the qualifications necessary to provide high-cost mortgage counseling and to provide guidance on the issue of lender participation in the counseling.

A. Counseling Qualifications

Regulation Z § 1026.34(a)(5)(i) provides that a creditor “shall not extend a high-cost mortgage to a consumer unless the creditor receives written certification that the consumer has obtained counseling on the advisability of the mortgage from a counselor that is approved to provide such counseling by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or, if permitted by the Secretary, by a State housing finance authority.” The Bureau has heard informally that there has been some concern among creditors and counselors regarding both the necessary qualifications for providing high-cost mortgage counseling and what constitutes “high-cost mortgage counseling.”

Regulation Z comment 34(a)(5)(iv)-1 describes what is necessary for a consumer to have received counseling on the advisability of the high-cost mortgage. The counseling must cover: “key terms of the mortgage transaction” as set out in the relevant disclosure (usually the Good Faith Estimate or, after August 1, 2015, the Loan Estimate); “the consumer's budget, including the consumer's income, assets, financial obligations, and expenses; . . . and the affordability of the mortgage transaction for the consumer.”

The Bureau understands that these topics are currently covered by counseling agencies approved by HUD in providing counseling to prospective borrowers. As stated in the preamble for the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule, “HUD already requires counselors to analyze the financial situation of their clients and establish a household budget for their clients when providing housing counseling.” 13 To the extent that a counselor from a HUD-approved counseling agency covers the matters described in comment 34(a)(5)(iv)-1, the counseling requirement of § 1026.34(a)(5)(i) is met. Unless and until HUD limits the current scope of counseling in some way that would not include elements of the comment, counseling agencies that are already approved by HUD to offer homeownership counseling are also qualified to provide the counseling required for high-cost mortgages, provided such counseling does indeed cover the topics prescribed by comment 34(a)(5)(iv)-1. Further, the Bureau encourages creditors, counselors, and consumers to facilitate provision of the required counseling as early as feasible in the loan application process to help ensure the consumer ultimately makes an informed and considered decision.

13 78 FR 6931 (Jan. 31, 2013).

B. Lender Participation

The Bureau has also received information that consumers may be receiving high-cost mortgage counseling by telephone in a creditor's office while the creditor is present and listening-in. Such listening in may be objectionable by certain counselors, as it could diminish the quality of counseling. In the 2013 HOEPA Final Rule, the Bureau expressed a desire to implement the counseling requirement in a way that “ensures that borrowers will receive meaningful counseling, and at the same time that the required counseling can be provided in a manner that minimizes operational challenges.” 14 The Bureau added an anti-steering provision to the counseling requirement in § 1026.34(a)(5)(vi) that provides that a creditor “shall not steer or otherwise direct a consumer to choose a particular counselor or counseling organization for the counseling required. . . .” 15 The 2013 HOEPA Final Rule described the rationale behind this provision as “preserv[ing] counselor independence and prevent[ing] conflicts of interest that may arise. . .”.16

14 78 FR 6928 (Jan. 31, 2013).

15 12 CFR 1026.34(a)(5)(vi).

16 78 FR 6933 (Jan. 31, 2013).

Consistent with the purpose of the high-cost mortgage counseling requirement and with the anti-steering provision at § 1026.34(a)(5)(vi) in particular, the Bureau is issuing this interpretive rule, in part, to clarify that a creditor may be steering, that is directing, if the creditor insists on participating or listening in to a counseling call or session if such behavior results in a consumer's selection of a particular counselor. Under these circumstances, creditors comply with the anti-steering provision if a counselor is allowed to request that the creditor not participate or listen on the call. A counselor also is allowed to request that a creditor participate in a call or a portion of a call. For example, a counselor may request that a creditor participate in part of the counseling session to provide additional information related to the loan.

The Bureau believes that counselor independence and impartiality, which the anti-steering provision seeks to preserve, may be adversely affected by a concern that another counselor may be selected or the content of the counseling influenced if the counselor requests that the creditor not listen to the counseling and the creditor does not agree. Counselor independence and impartiality may also be compromised by the knowledge that the creditor is listening-in to the advice given. Moreover, creditor participation in such conversations may influence loan applicants away from a full and frank conversation with an independent and impartial counselor, thus undermining the purpose of the rule.

IV. Regulatory Requirements

This rule articulates the Bureau's official interpretations of the Bureau's Regulation X and Regulation Z. It is therefore exempt from the APA's notice and comment rulemaking requirements pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not require an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis. 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

The Bureau has determined that this rule does not impose any new or revise any existing recordkeeping, reporting, or disclosure requirements on covered entities or members of the public that would be collections of information requiring OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The RESPA requirements under Regulation X that lenders provide loan applicants with a written list of homeownership counseling organizations in the loan applicants' location are currently approved by OMB and assigned the OMB control number 3170-0025. The related TILA requirements are approved under OMB control number 3170-0023. Generally, the collections of information contained in Regulation X are assigned the OMB control number 3170-0016, and the collections of information contained in Regulation Z are assigned the OMB control number 3170-0015.

Dated: April 15, 2015. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
[FR Doc. 2015-09244 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2014-0528; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-060-AD; Amendment 39-18139; AD 2015-08-03] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report that during production, an incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper installation onto the alternate release cable of the main landing gear (MLG). This AD requires a detailed visual inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an incorrect clevis has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct improper installation of the clevis, which could cause loss of the alternate release system and prevent the MLG from extending and retracting, and could consequently affect the airplane's continued safe flight and landing.

DATES:

This AD becomes effective May 26, 2015.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528 or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-4000; fax 416-375-4539; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.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. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0528.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ezra Sasson, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7320; fax 516-794-5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 13, 2014 (79 FR 47393).

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2013-40, dated December 9, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

A discrepancy has been found in the Main Landing Gear (MLG) emergency release clevis installation. During production, an incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper installation onto the MLG alternate release cable. Failure of the clevis could cause the loss of the alternate release system, preventing the MLG from extending in the case of a failure of the normal MLG extension/retraction system.

This [Canadian] AD mandates the inspection for proper MLG emergency release clevis installation, and the rectification as required.

The required actions for this AD include a detailed visual inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an incorrect clevis has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528-0002.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014) and the FAA's response to the comment.

Request To Correct a Typographical Error

Horizon Airlines stated that the Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code in paragraph (d) of the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014) is incorrect for the MLG, and should be 32, not 31.

We agree with the commenter. We have changed the ATA of America Code in paragraph (d) of this AD to 32, Landing Gear.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the change described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 47393, August 13, 2014).

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Bombardier, Inc., has issued Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009. The service information describes a visual inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an incorrect clevis has been installed, and if necessary, replacing the clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. You can find this information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0528. This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 18 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $3,060, or $170 per product.

In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will take about 3 work-hours and require parts costing $0, for a cost of $255 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 AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:

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.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528; 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 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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): 2015-08-03 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18139. Docket No. FAA-2014-0528; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-060-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD becomes effective May 26, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 4001 through 4109 inclusive.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by a report that during production, an incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper installation onto the alternate release cable of the main landing gear (MLG). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct improper installation of the clevis, which could cause loss of the alternate release system and prevent the MLG from extending and retracting, and could consequently affect the airplane's continued safe flight and landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

Within 2,000 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a general visual inspection of the emergency release clevis of the MLG to determine if an incorrect clevis has been installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009. If an incorrect clevis has been installed, before further flight, replace the clevis with a correct clevis and clevis pin, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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 New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; fax 516-794-5531. 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, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(i) Related Information

Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2013-40, dated December 9, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0528-0002.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, dated July 8, 2009.

(ii) Reserved.

(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-4000; fax 416-375-4539; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com.

(4) 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.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 6, 2015. John P. Piccola, Jr., Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-08718 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. FAA-2015-0618; Airspace Docket No. 15-ANM-3] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Restricted Area Boundary Descriptions; Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; technical amendment, correction.

SUMMARY:

This action corrects a final rule; technical amendment, published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2015, that made a correction to a typographical error to R-6703A, R-6703B, R-6703C, R-6703D, R-6703E and R-6703F at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. Due to a submission error, the abbreviation for West in the longitude description of restricted area R-6703A was entered as “N”. This action corrects the boundary description of R-6703A by changing the longitude direction to “W”.

DATES:

Effective date 0901 UTC, May 7, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jason Stahl, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group, AJV-11, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On April 7, 2015, the FAA published a final rule; technical amendment in the Federal Register that made a correction to a typographical error to R-6703A, R-6703B, R-6703C, R-6703D, R-6703E and R-6703F at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA (80 FR 18519). Subsequent to publication, it was discovered that the longitude direction for R-6703A was entered as N (north) instead of W (west). The error creates an invalid geographical boundary for R-6703A. This correction replaces the abbreviation “N” with “W” in the longitude data for R-6703A.

Correction to Final Rule; Technical Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the boundary description of restricted area R-6703A, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, as published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2015 (80 FR 18519) (FR Doc. 2015-08005) is corrected to read as follows:

§ 73.67 [Amended] R-6703A Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA [Corrected]

On page 18521, second column, remove the current boundaries and add in its place the following:

Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 47°03′07″ N., long. 122°41′09″ W.; to lat. 47°04′34″ N., long. 122°41′09″ W.; to lat. 47°04′41″ N., long. 122°38′19″ W.; to lat. 47°03′37″ N., long. 122°35′40″ W.; to lat. 47°03′15″ N., long. 122°35′48″ W.; to lat. 47°03′06″ N., long. 122°36′51″ W.; to lat. 47°02′02″ N., long. 122°37′33″ W.; to lat. 47°02′06″ N., long. 122°38′33″ W.; to lat. 47°02′14″ N., long. 122°38′53″ W.; to lat. 47°02′19″ N., long. 122°39′14″ W.; to lat. 47°02′19″ N., long. 122°39′37″ W.; to lat. 47°02′21″ N., long. 122°40′17″ W.; to lat. 47°02′38″ N., long. 122°40′39″ W.; thence via the Nisqually River to the point of beginning.

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2015. Donna Warren, Acting Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2015-09075 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0092] Great Steam Boat Race/Kentucky Derby Festival, Louisville, KY AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce “the Great Steam Boat Race” safety zone for all waters of the Ohio River, beginning at mile marker 596.8 and ending at 604.3, Louisville, KY. This rule is effective from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 29, 2015. This action is necessary to protect person, property, and infrastructure from potential damage and safety hazards associated with “the Great Steam Boat Race.” During the enforcement period, deviation from the safety zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 100.801, Table no. 1, Line no. 3 will be enforced from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 29, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this notice, call or email Petty Officer Stephen F. McConnell, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 502-779-5334, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for “the Great Steam Boat Race” in 33 CFR 100.801, Table no. 1, Line no. 3 on 04/29/2015 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. These regulations can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 33 CFR 100.801 or in the Federal Register (77 FR 12460).

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100, a vessel may not enter the regulated area, unless it receives permission from the COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative. Additionally, no person or vessel may enter or remain within 200 yards ahead of the lead vessel, within 200 yards astern of the last vessel, or within 200 yards on either side of any vessel. Spectator vessels may safely transit outside the regulated area but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of race participants or official patrol vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.

This rule is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners (LNM) and Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM). If the COTP Ohio Valley determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in the notice, he or she may use a BNM to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: March 27, 2015. R.V. Timme, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2015-09277 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2014-0807] RIN 1625-AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mantua Creek, Paulsboro, NJ AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulation that governs the Conrail Railroad Bridge over Mantua Creek at mile marker 1.4 in Paulsboro, NJ. The bridge owner, Conrail, is modifying the operating system which controls the bridge operations. Cameras will be installed and the bridge will be remotely operated from Mt. Laurel, NJ. The train crew will no longer be required to stop and check the waterway for approaching vessel traffic prior to initiating a bridge closure or be responsible to operate the bridge closure equipment located at the bridge site.

DATES:

This rule is effective May 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket USCG-2014-0807. 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, call or email Mrs. Kashanda Booker, Fifth Coast Guard District Bridge Administration Division, Coast Guard; telephone 757-398-6227, email [email protected] If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms CFR—Code of Federal Regulations Conrail—Consolidated Rail Corporation DHS—Department of Homeland Security FR—Federal Register NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking § —Section Symbol U.S.C.—United States Code A. Regulatory History and Information

On December 30, 2014, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, “Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mantua Creek, Paulsboro, NJ” in the Federal Register (79 FR 78365). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

The bridge owner, Conrail, requested a change to 33 CFR 117.729 (a) due to the replacement of the existing bridge structure. Conrail also requested to modify the operating regulations due to their intent to install sensor equipment as part of the reconstruction efforts for their bridge across Mantua Creek. This rule will change three aspects of the bridge operation. Specifically, the regulations will enable (1) remote operation of the bridge, (2) installation of cameras and infrared sensors to verify whether any vessels are transiting the waterway before a bridge closure is initiated, and (3) alter the requirement for signals to be used during drawbridge movement operations. This rule will not change the operating schedule of the bridge. The original structure for the bridge at mile marker 1.4 across Mantua Creek was an A-Frame swing bridge with unlimited vertical clearance in the open position. This swing bridge is being replaced by a vertical lift bridge with a 25-foot vertical clearance in the open position. The horizontal clearance for the swing bridge was 32 feet. The vertical lift bridge will have a horizontal clearance of 44 feet.

The scope of the waterway inspection is different between the current on-site train crewmember inspection process and the range of the camera installation. There is also a difference in the time it takes between the inspection and the initiation of the bridge closure operations. Currently, the regulation requires an on-site train crewmember to conduct an inspection of the waterway for vessels by stopping the train approximately 150 feet north of the bridge site when approached from the north or 150 feet south of the bridge site when approached from the south. Once the train is stopped, the train crewmember walks to the bridge site and physically looks up and down the channel. The time it takes to stop the train, walk to the bridge, conduct the inspection, walk back to the train, and re-start the train takes 5-10 minutes. This rule allows the remote operating station to inspect the waterway with cameras without first stopping the train which permits a more efficient operating system.

The closer the vessels are to the bridge, the more likely it is that the train crewmember will see them using the process required by the current regulation. Under this rule, the camera inspection of the waterway has the capability to zoom up and down stream allowing for easier detection of a smaller vessel approaching the bridge. After inspection of the waterway, using the cameras, the bridge closing operations would then occur from a remote location at the Mt. Laurel remote operating station.

Currently, the bridge is designed to be operated by the train crew. Under this rule Conrail will operate the Mantua Creek Bridge at mile 1.4 from a remote location, the Conrail Mt. Laurel, NJ, remote operating station, at all times. A draw tender may be stationed at the bridge at various times when it is deemed necessary for safety purposes such as during times when bridge maintenance is being performed.

Conrail operates other bridges at the Mt. Laurel, NJ remote operating station. The change from on-site control of the bridge to the Mt. Laurel, NJ operating station enables Conrail to consolidate its control of the train line and Mantua Creek bridge. By controlling the track as well as the bridge operating mechanism at the Mt. Laurel station, the remote operator has access to more information regarding the anticipated arrival time for when the trains will be at the bridge site. Information such as train speed and location directly contribute to when the bridge will need to be closed. This change to a remote operating station may shorten the duration of the bridge closures due to the higher accuracy of information on train speed and anticipated arrival time at the bridge site.

The depth of Mantua Creek at the bridge is 22 feet. The diurnal tidal range is 6 feet. Mantua Creek is used by several recreational vessels during the summer boating season. There is no commercial vessel traffic on Mantua Creek.

From March through November, the bridge is in the open to navigation position and will only be lowered for the passage of train and maintenance. Train activity in this location requires the bridge to close to navigation up to eight times a day Monday thru Friday. On Saturday and Sunday, the bridge is closed up to six times each day.

From December through the end of February, the bridge is in the closed to navigation position but will open if 4 hours notice is given.

Conrail will also specify the dates when the bridge will be left in the open to navigation position from March 1 through November 30 and left in the closed to navigation position from December 1 through the last day of February. This represents a clarification of the existing regulatory language, and not a substantive change to the existing bridge schedule.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

The Coast Guard provided a comment period of 45 days and no comments were received, therefore, no changes were made.

Under this rule, the responsibility to operate the drawbridge is being removed from the train crew and being transferred to the remote operating station located in Mt. Laurel, NJ. The visual examination of the waterway to confirm whether or not any vessels are present will shift from the train crew to the Mt. Laurel remote operating station. The train crew will not be required to stop and check the waterway prior to the remote operating station closing or opening the bridge. Cameras and sensors will be used to confirm whether any vessels are navigating Mantua Creek near the CONRAIL Bridge prior to closing the bridge.

From the controls at the Mt. Laurel remote operating station, the timeframe to initiate the bridge closure is not more than 15 minutes before a train will arrive at the bridge location. The system currently in place using local control of the operating mechanism works under a similar timeframe. At the Mt. Laurel remote operating station, the cameras and sensors will be used continuously during the bridge closure operations to monitor the waterway for the presence of vessels.

With the limit of 25 feet of vertical clearance in the open position, the movement of the bridge impacts vessels transiting the waterway. Signals alerting any vessels on Mantua Creek about this movement are being modified to reflect the operating process of a new vertical lift bridge. The bridge will use flashing red lights along with sounding the horn to notify waterway users that the bridge is changing position. The current regulation requires a flashing red light, one prolonged blast, one short blast, and an audio voice announcement to indicate the bridge is opening. The new regulation states that the light will change from fixed green to flashing red any time the bridge is not in the full open position. Prior to bridge movement, there will be two prolonged blasts followed by two short blasts. This rule removes the audio voice announcement.

The drawbridge operation schedule will not change under the Final Rule. However, Conrail will specify the dates when the bridge will be left in the open to navigation position from March 1 through November 30 and left in the closed to navigation position from December 1 through the last day of February. This represents a clarification of the existing regulatory language, and not a substantive change to the existing bridge schedule.

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, 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 Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. The changes in this rule impact the methods used to operate the drawbridge. There are no changes to the drawbridge operating schedule.

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 received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

This action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. There are no changes proposed to the drawbridge operating schedule. Vessels that can safely transit under the bridge may do so at any time. The vertical clearance of 25 feet is consistent with other approved bridges on Mantua Creek.

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. 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.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). 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 would call 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 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 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 will 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 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 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 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 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 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 guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 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 promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.

Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority:

33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Revise § 117.729(a) to read as follows:
§ 117.729 Mantua Creek.

(a) The draw of the Conrail automated railroad bridge, mile 1.4, at Paulsboro, NJ shall operate as follows:

(1) The bridge will be operated remotely by the South Jersey Train Dispatcher located in Mt. Laurel, NJ. Operational information will be provided 24 hours a day by telephone at (856) 231-2282.

(2) From March 1 through November 30, the draw shall be left in the open position and will only be lowered for the passage of trains and to perform periodic maintenance authorized in accordance with subpart A of this part.

(3) From December 1 through the last day of February, the draw will open on signal if at least 4 hours notice is given by telephone at (856) 231-2282.

(4) The timeframe to initiate the bridge closure will be not more than 15 minutes before a train will arrive at the bridge location. If a train moving toward the bridge has crossed the home signal for the bridge, the train may continue across the bridge and must clear the bridge prior to stopping for any reason. Trains shall be controlled so that any delay in opening of the draw shall not exceed ten minutes except as provided in § 117.31(b).

(5) The bridge will be equipped with cameras and channel sensors to visually and electronically ensure the waterway is clear before the bridge closes. The video and sensors are located and monitored at the remote operating location in Mt. Laurel, NJ. The channel sensors signal will be a direct input to the bridge control system. In the event of failure or obstruction of the infrared channel sensors, the bridge will automatically stop closing and the South Jersey Train Dispatcher will return the bridge to the open position. In the event of video failure the bridge will remain in the full open position.

(6) The Conrail Railroad center span light will change from fixed green to flashing red anytime the bridge is not in the full open position.

(7) Prior to downward movement of the span, the horn will sound two prolonged blasts, followed by a pause, and then two short blasts until the bridge is seated and locked down. At the time of movement, the center span light will change from fixed green to flashing red and remain flashing until the bridge has returned to its full open position.

(8) When the train controller at Mt. Laurel has verified that rail traffic has cleared, they will sound the horn five times to signal the draw is about to return to its full open position.

(9) During upward movement of the span, the horn will sound two prolonged blasts, followed by a pause, and then sound two short blasts until the bridge is in the full open position. The center span light will continue to flash red until the bridge is in the fully open position.

(10) When the draw cannot be operated from the remote site, a bridge tender must be called to operate the bridge in the traditional manner. Personnel shall be dispatched to arrive at the bridge as soon as possible, but not more than one hour after malfunction or disability of the remote system.

Dated: April 3, 2015. Stephen P. Metruck, Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-09038 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0273] Drawbridge Operation Regulation, York River; Yorktown and Gloucester Point, VA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the draw of the Coleman Memorial Bridge (US 17/George P. Coleman Memorial Swing Bridge) across the York River, mile 7.0, between Gloucester Point and Yorktown, VA. This deviation is necessary to facilitate maintenance work on the moveable spans on the Coleman Memorial Bridge. This temporary deviation allows the drawbridge to remain in the closed to navigation position.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on May 3, 2015 to 5 p.m. on July 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2015-0273] is available at 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 deviation. 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 temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Terrance Knowles, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard; telephone (757) 398-6587, email [email protected] If you have questions on reviewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Virginia Department of Transportation, who owns and operates this swing bridge, has requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulation set out in 33 CFR 117.1025, to facilitate maintenance of the moveable spans on the structure.

Under the regular operating schedule, the Coleman Memorial Bridge, mile 7.0, between Gloucester Point and Yorktown, VA, opens on signal except from 5 a.m. to 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, shall remain closed to navigation. The Coleman Memorial Bridge has vertical clearances in the closed position of 60 feet above mean high water.

Under this temporary deviation, the drawbridge will be closed to navigation from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day on: Sunday May 3, 2015 with an inclement weather date on Sunday May 10, 2015; Sunday June 7, 2015 with an inclement weather date on Sunday June 14, 2015; And Sunday July 12, 2015 with an inclement weather date on Sunday July 19, 2015. The bridge will operate under normal operating schedule at all other times. Emergency openings cannot be provided. There are no alternate routes for vessels transiting this section of the York River. Vessels able to pass under the bridge in the closed position may do so at anytime and are advised to proceed with caution. All other vessels may pass before 7 a.m. and after 5 p.m.

The York River is used by a variety of vessels including military, tugs, and recreational vessels. The Coast Guard has carefully coordinated the restrictions with these waterway users. The Coast Guard will also inform additional waterway users of the bridge closure periods through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners so that vessels can arrange their transits and minimize any impacts caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

Dated: April 8, 2015. James L. Rousseau, Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-09039 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2014-0386] RIN 1625-AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal), TX AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is implementing an operating schedule that governs the Valero pontoon-supported swing bridge across Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal (JOC)), mile 2.44, West Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Texas. This bridge provides for Valero's maintenance vehicles and contractors to cross the waterway. The regulation will allow the bridge to remain in the open-to-navigation position except during two scheduled daily closures. This regulation increases the efficiency of operations allowing for the safe navigation of vessels through the bridge while recognizing the bridge's importance to the facility that it serves.

DATES:

This rule is effective May 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket [USCG-2014-0386]. 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, call or email Mr. James Wetherington; Bridge Administration Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District; telephone 504-671-2128, email [email protected] If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Acronyms CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security USCG United States Coast Guard NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NPRM Notice of Proposed Rule Making § Section Symbol U.S.C. United States Code JOC Joint Outfall Canal A. Regulatory History and Information

On September 23, 2014, we published an Interim Rule with request for comments entitled, “Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal), TX” in the Federal Register (79 FR 56651). We received 1 comment on the interim rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

The Premcor Refining Group, Inc.—A Valero Company owns the new Valero pontoon-supported swing bridge across Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (JOC), mile 2.44, West Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Texas.

The bridge has unlimited vertical clearance in the open-to-navigation position and a vertical clearance of 11.11 feet in the closed-to-navigation position. The new bridge also has a horizontal clearance of 75.0 feet from fender to fender in the open-to-navigation position and 52 feet from pontoon to fender in the closed-to-navigation position. Traffic on this waterway is primarily recreational craft and commercial barges. Valero engaged the owners of these vessels through multiple discussions leading to the design and operating schedule of this bridge.

The owner requested to change the operating schedule, per 33 CFR 117.41(b), to allow the bridge to remain open except for two scheduled daily closures.

This change allows the bridge owner to leave the bridge in the open-to-navigation position, except for two daily maintenance cycles, while removing the requirement that a bridge tender be on the bridge at all times. All notifications and signals will remain as noted in the Interim Rule.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

The Coast Guard provided a comment period of 45 days and only one comment was received. This comment was from Valero stating that they are in agreement with the rule as stated in the interim rule; however, they wish to have a little bit more flexibility due to contractor staff and general maintenance that require access to the other side of the property. After discussions with Valero, they agreed that any operation of the bridge outside of the prescribed times will require a tender on the bridge until the operations are finished and the normal open-to-navigation position can be resumed. Everything else will remain as published in the interim rule.

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, 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 Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.

This rule allows the bridge to remain in the open-to-navigation position at all times with the exception of two scheduled closures each day to allow for vehicular traffic. Because the bridge will be left in the open position and only closed to vessel traffic for two hours per day, one hour in the morning and one hour in the early evening, this regulation will have a minimal affect on the waterway users and vessels transiting the area. Additionally, the bridge can be opened in 30 minutes should there be emergency need during one of the scheduled closures. Through the course of the comment period of the interim rule, it was noted that if the bridge needs to be closed at any other time than those times that are scheduled, the bridge will be tended and be able to be opened in approximately 15 minutes.

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 received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 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 property owners, vessel operators and waterway users who wish to transit on Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (JOC) past mile 2.44 from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. and from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. daily. This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons because, through pre-coordination and consultation with property owners, vessel operators and waterway users, this operating schedule will accommodate all waterway users with minimal impact.

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. 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.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). 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 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 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 will 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 will 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 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 does 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 guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a determination 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 simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.

Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Accordingly, the interim rule amending 33 CFR part 117 which was published at 79 FR 56651 on September 23, 2014, is adopted as a final rule with the following change:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority:

33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Amend § 117.988 by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 117.988 Taylor Bayou Outfall Canal (Joint Outfall Canal (JOC)).

(g) If the bridge is required to operate outside of the specified times, the bridge will be tended until it is returned to the open-to-navigation position.

Dated: March 20, 2015. Kevin S. Cook, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-09037 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0169] RIN 1625-AA00 Cincinnati Reds Season Fireworks; Ohio River Mile 470.1-470.4; Cincinnati, OH AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for the Cincinnati Reds Season Fireworks on the Ohio River, from mile marker 470.1 and ending at 470.4, extending 500 feet from the State of Ohio shoreline. This rule is effective during specific home games during the regular baseball season. Should the Cincinnati Reds make the playoffs and have additional home games, the Coast Guard will provide advance notification of enforcement periods via Broadcast Notices to Mariners, Local Notices to Mariners, and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins as appropriate. This action is needed to protect vessels transiting the area and event spectators from the hazard associated with the Cincinnati Reds Barge-based Fireworks. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in the safety zone is prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801, Table No. 1, Line no. 2 will be enforced from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on April 24, May 15, May 29, June 5, June 19, July 3, July 4, July 17, July 31, August 21, September 4, September 11, and September 25, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this notice of enforcement, call or email Kevin Cador, MSD Cincinnati, U.S. Coast Guard at telephone 513-921-9033, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety Zone for the Cincinnati Reds Season Fireworks listed in 33 CFR 165.801, Table No. 1, Line no. 2. These regulations can be found in the electronic version of the Code of Federal Regulations, under 33 CFR 165.801( ).

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.801, a vessel may not enter the safe zone, unless it receives permission from the COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the safety zone must request permission from the COTP Ohio Valley or designated representative. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP Ohio Valley or designated representative.

This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.801 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners (LNM) and Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM). If the COTP Ohio Valley determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in the notice, he or she may use a BNM to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: March 30, 2015. R.V. Timme, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2015-09279 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0019] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Xterra Swim, Myrtle Beach, SC AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone during the Xterra swim, a swimming race occurring on waters of the Intracoastal Waterway in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The Xterra Swim is scheduled to take place on Sunday, May 3, 2015. The temporary safety zone is necessary for the safety of the swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public during the event. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective and will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. on May 3, 2015.

ADDRESSES:

Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket USCG-2015-0019. 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, call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector Charleston Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (843) 740-3184, email [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, 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. Regulatory History and Information

On March 2, 2015, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled Safety Zone; Xterra Swim, Myrtle Beach, SC in the Federal Register (76 FR 246). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

(a) The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

(b) The purpose of the rule is to ensure the safety of the swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public during the Xterra Swim.

C. 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 and 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, 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. The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the following reasons: (1) The safety zone will only be enforced for a total of 1 hour; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, they may operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (3) persons and vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone if authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

(1) This rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the Intracoastal Waterway in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina from 7:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. on May 3, 2015.

(2) For the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review section above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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. 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.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). 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 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 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 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 rule will 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 will 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 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 does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 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 that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary safety zone on waters of the Intracoastal Waterway in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina during the Xterra Swim event on Sunday, May 3, 2015. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph (34)(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. 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; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Add § 165.T07-0019 to read as follows:
§ 165.T07-0019 Safety Zone; Xterra Swim, Myrtle Beach, SC.

(a) Regulated area. The following regulated area is a safety zone: all waters within the following two points of position and the North shore: 33°45.076 N., 78°50.790 W. to 33°45.323 N., 78°50.214 W. The Xterra Swim race consists of approximately 150 swimmers. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.

(b) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated area.

(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

(2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at 843-740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

(3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.

(d) Effective date. This rule is effective on May 3, 2015. This rule will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. on Sunday, May 3, 2015.

Dated: April 9, 2015. B.D. Falk, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2015-09047 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0121] Safety Zones; Fireworks Events in Captain of the Port New York Zone AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce various safety zones within the Captain of the Port New York Zone on the specified dates and times. This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators from hazards associated with fireworks displays. During the enforcement period, no person or vessel may enter the safety zones without permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP).

DATES:

The regulation for the safety zones described in 33 CFR 165.160 will be enforced on the dates and times listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this document, call or email Lieutenant Douglas Neumann, Coast Guard; telephone 718-354-4154, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zones listed in 33 CFR 165.160 on the specified dates and times as indicated in Table 1 below. This regulation was published in the Federal Register on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69614).

Table 1 1. Empire Force Event Fireworks, Liberty Island Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(2.1) • Launch site: A barge located in approximate position 40°41′16.5″ N. 074°02′23″ W. (NAD 1983), located in Federal Anchorage 20-C, about 360 yards east of Liberty Island. This Safety Zone is a 360-yard radius from the barge.
  • • Date: April 9, 2015.
  • • Time: 9:15 p.m.-10:30 p.m.
  • 2. Swank Productions, Ellis Island Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(2.2) • Launch site: A barge located between Federal Anchorages 20-A and 20-B, in approximate position 40°41′45″ N. 074°02′09″ W. (NAD 1983) about 365 yards east of Ellis Island. This Safety Zone is a 360-yard radius from the barge.
  • • Date: May 24, 2015.
  • • Time: 11:05 p.m.-12:00 a.m.
  • 3. Hempstead Summer Kick Off, Bar Beach Hempstead Harbor Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(3.9) • Launch site: A barge located in approximate position 40°49′50″ N. 073°39′12″ W. (NAD 1983), approximately 190 yards north of Bar Beach, Hempstead Harbor, New York. This Safety Zone is a 180-yard radius from the barge.
  • • Date: May 23, 2015.
  • • Time: 09:00 p.m.-10:15 p.m.
  • 4. City of Glen Cove Fireworks, Glen Cove, Hempstead Harbor Safety Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(3.8) • Launch site: A barge located in approximate position 40°51′58″ N. 073°39′34″ W. (NAD 1983), approximately 500 yards northeast of Glen Cove Breakwater Light 5 (LLNR 27065). This Safety Zone is a 360-yard radius from the barge.
  • • Date: July 4, 2015.
  • • Rain Date: July 5, 2015
  • • Time: 8:45 p.m.-10:10 p.m.
  • Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.160, vessels may not enter the safety zones unless given permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Spectator vessels may transit outside the safety zones but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of other vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.

    This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.160(a) and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this document in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide mariners with advanced notification of enforcement periods via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine information broadcasts. If the COTP determines that a safety zone need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this document, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the safety zone.

    Dated: March 26, 2015. Jeffrey Dixon, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09040 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2011-0148; A-1-FRL-9926-51-Region 1] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode Island: Prevention of Significant Deterioration AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action approving revisions to the Rhode Island State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM) Office of Air Resources, on January 18, 2011. The EPA finds that RI DEM has satisfied all the elements of our October 24, 2013, final conditional approval, and as such, the conditional approval is converting to a full approval with this action. The commitment consisted of a submission by Rhode Island of a technical demonstration, that Rhode Island's PSD and nonattainment new source review permitting programs are at least as stringent in all respects as EPA's NSR Reform provisions for stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants other than Greenhouse Gases (GHGs). This action is being taken under section 110 of the Act.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective April 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    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 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact 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 legal holidays.

    In addition, copies of the state submittal are also available for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the Office of Air Resources, Department of Environmental Management, 235 Promenade Street, Providence, RI 02908-5767;

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ida E. McDonnell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Ms. Ida E. McDonnell's telephone number is (617) 918-1653; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

    Table of Contents I. Background II. What is a conditional approval? III. What are the terms of the conditional approval? IV. Were the terms of the conditional approval met? V. Final Action I. Background

    On October 24, 2013, EPA conditionally approved, pending submission by Rhode Island of a technical demonstration that Rhode Island's January 18, 2011 SIP revisions as they relate to major new and modified stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants other than GHGs, are as least as stringent as EPA's NSR reform. See 78 FR 63383. On February 27, 2015, the State Rhode Island submitted a technical demonstration, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7), that Rhode Island's PSD and nonattainment new source review permitting programs are at least as stringent in all respects as EPA's NSR Reform provisions for stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants other than GHGs.

    II. What is a conditional approval?

    Under section 110(k)(4) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA may conditionally approve a plan based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable measures by a date certain no later than one year from the date of final conditional approval. If the EPA subsequently determines that the State has met its commitment, EPA publishes a document in the Federal Register notifying the public that EPA is converting the conditional approval to a full approval. However, if the State fails to timely meet its commitment, then the conditional approval automatically converts to a disapproval by operation of law without further action required by EPA. If that were to occur, EPA would then notify the state by letter. At that time, the conditionally approved SIP revisions would not be part of the state's approved SIP. EPA subsequently would publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the conditional approval automatically converted to a disapproval.

    III. What are the terms of the conditional approval?

    The EPA conditionally approved Rhode Island's January 18, 2011 SIP revision as it relates to major new and modified stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants other than GHGs on October 24, 2013. See 78 FR 63383. Our conditional approval was based on a commitment letter submitted by RI DEM on September 18, 2013. Specifically, RI DEM committed to submit a revised technical demonstration (described above) no later than one year from the date on which EPA finalized the conditional approval.

    IV. Were the terms of the conditional approval met?

    RI DEM failed to submit the technical demonstration in a timely manner, therefore our conditional approval, by operation of law, became a disapproval on December 23, 2014. However, on February 27, 2015, RI DEM submitted the technical demonstration pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7), showing that Rhode Island's PSD and nonattainment new source review permitting programs are at least as stringent in all respects as EPA's NSR Reform provisions for stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants other than GHGs. Rhode Island's technical demonstration is included in the docket and administrative record for this action.

    EPA therefore has determined that RI DEM met the conditions of the conditional approval.

    V. Final Action

    EPA is converting the conditional approval to a full approval with this action. Rhode Island's February 27, 2015 submission cured, as a legal matter, the disapproval that automatically occurred on December 23, 2014. Thus, the provisions of Rhode Island's SIP that EPA conditionally approved on October 24, 2013 are now fully approved into the State's SIP.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: March 26, 2015. H. Curtis Spalding, Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09017 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0209; FRL-9926-47-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve the state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR) on July 7, 2014, to address the base year emissions inventory and emissions statement requirements for the State's portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the “bi-state Charlotte Area” or “Area”). Annual emissions reporting (i.e., emission statement) and a base year emissions inventory are required for all ozone nonattainment areas. The Area is comprised of the entire county of Mecklenburg and portions of Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Rowan and Union Counties in North Carolina; and a portion of York County in South Carolina. EPA will consider and take action on the South Carolina submission for the emissions inventory and emissions statement for its portion of this Area in a separate action.

    DATES:

    This direct final rule is effective June 22, 2015 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 21, 2015. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0209, 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-2015-0209,” Air Regulatory Management 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: Lynorae Benjamin, 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 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0209. 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 Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 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 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jane Spann, 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. Ms. Spann can be reached at (404) 562-9029 and via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm. 40 CFR 50.15. Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness requirement. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part 50.

    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS based on the three most recent years of ambient air quality data at the conclusion of the designation process. The bi-state Charlotte Area was designated nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2012 (effective July 20, 2012) using 2009-2011 ambient air quality data. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). At the time of designation, the bi-state Charlotte Area was classified as a Marginal nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On February 13, 2015, EPA finalized a rule entitled “Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements” (SIP Requirements Rule) that establishes the requirements that state, tribal, and local air quality management agencies must meet as they develop implementation plans for areas where air quality exceeds the 2008 ozone NAAQS.1 See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). This rule establishes ozone nonattainment area attainment dates based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the CAA, including an attainment date three years after the July 20, 2012, effective date for areas classified as marginal areas for the 2008 8-hour NAAQS. Therefore, the attainment date for the bi-state Charlotte Area is July 20, 2015.

    1 The SIP Requirements Rule addresses a range of nonattainment area SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including requirements pertaining to attainment demonstrations, reasonable further progress (RFP), reasonably available control technology, reasonably available control measures, major new source review, emission inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and of compliance with emission control measures in the SIP. The rule also revokes the 1997 ozone NAAQS and establishes anti-backsliding requirements.

    Based on the nonattainment designation, North Carolina was required to develop a nonattainment SIP revision addressing certain CAA requirements. Specifically, pursuant to CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) and section 182(a)(1), North Carolina was required to submit a SIP revision addressing emissions statements and emissions inventory requirements, respectively.

    Ground level ozone is not emitted directly into the air, but is created by chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of sunlight. Emissions from industrial facilities and electric utilities, motor vehicle exhaust, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents are some of the major sources of NOX and VOC. Section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA requires each state with ozone nonattainment areas to submit a SIP revision requiring annual emissions statements to be submitted to the state by the owner or operator of each NOX or VOC stationary source 2 located within a nonattainment area showing the actual emissions of NOX and VOC from that source. The first statement is due three years from the area's nonattainment designation, and subsequent statements are due at least annually thereafter. Section 182(a)(1) of the CAA requires states with areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS to submit a SIP revision providing a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area.

    2 A state may waive the emission statement requirement for any class or category of stationary sources which emit less than 25 tons per year of VOCs or NOX if the state meets the requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii).

    On July 7, 2014, North Carolina submitted a SIP revision containing a base year emissions inventory and addressing emissions statement requirements related to its portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. EPA is now taking action to approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirements of sections 110, 182(a)(1), and 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA. More information on EPA's analysis of North Carolina's SIP revision is provided below.

    II. Analysis of State's Submittal (a) Base Year Emission Inventory

    As discussed above, section 182(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in each ozone non-attainment area. The section 182(a)(1) base year inventory is defined in the SIP Requirements Rule as “a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from sources of VOC and NOX emitted within the boundaries of the nonattainment area as required by CAA section 182(a)(1).” See 40 CFR 51.1100(bb). The inventory year must be selected consistent with the baseline year for the RFP plan as required by 40 CFR 51.1110(b),3 and the inventory must include actual ozone season day emissions as defined in 40 CFR 51.1100(cc) 4 and contain data elements consistent with the detail required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. See 40 CFR 51.1115(a), (c), (e). In addition, the point source emissions included in the inventory must be reported according to the point source emissions thresholds of the Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) in 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. See 40 CFR 51.1115(d).

    3 40 CFR 51.1110(b) states that “at the time of designation for the 2008 ozone NAAQS the baseline emissions inventory shall be the emissions inventory for the most recent calendar year for which a complete triennial inventory is required to be submitted to EPA under the provisions of subpart A of this part. States may use an alternative baseline emissions inventory provided the state demonstrates why it is appropriate to use the alternative baseline year, and provided that the year selected is between the years 2008 to 2012.”

    4 “Ozone season day emissions” is defined as “an average day's emissions for a typical ozone season work weekday. The state shall select, subject to EPA approval, the particular month(s) in the ozone season and the day(s) in the work week to be represented, considering the conditions assumed in the development of RFP plans and/or emissions budgets for transportation conformity.” See 40 CFR 51.1100(cc).

    North Carolina selected 2011 as the base year for the section 182(a)(1) emissions inventory which is the year corresponding with the first triennial inventory under 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. This base year is one of the three years of ambient data used to designate the Area as a nonattainment area and therefore represents emissions associated with nonattainment conditions. The emissions inventory is based on data developed and submitted by NC DENR and Mecklenburg County Air Quality to EPA's 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), and it contains data elements consistent with the detail required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.5

    5 Data downloaded from the EPA EIS from the 2011 NEI was subjected to quality assurance procedures described under quality assurance details under 2011 NEI Version 1 Documentation located at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2011inventory.html#inventorydoc. The quality assurance and quality control procedures and measures associated with this data are outlined in the State's EPA-approved Emission Inventory Quality Assurance Project Plan.

    North Carolina's emissions inventory for its portion of the Area provides 2011 typical average summer day emissions data for NOX and VOCs for the following general source categories: stationary point, area, non-road mobile, and on-road mobile. A detailed discussion of the inventory development is located in Appendix B to North Carolina's submittal which is provided in the docket for this action. The table below provides a summary of the emissions inventory.

    Table 1—2011 Point and Area Sources Emissions for the North Carolina Portion of the Charlotte Area [Tons per summer day] County Point NOX VOC Area NOX VOC Non-road mobile NOX VOC On-road mobile NOX VOC Cabarrus* 1.10 0.89 0.44 4.53 2.43 1.62 11.85 6.32 Gaston* 26.44 1.74 0.55 4.94 2.30 1.83 13.39 6.93 Iredell* 4.63 0.97 0.22 1.95 0.96 0.84 5.45 2.62 Lincoln* 0.43 1.23 0.12 1.72 0.88 0.83 4.33 2.49 Mecklenburg 7.76 1.53 4.48 23.47 16.31 14.76 57.01 26.06 Rowan* 6.21 3.81 0.40 3.95 1.94 1.96 10.78 5.74 Union* 0.60 1.20 0.47 6.13 3.93 2.56 9.32 5.19 * Indicates emissions for the nonattainment portion of the county.

    The emissions reported for Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Rowan, and Union Counties reflect the emissions for only the nonattainment portion of the counties. The inventory contains point source emissions data for facilities located within the North Carolina portion of the Area based on Geographic Information Systems mapping. For the remaining emissions categories, emissions for the North Carolina portion of the Area were determined based on the population of the nonattainment townships within each partial county. For Mecklenburg County, the emissions for the entire county are provided. More detail on the inventory emissions for individual sources categories is provided below and in Appendix B to North Carolina's SIP submittal.

    Point sources are large, stationary, identifiable sources of emissions that release pollutants into the atmosphere. The point source emissions inventory for North Carolina's portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area was developed using facility-specific emissions data. The point source emissions inventory for North Carolina's portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area data is located in the docket for today's action. The point source emissions data meets the point source emissions thresholds of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.

    Area sources are small emission stationary sources which, due to their large number, collectively have significant emissions (e.g., dry cleaners, service stations). Emissions for these sources were estimated by multiplying an emission factor by such indicators of collective emissions activity as production, number of employees, or population. These emissions were estimated at the county level. North Carolina developed its inventory according to the current EPA emissions inventory guidance for area sources.6

    6 This guidance includes: Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories of Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Vol. 1, EPA-450/4-91-016 (May 1991) and Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Technical Report, Vol. 3, Area Sources (Revised January 2001, updated April 2001).

    On-road mobile sources include vehicles used on roads for transportation of passengers or freight. North Carolina's developed its on-road emissions inventory using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model for each ozone nonattainment county.7 County level on-road modeling was conducted using county-specific vehicle population and other local data. North Carolina developed its inventory according to the current EPA emissions inventory guidance for on-road mobile sources.8

    7 North Carolina used MOVES version 2010b because this was the latest version available at the time that the State submitted its SIP revision.

    8 This guidance includes: Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations, EPA-454/R-05-001 (August 2005, updated November 2005); Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes, EPA-420-B-09-046 (December 2009); and Technical Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for Emission Inventory Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity, EPA-420-B-10-023 (April 2010).

    Non-road mobile sources include vehicles, engines, and equipment used for construction, agriculture, recreation, and other purposes that do not use roadways (e.g., lawn mowers, construction equipment, railroad locomotives, and aircraft). North Carolina calculated emissions for most of the non-road mobile sources using EPA's NONROAD2008a model 9 and developed its non-road mobile source inventory according to the current EPA emissions inventory guidance for non-road mobile sources.10

    9 For consistency with the NEI, North Carolina included emissions data for locomotives at rail yards and aircraft (where they are reported to occur at the locations of the airports where they are generated) with the point source data in the base year inventory. See Appendix B.1 and Appendix B.4 of the State's SIP revision for a detailed discussion of the methodology used to calculate aircraft and locomotive emissions.

    10 This guidance includes: Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile Sources, EPA-450/4-81-026d (July 1991).

    For the reasons discussed above, EPA has determined that North Carolina's emissions inventory meets the requirements under CAA section 182(a)(1) and the SIP Requirements Rule for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

    (b) Emissions Statements

    Pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B), states with ozone nonattainment areas must require annual emissions statements from NOX and VOC stationary sources within those nonattainment areas. This requirement applies to all ozone nonattainment areas regardless of classification (e.g., Marginal, Moderate).

    North Carolina regulation 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02Q.0207 requires all owners or operators of stationary sources with actual emissions of 25 tons per year or more of VOC or NOX located in the counties listed therein to submit a statement to the State by June 30 of each year identifying actual NOX and VOC emissions for the previous calendar year. In 1995, EPA approved North Carolina's regulation and incorporated it into the SIP. See 60 FR 22283 (May 5, 1995). At that time, the regulation applied to stationary sources within Davidson County, Durham County, Forsyth County, Gaston County, Guilford County, Mecklenburg County, Wake County, the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County, and that part of Davie County bounded by the Yadkin River, Dutchman's Creek, North Carolina Highway 801, Fulton Creek, and back to the Yadkin River. North Carolina subsequently amended the regulation to expand its coverage to include Cabarrus, Lincoln, Rowan, and Union Counties in their entireties and Davidson Township and Coddle Creek Township in Iredell County. EPA concluded that the amended regulation met the requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and incorporated the amendments into the SIP in 2012. See 77 FR 24382 (April 24, 2012). In its July 7, 2014 SIP revision, North Carolina noted that it continues to operate under 15A NCAC 02Q.0207 as approved into the SIP in 2012. EPA has reviewed this SIP-approved regulation and determined that it covers the entire North Carolina portion of the Area and meets the requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.11

    11 As discussed in the preamble to the SIP Requirements Rule, a state may rely on emissions statement rules in force and approved by EPA for the 1997 ozone NAAQS or the 1-hour ozone NAAQS provided that the rules remain adequate and cover all portions of the 2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas. See 80 FR 12291.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted by North Carolina on July 7, 2014, addressing the base year emissions inventory and emissions statement requirements for the State's portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. EPA has concluded that the State's submission meets the requirements of sections 110 and 182 of the CAA. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective June 22, 2015 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by May 21, 2015.

    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All adverse comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on June 22, 2015 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, the Agency may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 22, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: April 9, 2015. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart II—North Carolina 2. In § 52.1770, paragraph (e) is amended by adding two entries for “North Carolina portion of bi-state Charlotte; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Base Year Emissions Inventory” and “North Carolina portion of bi-state Charlotte; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Annual Emission Reporting (Emission Statement)” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1770 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register notice Explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * North Carolina portion of bi-state Charlotte Area; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Base Year Emissions Inventory 07/07/2014 April 21, 2015 [Insert citation of publication] North Carolina portion of bi-state Charlotte Area; 2008 8-Hour Ozone Annual Emissions Reporting (Emissions Statements) 07/07/2014 April 21, 2015 [Insert citation of publication]
    [FR Doc. 2015-09050 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0868; FRL-9926-43-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's request to redesignate to attainment the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Nonattainment Area (Philadelphia Area or Area) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or standard). EPA has determined that the Philadelphia Area attained both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is approving as a revision to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) the associated maintenance plan to show maintenance of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025 for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area. The maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) mobile vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which EPA is approving for transportation conformity purposes. Furthermore, EPA is approving the 2007 base year emissions inventory included in the maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. These actions are being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on April 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0868. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On September 5, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally submitted a request to redesignate the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued attainment throughout the Pennsylvania portion of the Area over the next 10 years. The maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which EPA is approving for transportation conformity purposes. PADEP also submitted a 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory that was included in the maintenance plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for NOX, sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3).

    On February 17, 2015 (80 FR 8254), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for Pennsylvania. In the NPR, EPA proposed approval of Pennsylvania's September 5, 2014 request to redesignate the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA also proposed approval of the associated maintenance plan as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for both NAAQS, which EPA proposed to approve for purposes of transportation conformity. In addition, EPA proposed approval of the 2007 emissions inventory included in the maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to meet the emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.

    The details of Pennsylvania's submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed actions are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No adverse public comments were received on the NPR.

    II. Final Actions

    EPA is taking final actions on the redesignation request and SIP revisions submitted on September 5, 2014 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area for the1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. First, EPA finds that the monitoring data demonstrates that the Area has attained the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and continues to attain both NAAQS. Second, EPA is approving Pennsylvania's redesignation request for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, because EPA has determined that the request meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for both NAAQS. Approval of this redesignation request will change the official designation of the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Third, EPA is approving the associated maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS because it meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. The maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area for transportation conformity purposes. In addition, EPA is approving the 2007 emissions inventory for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause for this rulemaking action to become effective immediately upon publication. A delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of a redesignation to attainment, which eliminates CAA obligations that would otherwise apply. The immediate effective date for this rulemaking action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule “grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction,” and section 553(d)(3), which allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.” The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today's rulemaking action, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, today's rulemaking action relieves the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of the obligation to comply with nonattainment-related planning requirements for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area pursuant to part D of the CAA and approves certain emissions inventories and MVEBs for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for this rulemaking action to become effective on the date of publication.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

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

    • 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, August 10, 1999);

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

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

    • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 22, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, approving the redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the comprehensive emissions inventory for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

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

    40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: April 7, 2015. William C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart—NN Pennsylvania 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding an entry for 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and 2007 Base Year Emissions Inventory at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.2020 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Name of non-regulatory SIP
  • revision
  • Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and 2007 Base Year Emissions Inventory Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE 9/5/14 4/21/15 [Insert Federal Register citation] See § 52.2036(u) and § 52.2059(p)
    3. Section 52.2036 is amended by adding paragraph (u) to read as follows:
    § 52.2036 Base year emissions inventory.

    (u) EPA approves as revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan the 2007 base year emissions inventory for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection on September 5, 2014. The emissions inventory includes emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point, area, nonroad, and onroad sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are PM2.5, nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), ammonia (NH3), and sulfur dioxide (SO2).

    4. Section 52.2059 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
    § 52.2059 Control strategy: Particular matter.

    (p) EPA approves the maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia nonattainment area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on September 5, 2014. The maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX mobile vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) to be applied to all future transportation conformity determinations and analyses for the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia nonattainment area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

    Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia Area's Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in tons per year Type of control strategy SIP Year PM2.5 NOX Effective date of SIP approval Maintenance Plan 2017 1,679 37,922 April 21, 2015. 2025 1,316 25,361 April 21, 2015.
    PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 5. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    6. Section 81.339 is amended by revising the entry for “Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE” where it occurs in the tables entitled “Pennsylvania—1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS” and “2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS” to read as follows:
    § 81.339 Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania—1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary] Designated area Designation a Date 1 Type Classification Date 2 Type *         *         *         *         *         *         * Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE: Bucks County April 21, 2015 Attainment Chester County April 21, 2015 Attainment Delaware County April 21, 2015 Attainment Montgomery County April 21, 2015 Attainment Philadelphia County April 21, 2015 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. Pennsylvania—2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary] Designated area Designation a Date 1 Type Classification Date 2 Type *         *         *         *         *         *         * Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE: Bucks County April 21, 2015 Attainment Chester County April 21, 2015 Attainment Delaware County April 21, 2015 Attainment Montgomery County April 21, 2015 Attainment Philadelphia County April 21, 2015 Attainment *         *         *         *         *         *         * a Includes Indian County located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted. 2 This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09005 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63 [EPA-R06-OAR-2008-0063; FRL-9926-50-Region 6] National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation of Authority to Oklahoma AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Withdrawal of direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    On February 24, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a direct final rule approving the updated delegation of EPA authority for implementation and enforcement of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for all sources (both part 70 and non-part 70 sources) to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ). The direct final rule was published without prior proposal because EPA anticipated no adverse comments. EPA stated in the direct final rule that if EPA received relevant, adverse comments by March 26, 2015, EPA would publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register. EPA received a relevant, adverse comment on March 25, 2015, and accordingly is withdrawing the direct final rule, and in a separate subsequent final rulemaking will address the comment received.

    DATES:

    Effective April 21, 2015, the direct final rule published at 80 FR 9622 on February 24, 2015, is withdrawn.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Rick Barrett (6PD-R), Air Permits Section, telephone (214) 665-7227, fax (214) 665-6762, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On February 24, 2015, EPA published a direct final rule approving the updated delegation of EPA authority for implementation and enforcement of NESHAPs for all sources (both part 70 and non-part 70 sources) to the ODEQ. The direct final rule was published without prior proposal because EPA anticipated no adverse comments. EPA stated in the direct final rule that if relevant, adverse comments were received by March 26, 2015, EPA would publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register. EPA received a comment on March 25, 2015, from the ODEQ stating in relevant part, that EPA reconsider the limitation on ODEQ's authority over NESHAPs and remove the language in the final rule requiring ODEQ to make a demonstration of jurisdiction over non-reservation Indian country. ODEQ cited various wording from two court cases where both generally stated that a state has regulatory jurisdiction under the CAA over all the land within its territory and outside the boundaries of an Indian reservation, and that regulatory jurisdiction under the CAA must lie initially with either a tribe or a state. EPA considers this a relevant, adverse comment and accordingly is withdrawing the direct final rule. In a separate subsequent final rulemaking EPA will address the comment received. The withdrawal is being taken pursuant to section 112 of the CAA.

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Arsenic, Benzene, Beryllium, Hazardous substances, Mercury, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vinyl chloride.

    40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 9, 2015. Wren Stenger, Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, Region 6. PART 61—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

    Accordingly, the amendments to 40 CFR 61.04 and 40 CFR 63.99 published in the Federal Register on February 24, 2015 (80 FR 9622) on pages 9625 and 9626 are withdrawn effective April 21, 2015.

    [FR Doc. 2015-09201 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories CFR Correction

    In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 63, §§ 63.1 to 63.599, revised as of July 1, 2014, on page 478, in § 63.343, paragraph (c)(5)(ii) is correctly revised to read as follows:

    § 63.343 Compliance provisions. [Corrected]

    (c) * * *

    (5) * * *

    (ii) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is required to be completed under § 63.7, the owner or operator of an affected source shall monitor the surface tension of the electroplating or anodizing bath. Operation of the affected source at a surface tension greater than the value established during the performance test, or greater than 40 dynes/cm, as measured by a stalagmometer, or 33 dynes/cm, as measured by a tensiometer, if the owner or operator is using this value in accordance with paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section, shall constitute noncompliance with the standards. The surface tension shall be monitored according to the following schedule:

    [FR Doc. 2015-09202 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 73 Sulfur Dioxide Allowance System CFR Correction

    In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 72 to 80, revised as of July 1, 2014, on page 159, in § 73.35, remove paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (iii).

    [FR Doc. 2015-09232 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 64 [Docket ID FEMA-2015-0001: Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-8379] Suspension of Community Eligibility AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule identifies communities where the sale of flood insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in the Federal Register on a subsequent date. Also, information identifying the current participation status of a community can be obtained from FEMA's Community Status Book (CSB). The CSB is available at http://www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm.

    DATES:

    The effective date of each community's scheduled suspension is the third date (“Susp.”) listed in the third column of the following tables.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you want to determine whether a particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for further information, contact Bret Gates, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4133.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NFIP enables property owners to purchase Federal flood insurance that is not otherwise generally available from private insurers. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits the sale of NFIP flood insurance unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed in this document no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. We recognize that some of these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities will not be suspended and will continue to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of such communities will be published in the Federal Register.

    In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that identifies the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may be provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year on FEMA's initial FIRM for the community as having flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against certain types of Federal assistance becomes effective for the communities listed on the date shown in the last column. The Administrator finds that notice and public comment procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and unnecessary because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately notified.

    Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less than 30 days.

    National Environmental Policy Act. This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact assessment has been prepared.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no longer comply with the statutory requirements, and after the effective date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the communities unless remedial action takes place.

    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

    Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule does not involve any collection of information for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

    Flood insurance, Floodplains.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:

    PART 64—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for Part 64 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376.

    § 64.6 [Amended]
    2. The tables published under the authority of § 64.6 are amended as follows: State and location Community No. Effective date authorization/cancellation of sale of flood insurance in community Current effective map date Date certain Federal
  • assistance
  • no longer
  • available in SFHAs
  • Region III Virginia: Accomack County, Unincorporated Areas 510001 January 10, 1974, Emerg; June 1, 1984, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp May 18, 2015 May 18, 2015. Belle Haven, Town of, Accomack County 510242 N/A, Emerg; February 8, 2001, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do *   Do. Chincoteague, Town of, Accomack County 510002 March 4, 1974, Emerg; March 1, 1977, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Middlesex County, Unincorporated Areas 510098 October 18, 1974, Emerg; January 18, 1989, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Onancock, Town of, Accomack County 510298 February 17, 1976, Emerg; December 15, 1981, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Saxis, Town of, Accomack County 510003 March 11, 1976, Emerg; November 17, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Tangier, Town of, Accomack County 510004 March 28, 1975, Emerg; October 15, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Urbanna, Town of, Middlesex County 510292 May 21, 1975, Emerg; November 3, 1989, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Wachapreague, Town of, Accomack County 510005 January 28, 1975, Emerg; September 2, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Region V Indiana: Gentryville, Town of, Spencer County 180394 July 3, 1975, Emerg; September 16, 1988, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Grandview, Town of, Spencer County 180238 April 14, 1975, Emerg; July 18, 1983, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Rockport, City of, Spencer County 180239 March 21, 1975, Emerg; July 18, 1983, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Spencer County, Unincorporated Areas 180237 August 18, 1972, Emerg; May 1, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Minnesota: Breckenridge, City of, Wilkin County 275232 September 4, 1970, Emerg; September 4, 1970, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Campbell, City of, Wilkin County 270521 March 1, 1976, Emerg; June 8, 1984, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Doran, City of, Wilkin County 270522 N/A, Emerg; March 5, 2013, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Wilkin County, Unincorporated Areas 270519 June 6, 1973, Emerg; September 29, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Wolverton, City of, Wilkin County 270524 March 22, 2011, Emerg; November 21, 2012, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Ohio: Clay Center, Village of, Ottawa County 390875 March 27, 1979, Emerg; June 20, 1980, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Elmore, Village of, Ottawa County 390610 October 9, 1975, Emerg; April 1, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Genoa, Village of, Ottawa County 390612 March 21, 1978, Emerg; May 3, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Marblehead, Village of, Ottawa County 390748 May 29, 1979, Emerg; February 1, 1984, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Oak Harbor, Village of, Ottawa County 390433 April 28, 1977, Emerg; April 1, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Ottawa County, Unincorporated Areas 390432 April 25, 1973, Emerg; October 17, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Port Clinton, City of, Ottawa County 390434 April 5, 1973, Emerg; September 30, 1977, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Put-In-Bay, Village of, Ottawa County 390600 July 25, 1973, Emerg; September 30, 1977, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Region VII Iowa: Jones County, Unincorporated Areas 190919 March 21, 1979, Emerg; September 30, 1988, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Monticello, City of, Jones County 190175 November 27, 1974, Emerg; April 2, 1979, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Region VIII Montana: Big Timber, City of, Sweet Grass County 300106 N/A, Emerg; June 6, 1997, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Sweet Grass County, Unincorporated Areas 300167 April 4, 1978, Emerg; August 2, 1982, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do.  Wyoming: Casper, City of, Natrona County 560037 February 4, 1972, Emerg; September 15, 1977, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Evansville, Town of, Natrona County 560071 June 2, 1975, Emerg; July 17, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Mills, Town of, Natrona County 560076 November 16, 1979, Emerg; December 1, 1986, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Natrona County, Unincorporated Areas. 560036 June 20, 1973, Emerg; August 15, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Region X Washington: Ilwaco, City of, Pacific County 530127 April 2, 1974, Emerg; February 1, 1979, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Long Beach, City of, Pacific County 530128 September 27, 1974, Emerg; August 1, 1979, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Pacific County, Unincorporated Areas 530126 January 17, 1974, Emerg; January 5, 1978, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Raymond, City of, Pacific County 530129 April 2, 1974, Emerg; July 16, 1979, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe, Pacific County 530341 N/A, Emerg; January 4, 2002, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. South Bend, City of, Pacific County 530130 October 16, 1974, Emerg; November 15, 1979, Reg; May 18, 2015, Susp ......do   Do. *......do =Ditto. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension.
    Dated: April 8, 2013. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09257 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Part 11 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0168] Policy for Evaluating Sea Service Aboard Liftboats AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard announces the availability of Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CVC) Policy Letter 14-03, Evaluating Sea Service Aboard Liftboats. This policy letter will provide guidance to mariners concerning endorsements to Merchant Mariner Credentials (MMC) for service on liftboats.

    DATES:

    This policy letter is effective on April 6, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of availability, call or email Luke B. Harden, Mariner Credentialing Program Policy Division (CG-CVC-4), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-2357, or [email protected] If you have questions on viewing material in the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Viewing Documents

    The policy letter discussed below is available and can be viewed by going to http://www.uscg.mil/nmc and clicking on “Regulations & Policy,” then click on “Policy Letters.”

    Discussion

    Liftboats spend significant periods elevated at work sites and are not underway at those times. The time a liftboat spends underway is generally limited to travelling to and from a job site, and may be a relatively small portion of the total time the liftboat is in operation. Because of these specialized operations, the Coast Guard considers liftboats to be unique vessels and has evaluated sea service on liftboats to determine its equivalency to traditional service.

    This policy letter describes policy for the Coast Guards' evaluation of service obtained on liftboats used to qualify for national officer endorsements to an MMC.

    Authority

    This notice of availability is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: April 2, 2015. J.C. Burton, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director, Inspection & Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09052 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 223 and 648 [Docket No. 141125999-5362-02] RIN 0648-BE68 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery and Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Framework Adjustment 26; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Sea Turtle Conservation AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS approves and implements through regulations the measures included in Framework Adjustment 26 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan, which the New England Fishery Management Council adopted and submitted to NMFS for approval. The purpose of Framework 26 is to prevent overfishing, improve yield-per-recruit, and improve the overall management of the Atlantic sea scallop fishery. Framework 26 sets fishing specifications for 2015, including catch limits, days-at-sea allocations, individual fishing quotas, and sea scallop access area trip allocations. In addition, Framework 26 closes a portion of the Elephant Trunk Access Area and extends the boundaries of the Nantucket Lightship Access Area to protect small scallops, adjusts the State Waters Exemption Program, allows for Vessel Monitoring System declaration changes for vessels to steam home with product on board, implements a proactive accountability measure to protect windowpane flounder and yellowtail flounder, aligns two gear measures designed to protect sea turtles, and implements other measures to improve the management of the scallop fishery. Aligning the gear measures designed to protect sea turtles involves modifying existing regulations implemented under the Endangered Species Act; therefore, this action is implemented under joint authority of the Endangered Species Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

    DATES:

    Effective May 1, 2015, except for the amendment to § 648.51(b)(4)(iv), which will be effective May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Council developed an environmental assessment (EA) for this action that describes the action and other considered alternatives and provides a thorough analysis of the impacts of these measures. Copies of the Framework, the EA, and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available upon request from Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Newburyport, MA 01950. The EA/IRFA is also accessible via the Internet at http://www.nefmc.org/scallops/index.html or http://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/regs/2015/March/15scalfw26turtlepr.html.

    Copies of the small entity compliance guide are available from John K. Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298, or available on the Internet at http://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/scallop/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Council adopted Framework 26 on November 20, 2014, and submitted it to NMFS on February 17, 2015, for review and approval. Framework 26 specifies measures for fishing year 2015, but includes fishing year 2016 measures that will go into place as a default, should the next specifications-setting framework be delayed beyond the start of fishing year 2016. Fishing year 2015 default allocations have been in place since March 1, 2015, and allow for only 17 DAS and zero access area trips. The default measures are replaced by the higher Framework 26 allocations described below. Details concerning the development of these measures were contained in the preamble of the proposed rule and are not repeated here.

    Specification of Scallop Overfishing Limit (OFL), Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC), Annual Catch Limits (ACLs), Annual Catch Targets (ACTs), and Set-Asides for the 2015 Fishing Year and Default Specifications for Fishing Year 2016

    The allocations incorporate new biomass reference points that resulted from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center's most recent scallop stock benchmark assessment that was completed in July 2014. The assessment reviewed and updated the data and models used to assess the scallop stock and ultimately updated the reference points for status determinations. A comparison of the old and new reference points is outlined in Table 1.

    Table 1—Summary of Old and New Scallop Reference Points From the Last Two Benchmark Scallop Stock Assessments in 2010 and 2014 2010 Assessment 2014 Assessment Fishing Mortality at Maximum Sustainable Yield (Fmsy) 0.38 0.48. Biomass at Maximum Sustainable Yield (Bmsy) 125,000 mt 96,480 mt. 1/2 Bmsy 62,000 mt 48,240 mt.

    Due to these reference point updates, we are updating the fishing mortality rates that the Council uses to set OFL, ABC, and ACL through this action. The Council set OFL based on an F of 0.48, equivalent to the F threshold updated through the 2014 assessment. The Council set ABC and the equivalent total ACL for each fishing year using an F of 0.38, which is the F associated with a 25-percent probability of exceeding the OFL. The Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee recommended scallop fishery ABCs for the 2015 and 2016 fishing years of 55.9 million lb (25,352 mt) and 70.1 million lb (31,807 mt), respectively, after accounting for discards and incidental mortality. The Scientific and Statistical Committee will reevaluate an ABC for 2016 when the Council develops the next framework adjustment. Table 2 outlines the scallop fishery catch limits derived from the ABC values.

    Table 2—Scallop Catch Limits for Fishing Years 2015 and 2016 for the Limited Access and Limited Access General Category (LAGC) Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Fleets 2015 2016 Overfishing Limit 38,061 mt 45,456 mt. ABC/ACL w/ discards removed 25,352 mt 31,807 mt. Incidental Total Allowable Catch (TAC) 22.7 mt 22.7 mt. Research Set-Aside (RSA) 567 mt 567 mt. Observer Set-aside (1 percent of ABC/ACL) 254 mt 318 mt. Limited Access sub-ACL (94.5 percent of total ACL, after deducting set-asides and incidental catch) 23,161 mt 29,200 mt. Limited Access sub-ACT (adjusted for management uncertainty) 19,311 mt 23,016 mt. LAGC IFQ sub-ACL (5.0 percent of total ACL, after deducting set-asides and incidental catch) 1,225 mt 1,545 mt. LAGC IFQ sub-ACL for vessels with limited access scallop permits (0.5 percent of total ACL, after deducting set-asides and incidental catch) 123 mt 154 mt.

    This action deducts 567 mt of scallops annually for 2015 and 2016 from the ABC and sets it aside as the Scallop research set-aside (RSA) to fund scallop research and to compensate participating vessels through the sale of scallops harvested under RSA projects. Framework 26 allows RSA to be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area that is opened for 2015, once this action is approved and implemented, but would prevent RSA harvesting from access areas under 2016 default measures. Of this 1.25 M lb (567 mt) allocation, NMFS has already allocated 397,470 lb (180.3 mt) to previously funded multi-year projects as part of the 2014 RSA awards process. NMFS reviewed proposals submitted for consideration of 2015 RSA awards and will be selecting projects for funding in the near future.

    This action also sets aside 1 percent of the ABC for the industry-funded observer program to help defray the cost to scallop vessels that carry an observer. The observer set-asides for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are 254 mt and 318 mt, respectively. In fishing year 2015, the compensation rates for limited access vessels in open areas fishing under days-at-sea (DAS) is 0.08 DAS per DAS fished, and for access area trips the compensation rate is 150 lb, in addition to the vessel's possession limit for the trip for each day or part of a day an observer is onboard. LAGC IFQ vessels may possess an additional 150 lb per trip in open areas when carrying an observer. NMFS may adjust the compensation rate throughout the fishing year, depending on how quickly the fleets are using the set aside. The 2016 observer set-aside may be adjusted by the Council when it develops specific, non-default measures for 2016.

    Open Area DAS Allocations

    This action implements vessel-specific DAS allocations for each of the three limited access scallop DAS permit categories (i.e., full-time, part-time, and occasional) for 2015 and 2016 (Table 3). Fishing year 2015 DAS allocations are almost identical to those allocated to the limited access fleet in 2014 (31 DAS for full-time, 12 DAS for part-time, and 3 DAS for occasional vessels). Fishing year 2016 DAS allocations are precautionary, and are set at 75 percent of what current biomass projections indicate could be allocated to each limited access scallop vessel for the entire fishing year. This is to avoid over-allocating DAS to the fleet in the event that the framework that would set those allocations is delayed past the start of the 2016 fishing year. The allocations in Table 3 exclude any DAS deductions that are required if the limited access scallop fleet exceeded its 2014 sub-ACL. The DAS values in Table 3 take into account a slight DAS reduction (0.14 DAS) to account for vessels steaming to southern ports while not accruing DAS (See Adjustment to Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Declaration Procedures for Some Open Area Trips). In addition, the Council requested that DAS allocations now be specified to the hundredth decimal place, rather than rounding up or down to whole DAS. This is consistent with DAS accounting as vessels use DAS throughout the year. Table 3 also includes 2015 Default DAS that are replaced by the 2015 DAS.

    Table 3—Scallop Open Area DAS Allocations for 2015 and 2016 Permit category Default 2015 2015 2016 Full-Time 17 30.86 26.00 Part-Time 7 12.94 10.40 Occasional * 1 2.58 2.17 * Note: There are no occasional vessels currently. LA Allocations and Trip Possession Limits for Scallop Access Areas

    For fishing year 2015 and the start of 2016, Framework 26 closes all three Georges Bank Access Areas (i.e., Nantucket Lightship (NLS), Closed Area 1, and Closed Area 2 Access Areas) and opens all three Mid-Atlantic Access Areas (i.e., Elephant Trunk, Delmarva, and Hudson Canyon Access Areas combined). This action extends the boundaries of the NLS Access Area that will be closed to the scallop fleet to include a concentration of small scallops near the existing boundary along the southeast corner, currently considered part of the open area. Opening this NLS extended closure area, which increases the NLS Access Area boundary by 158 square miles (409 square km), will be reconsidered in a future framework action when the scallops are larger and ready for harvest.

    This action opens all three Mid-Atlantic access areas to both the limited access and LAGC IFQ fleet, and treats the three areas as one single area. This is named the Mid-Atlantic Access Area under this action. Scallop vessels are able to fish across all three areas in a single access area trip, except in one area within the Mid-Atlantic Access Area that is closed to scallop fishing. This area is seven 10-minute squares (i.e., 548 square nautical miles, 1419 square km) in the northwest corner of the Elephant Trunk Access Area, and is closed to protect small scallops. This area constitutes roughly 35 percent of the current Elephant Trunk Access Area. The closure allows for the small concentrations of scallops in this portion of the access area to be protected as they grow to a more harvestable size. This action prohibits transiting across this small area due to its small size and because the incentive to fish in the area is relatively high due to the high abundance of scallops.

    Table 4 outlines the limited access allocations that can be fished from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area. Vessels can take this allocation in as many trips as needed, so long as vessels do not exceed the trip possession limits (also in Table 4). These access area allocations for 2015 represent a 112-percent increase in access area allocations compared to 2014.

    Table 4—Scallop Access Area Poundage Allocations and Trip Possession Limits for 2015 and 2016 Permit category Possession limits 2015 Allocation 2016 Allocation Full-Time 17,000 lb (7,711 kg) 51,000 lb (23,133 kg) 17,000 lb (7,711 kg). Part-Time 10,200 lb ( 4,627 kg) 20,400 lb ( 9,253 kg) 10,200 lb (4,627 kg). Occasional * 1,420 lb (644 kg) 4,250 lb ( 1,928 kg) 1,420 lb ( 644 kg). * Note: There are no occasional vessels currently.

    This action also modifies access area trip reporting procedures by requiring that each limited access vessel submit a pre-landing notification form through its VMS unit prior to returning to port at the end of each access area trip, including trips where no scallops are landed. These pre-landing notifications replace the current broken trip and compensation trip procedures. Vessels are no longer required to submit a broken trip notification form if they are unable to land their full possession limits on an access area trip. Vessels also no longer need to apply to NMFS to receive, or wait for NMFS to issue, a compensation trip to fish their remaining access area scallop allocation.

    For example, under Framework 26 access area allocations, a full-time vessel receives 51,000 lb (23,133 kg) in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area. That allocation can be landed on as many or as few trips as needed, so long as the 17,000-lb (7,711-kg) possession limit is not exceeded on any one trip. The vessel may choose to fish its full allocation over the course of three trips, landing the maximum allowance of 17,000 lb (7,711 kg) on each trip, or it can choose to fish its full allocation over the course of two, three, or more trips, landing less than the trip possession limit on each trip. Regardless, the vessel must submit a pre-landing notification form prior to returning to port for each access area trip, but does not have to wait for NMFS to issue a compensation trip prior to starting its next access area trip.

    Under this action, each vessel automatically carries over unharvested access area allocation that the vessel can fish in the first 60 days of the subsequent fishing year, as long as the access area is open for scallop fishing during that time. This change results in little change to the amount of carryover NMFS expects from year to year because most vessels with unharvested access area pounds took advantage of the broken trip provisions. Also, Framework 26 accounts for the uncertainty associated with carryover by setting the limited access fishery's ACT lower than the fishery's ACL. The ACT is meant to prevent carryover from causing the fleet to exceed an ACL.

    Although vessel owners are ultimately responsible for tracking their own scallop access area landings and ensuring they do not exceed their annual allocations, NMFS will match dealer-reported scallop landing records with access area trip declarations and make that information available on the web-based allocation monitoring tool, Fish-On-Line, which each vessel owner can access and review.

    Adjustment to VMS Declaration Procedures for Some Open Area Trips

    This action enables a vessel to declare out of a DAS trip at or south of Cape May, NJ (specifically, at or south of 39° N. lat.), once it goes inside the VMS demarcation line, and then, with scallops on board, steam seaward of the VMS demarcation line to ports south of Cape May, NJ, without being charged DAS. This measure does not apply to vessels that intend to land scallops in ports north of Cape May, NJ. Once this change in declaration to “declare out of fishery” has been made, vessels are required to submit a scallop pre-landing notification form through VMS, return directly to port and offload scallops immediately, and stow all gear. In addition, such vessels are prohibited from having on board any in-shell scallops. The purpose of the is measure is to provide an incentive for vessels to land scallops in the fishery's southern-most ports by reducing some of the steaming time to return from more distant and heavily fished fishing grounds.

    Because this change in when some vessels may “clock out” of their DAS could impact overall DAS allocations to the fleet, this action also reduces the overall DAS allocated to each limited access scallop vessel. The DAS adjustment (which has already been calculated into the DAS allocations proposed in Table 3) is a decrease of 0.14 DAS for full-time vessels and 0.06 DAS for part-time vessels. This measure, including the appropriate DAS deductions, was supported by the Council's Advisory Panel.

    Additional Access Area Measures To Reduce Impacts on Small Scallops

    1. Crew Limit Restrictions in Access Areas. This action implements crew limits for all access areas. In an effort to protect small scallops and discourage vessels from high-grading (discarding smaller scallops in exchange for larger ones), Framework 26 imposes a crew limit of eight individuals per limited access vessel, including the captain, when fishing in any scallop access area. If a vessel is participating in the small dredge program, it may not have more than six people on board, including the captain, on an access area trip. These crew limits may be reevaluated in a future framework action.

    2. Delayed Harvesting of Default 2016 Mid-Atlantic Access Area Allocations. Although the Framework includes precautionary access area allocations for the 2016 fishing year (see 2016 allocations in Table 4), vessels have to wait to fish these allocations until April 1, 2016. This precautionary measure is designed to protect scallops when scallop meat weights are lower than other times of the year (generally, this change in meat-weight is a physiological change in scallops due to spawning). However, if a vessel has not fully harvested its 2015 scallop access area allocation in fishing year 2015, it may still fish the remainder of its allocation in the first 60 days of 2016 (i.e., March 1, 2016, through April 29, 2016).

    3. 2016 RSA Harvest Restrictions. This action prohibits vessels participating in RSA projects from harvesting RSA in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area under default 2016 measures. At the start of 2016, RSA can only be harvested from open areas. This will be re-evaluated for the remainder of 2016 in the framework action that would set final 2016 specifications.

    LAGC Measures

    1. Sub-ACL for LAGC vessels with IFQ permits. For LAGC vessels with IFQ permits, this action implements a 1,225-mt ACL for 2015 and an initial ACL of 1,545 mt for 2016 (Table 2). We calculate IFQ allocations by applying each vessel's IFQ contribution percentage to these ACLs. These allocations assume that no LAGC IFQ AMs are triggered. If a vessel exceeds its IFQ in a given fishing year, its IFQ for the subsequent fishing year would be reduced by the amount of the overage.

    Because Framework 26 is being implemented after the March 1 start of fishing year 2015, the default 2015 IFQ allocations went into place automatically on March 1, 2015. This action increases the current vessel IFQ allocations. NMFS sent a letter to IFQ permit holders providing both March 1, 2015, IFQ allocations and Framework 26 IFQ allocations so that vessel owners know what mid-year adjustments will occur now that Framework 26 is approved.

    2. Sub-ACL for Limited Access Scallop Vessels with IFQ Permits. For limited access scallop vessels with IFQ permits, this action implements a 123-mt ACL for 2015, and an initial 154-mt ACL for 2016 (Table 2). We calculate IFQ allocations by applying each vessel's IFQ contribution percentage to these ACLs. These allocations assume that no LAGC IFQ accountability measures (AMs) are triggered. If a vessel exceeds its IFQ in a given fishing year, its IFQ for the subsequent fishing year will be reduced by the amount of the overage.

    3. LAGC IFQ Trip Allocations and Possession Limits for Scallop Access Areas. Framework 26 allocates the LAGC IFQ vessels a fleetwide number of trips that can be taken in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area. Framework 26 allocates 2,065 and 602 trips in 2015 and 2016, respectively, to this area. Under default 2016 measures, LAGC IFQ vessels must wait to fish these trips until April 1, 2016.

    These trip allocations are equivalent to the overall proportion of total catch from access areas compared to total catch. For example, the total projected catch for the scallop fishery in 2015 is 20,865 mt, and 8,700 mt are projected to come from access areas, roughly 41.7 percent. If the same proportion is applied to total LAGC IFQ catch, the total allocation to LAGC IFQ vessels from access areas would be about 600 mt, roughly 44.5 percent of the total LAGC IFQ sub-ACL for 2015 (1,348 mt).

    4. Northern Gulf of Maine (NGOM) TAC. This action allocates a 70,000-lb (31,751-kg) annual NGOM TAC for fishing years 2015 and 2016. The allocation for 2015 assumes that there are no overages in 2014, which would trigger a pound-for-pound deduction in 2015 to account for the overage.

    5. Scallop Incidental Catch Target TAC. This action allocates a 50,000-lb (22,680-kg) scallop incidental catch target TAC for fishing years 2015 and 2016 to account for mortality from this component of the fishery, and to ensure that F targets are not exceeded. The Council and NMFS may adjust this target TAC in a future action if vessels catch more scallops under the incidental target TAC than predicted.

    Adjustments to Gear Modifications To Protect Sea Turtles

    This action adjusts season regulations for the sea turtle deflector dredge (TDD) and area regulations for the sea turtle chain mat to make them consistent by moving the chain mat requirement line to 71° W. long. and changing the end of the TDD season from October to November. By making the area and season for these two gear modifications consistent, west of 71° W. long. from May through November, the conservation benefit of the current chain mat and TDD requirements is maintained, while reducing the regulatory complexity of differing seasons and areas. Any reduction in the size of the area in which chain mats would be required is balanced by an extension of the season that TDDs would be required.

    This action also makes a very slight modification to the TDD gear regulations for safety purposes. Current TDD gear regulations allow for a flaring bar to ensure safe handling of the dredge. Prior to this action, this flaring bar could only be attached to the dredge frame on one side. This action adjusts this regulation to allow for a bar or “u”-shaped flaring mechanism to support safety at sea. Allowing a u-shaped flaring mechanism should not have an impact on sea turtles and the effectiveness of the TDD because the flaring bar or mechanism would still be prohibited from being attached within 12 inches (30.5 cm) of the “bump out” of the TDD and not between the bale bars. This change requires that each side of the bar or mechanism be no more than 12 inches (30.5 cm) in length.

    This action does not change any other regulatory requirements for the use of chain mats and TDDs.

    Adjustments to the State Water Exemption Program To Include NGOM Management Area Exemptions

    Framework 26 modifies the State Water Exemption Program to include a new exemption that enables scallop vessels to continue to fish in state waters after the NGOM hard TAC is reached. This action expands the exemptions to include this new measure related to the NGOM. Specifically, states within the NGOM management area (i.e., Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine) can request an exemption from the regulation that requires that scallop vessels must stop fishing in the state waters portion of the NGOM once the Federal TAC has been reached. States have to apply for this exemption and specify to which vessels this would apply (e.g., vessels with NGOM permits, IFQ permits, incidental permits, or limited access permits).

    This measure alleviates the concerns of Maine permit holders about their ability to fish in state waters when the state season is open in the winter if the NGOM TAC is reached by giving the state the ability to apply for an exemption through the State Water Exemption Program. Because the NGOM Federal TAC is set based only on the Federal portion of the resource, NMFS does not expect this measure to compromise the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan's (FMP's) limits on catch and mortality.

    Proactive AMs for Flatfish Protection

    Prior to Framework 26, all scallop vessels (i.e., limited access and LAGC) fishing for scallops with dredges in open areas west of 71° W. long. were required to have their dredges configured so that no dredge has more than seven rows of rings in the apron (i.e., the area between the terminus of the dredge (clubstick) and the twine top) on the topside of the dredge. The twine top helps finfish (flatfish in particular) escape from the dredge during fishing and the maximum number of rows of rings prevents fishermen from making the twine top small and ineffective in reducing bycatch. Framework 26 extends this proactive accountability measure to all areas where scallop fishing occurs (i.e., all access and open areas). This increased spatial coverage may further reduce flatfish bycatch by preventing dredge configurations using more than seven rows of rings. This is considered to be a proactive AM because it may help the fishery stay below the sub-ACLs for flatfish (yellowtail flounder and windowpane flounder, currently). Additionally, this measure enables vessels to voluntarily fish with an even shorter apron (less than seven rings), to proactively reduce flatfish bycatch in any area or season.

    Regulatory Corrections Under Regional Administrator Authority

    This rule includes several revisions to the regulatory text to address text that is unnecessary, outdated, unclear, or otherwise could be improved. NMFS changes these consistent with section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), which provides that the Secretary of Commerce may promulgate regulations necessary to ensure that amendments to an FMP are carried out in accordance with the FMP and the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Two revisions clarify how to apply and measure gear modifications to ensure compliance. The first revision at § 648.51 clarifies where to measure meshes to ensure twine top compliance. The second revision at § 648.53 clarifies an example on how the hanging ratio should be applied and measured if the windowpane reactive AM implemented through Framework 25 (June 26, 2014; 79 FR 34251) is triggered.

    This action also modifies the VMS catch report requirements at § 648.10(f)(4)(i) to only include the information used by NMFS to monitor flatfish bycatch. The form currently requires that the amount of yellowtail flounder discards be reported daily. This requirement has been in place since Amendment 15 to the Scallop FMP (76 FR 43746; July 21, 2011), which established the yellowtail flounder AMs in the FMP. However, since the implementation of Amendment 15, the scallop fishery now has other bycatch sub-ACLs and AMs (e.g., SNE/MA windowpane flounder) which are not captured in this form. In addition, current bycatch monitoring relies solely on observer reports to determine bycatch discards for these species. In order to minimize confusion, and because this information is not necessary for bycatch monitoring, we will remove the reference to reporting yellowtail discards. Instead, the vessels will report daily scallop catch and the amount of all other species kept.

    In addition, this action adjusts the regulations at § 648.53(a) to clarify that the values for ABC/ACL stated in the regulations reflect the levels from which ACTs are set, thus they do not include estimates of discards and incidental mortality. This regulatory clarification is at the request of the Council and more accurately reflects the process for establishing ABCs and ACLs in the scallop fishery.

    Comments and Responses

    NMFS received six comment letters in response to the proposed rule from: Fisheries Survival Fund, a scallop fishing industry organization; the Maine Department of Marine Resources; and four individuals. We provide responses below to the issues these commenters raised. NMFS may only approve, disapprove, or partially approve measures in Framework 26, and cannot substantively amend, add, or delete measures beyond what is necessary under section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to discharge its responsibility to carry out such measures.

    Comment 1: Fisheries Survival Fund, which represents a majority of the limited access scallop fleet, was supportive of this action, but asked that we waive the delay of effectiveness period for the measures related to access area allocations and DAS. It asked that we retain the 30-day delay of effectiveness period for other measures that may require some time for the industry to make the necessary changes, e.g., gear modifications.

    Response: NMFS agrees with the timing suggestions and will be implementing all measures upon publication of this final rule, with the exception of the maximum seven-row apron requirement. This measure will have a 30-day delay in effectiveness.

    Comment 2: One commenter was concerned that, because the Georges Bank Access Areas are closing and the Mid-Atlantic Access Area is opening in May, there may be a gear conflict with 15-20 monkfish gillnetters in the Delmarva Access Area. The commenter was concerned that the scallop vessels would dredge through their gear because April through June is the height of the monkfish fishing season.

    Response: The scallop fishery operates year round. The delayed opening of Delmarva in fishing year 2014 (mid-June instead of March 1) was a result of a delay in the Council's submission of Framework Adjustment 26 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP due to additional alternatives that were added late in the process. This action was intended to be in place before May. In the past, when we had 2-year specifications, the Delmarva area was opened on March 1. Also, the Delmarva area is currently opened to scallop fishing from 2014 carryover trips and will be through April. The commenter did not ask us to delay access to this area to give the monkfish fleet time to make the necessary adjustments, but they asked that we not allow scallopers in the area until they were done fishing. We cannot delay access area trips to prevent gear conflict because the Council did not address this issue in Framework 26. Section 305(1)(K) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act prohibits the negligent removal or damaging of fishing gear owned by another person, which is located in the exclusive economic zone, or the fish contained in such fishing gear. We will remind the scallop fleet of this prohibition in a bulletin announcing the implementation of Framework 26.

    Comment 3: The Maine Department of Marine Resources commented in support of the rule, in particular, the proposed modifications to the State Water Exemption Program.

    Response: NMFS appreciates the comment.

    Comment 4: One commenter stated that fishing year 2015 scallop quotas should be reduced by 25 percent to account for poaching.

    Response: There is no evidence in the record to support neither this assertion nor the need to reduce scallop quotas by 25 percent to address poaching. As we discuss in the preambles to both the proposed and final rules, the quota allocations for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are based on the best scientific information available and are consistent with the control rules outlined in the ACL process established under Amendment 15 to the FMP. We do not currently consider scallops overfished or subject to overfishing. Sufficient analysis and scientific justification for our action in this final rule are contained within the supporting documents.

    Comment 5: One commenter stated that anyone who kills a turtle should be fined $1 million.

    Response: As discussed in the preamble, the measures in this action to address turtle interactions were determined to be conservation neutral by balancing the smaller area for the turtle chain mat requirement with the additional months for the Turtle Deflector Dredge. Addressing any fines for the incidental take of turtles is not within the scope or authority for this type of action.

    Comment 6: One commenter requested that we increase the 40-lb possession limit for vessels with incidental LAGC permits.

    Response: Framework 26 did not include or analyze any alternatives regarding changes to possession limits for LAGC incidental permits. NMFS can only approve or disapprove this framework and cannot in this action add additional substantive measures not contained in the framework. The Council would have to consider this change in a subsequent action.

    Comment 7: One commenter simply stated that he opposed this action because he loves and needs scallops.

    Response: Framework 26 creates two closure areas to protect small scallops in the Elephant Trunk and Nantucket Lightship Access Areas, and NMFS has managed scallop fishing through area-based management since 1999. By protecting small scallops through area-based management, NMFS and the Council hope to support long term optimum yield. Under this management, NMFS and the Council intend to support this fishery that fills a demand for scallops that the U.S. and world love.

    Changes From Proposed Rule to Final Rule

    We corrected a typographical error that referenced section § 648.65, and we included changes to the regulatory text to §§ 648.58, 648.59, and 648.61 clarify the description of the regulated areas defined under the Scallop FMP.

    Classification

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

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

    This final rule does not contain policies with federalism or “takings” implications, as those terms are defined in E.O. 1312 and E.O. 12630, respectively.

    This action contains collection-of-information requirements subject the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The two requirements were approved by OMB under the NMFS Greater Atlantic Region Scallop Report Family of Forms (OMB Control No. 0648-0491). Under Framework 26, all 347 limited access vessels are required to submit a pre-landing notification form for each access area trip through their VMS units. This information collection is intended to improve access area trip monitoring, as well as streamline a vessel's ability to fish multiple access area trips. Although this is a new requirement, it replaces other reporting procedures currently required for breaking an access area trip and receiving permission to take a compensation trip to harvest remaining unharvested scallop pounds from an access area trip. The action also includes a new requirement for some limited access vessels to report a pre-landing notification form through their VMS unit before changing their open area trip declaration to a “declared out of fishery declaration,” which is expected to add a burden to a very small portion of the fleet. Public reporting burden for submitting these pre-landing notification forms is estimated to average 5 minutes per response with an associated cost of $1.25, which includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This requirement applies to a few vessels that intend to land open area scallops at ports south of Cape May, NJ, and want to steam to those ports while not using DAS. This new pre-landing requirement is necessary to enforce a measure intended to assist shoreside businesses in southern ports by providing an incentive for vessels to steam to ports far away from popular open area fishing grounds.

    In a given fishing year, NMFS estimates that for access area reporting, each of the 313 full-time limited access vessels will submit a pre-landing report 5 times (1,565 responses), and each of the 34 part-time limited access vessel will submit a pre-landing report up to 3 times (102 responses), for a total of 1,667 responses. These 1,667 responses impose total compliance costs of $2,084 on the whole fishery, but this cost is offset by the reduction in burden from the replaced trip termination and compensation trip reporting procedures, which were estimated to cost a total of $300 annually. Thus, the additional burden for this new pre-landing requirement is $1,785 ($2,085−$300), or $5.14 per vessel. This is likely an overestimate, but accounts for the potential of higher access area scallop allocations in future fishing years.

    For the new DAS pre-landing requirements, NMFS estimates that this will likely impact 30 vessels and result in each of those vessels reporting one time a year. Public reporting burden for submitting these pre-landing notification forms is also estimated to average 5 minutes per response with an associated cost of $1.25. Therefore, the total cost of this will impose total compliance costs of $38 (30 vessels × $1.25). The total additional burden for all vessels from both of these new pre-landing requirements is $1,823.

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries has determined that the need to implement these measures in an expedited manner in order to help achieve conservation objectives for the scallop fishery and certain fish stocks constitutes good cause, under authority contained in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness and to make the majority of Framework 26 final measures effective May 1, 2015, or upon publication in the Federal Register if published after May 1, 2015. The only exception to this waiver is the proactive accountability measure for bycatch requiring a maximum of seven rows of rings in the topside of the apron found in § 648.51(b)(4)(iv). This measure is effective 30 days after the publication date, in order to give vessels the opportunity to modify their gear to comply with regulations.

    If there is a 30-day delay in implementing the measures in Framework 26, the scallop fleet will continue under the current default access area, DAS, IFQ, RSA, and observer set-aside allocations. These default allocations were purposely set to be more conservative than what would eventually be implemented under Framework 26. Under default measures, each full-time vessel has 17 DAS and no access area allocation. If the rule is not in place May 1, many scallopers will not be able to fish because they have already used a significant portion of their default DAS. This action gives them another 13.86 DAS. More importantly, the entire fleet will not be allowed in the Access Area. Each full time vessel will receive an additional 51,000 to be harvested in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area with this action. This action, therefore, relieves restrictions on the scallop fleet by providing full-time vessels with an additional 13.86 DAS (30.86 DAS total) and 51,000 lb in access area allocation. Further, the catch rates, meat weights, and meat quality in Mid-Atlantic Access Area are best from May through July. Improving these parameters helps conserve the scallop resources in the access areas because it limits the number of individuals that scallop fishermen must harvest to reach a possession limit. Maximizing catch rates, meat weights, and meat quality will help the scallop fleet achieve optimum yield in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, which is the central goal of the access area rotation program. Therefore, the greatest benefits to the scallop fishing industry, the scallop resource, and the public would come from earlier access in May. This provides more time for vessels to fish during the most productive time for the resource. Delaying the implementation of Framework 26 for 30 days would be contrary to the public interest because continuing with these lower allocations would negatively impact the access area rotation program, as well as the scallop fleet economically. Any delay in implementation past May 1st would reduce the amount of time that scallop fishermen are able to fish in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area under the conditions that are ideal under the access area rotation program.

    For the reasons discussed above, to maximize conservation and economic benefits it necessary to allow access to the Mid-Atlantic Access Area on May 1. NMFS was unable to allow for a 30-day delay in effectiveness for Framework 26 rulemaking and allow access to the Mid-Atlantic Access Area on May 1. The Council's February 2015 submission of Framework 26 initiated a timeline for implementation that did not for both the 30-day delay in effectiveness and May 1 access to the Mid-Atlantic Access Area. However, NMFS must also consider the need of the scallop industry to have prior notice in order to make the necessary preparations to comply with changes to the gear required by the proactive accountability measure for bycatch. For these reasons, NMFS has determined that implementing these measures immediately, and with a 30-day delay in effectiveness of the proactive accountability measure for bycatch, would have the greatest public benefit.

    NMFS, pursuant to section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), has completed a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) in support of Framework 26 in this final rule. The FRFA incorporates the IRFA, a summary of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, NMFS responses to those comments, a summary of the analyses completed in the Framework 26 EA, and this portion of the preamble. A summary of the IRFA was published in the proposed rule for this action and is not repeated here. A description of why this action was considered, the objectives of, and the legal basis for this rule is contained in Framework 26 and in the preamble to the proposed and this final rule, and is not repeated here. All of the documents that constitute the FRFA are available from NMFS and a copy of the IRFA, the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the EA are available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

    A Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public in Response to the IRFA, a Summary of the Agency's Assessment of Such Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes Made in the Final Rule as a Result of Such Comments

    NMFS received no public comments directly in response to the IRFA summary or regarding economic impacts in the proposed rule.

    Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Would Apply

    The regulations affect all vessels with limited access and LAGC scallop permits. The Framework 26 document provides extensive information on the number and size of vessels and small businesses that will be affected by these regulations, by port and state (see ADDRESSES). There were 313 vessels that obtained full-time limited access permits in 2013, including 250 dredge, 52 small-dredge, and 11 scallop trawl permits. In the same year, there were also 34 part-time limited access permits in the sea scallop fishery. No vessels were issued occasional scallop permits. NMFS issued 212 LAGC IFQ permits in 2013, and 155 of these vessels actively fished for scallops that year (the remaining permits likely leased out scallop IFQ allocations with their permits in Confirmation of Permit History). The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a small business in shellfish fishery as a firm that is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field of operation, with receipts of up to $5.5 M annually. Matching the potentially impacted 2013 fishing year permits described above (LA and LAGC IFQ) to calendar year 2013 ownership data results in 172 distinct ownership entities for the limited access fleet and 115 distinct ownership entities for the LAGC IFQ fleet. Of these, and based on the SBA guidelines, 154 of the limited access distinct ownership entities and all 115 of the LAGC IFQ entities are categorized as small. The remaining 18 of the limited access entities are categorized as large entities, all of which are shellfish businesses.

    Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements

    This action contains collection-of-information requirements subject to the PRA. The OMB, under the NMFS Greater Atlantic Region Scallop Report Family of Forms (OMB Control No. 0648-0491), approved the two requirements.

    Under this action, all 347 limited access vessels are required to submit a pre-landing notification form for each access area trip through their VMS units. NMFS intends that this information collection will improve access area trip monitoring, as well as streamline a vessel's ability to fish multiple access area trips. Although this is a new requirement, it replaces other reporting procedures currently required for breaking an access area trip and receiving permission to take a compensation trip to harvest remaining unharvested scallop pounds from an access area trip. The action also includes a new requirement for some limited access vessels to report a pre-landing notification form through their VMS unit before changing their open area trip declaration to a “declared out of fishery declaration,” which is expected to add a burden to a very small portion of the fleet. This requirement only applies to a few vessels that intend to land open area scallops at ports south of Cape May, NJ, and want to steam to those ports while not using DAS. This new pre-landing requirement is necessary to enforce a measure intended to assist shoreside businesses in southern ports by providing an incentive for vessels to steam to ports far away from popular open area fishing grounds.

    Notification requires the dissemination of the following information: Operator's permit number; amount of scallop meats and/or bushels to be landed; the estimated time of arrival; the landing port and state where the scallops will be offloaded; and the vessel trip report (VTR) serial number recorded from that trip's VTR. This information will be used by the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement to monitor vessel activity and ensure compliance with the regulations.

    The burden estimates for these new requirements apply to all limited access vessels. In a given fishing year, NMFS estimates that for access area reporting, each of the 313 full-time limited access vessels will submit a pre-landing report 5 times (1,565 responses), and each of the 34 part-time limited access vessel will submit a pre-landing report up to 3 times (102 responses), for a total of 1,667 responses. Public reporting burden for submitting these pre-landing notification forms is estimated to average 5 minutes per response with an associated cost of $1.25, which includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

    Therefore, 1,667 responses impose total compliance costs of $2,084 across the whole fishery; however, this new requirement replaces current trip termination and compensation trip reporting procedures, which were estimated to cost a total of $300 annually, so the additional burden for this new pre-landing requirement is actually $1,785 ($2,085−$300), or $5.14 per vessel. This figure is likely an overestimate, but accounts for the potential of higher access area scallop allocations in future fishing years. For the new DAS pre-landing requirements, NMFS estimates that this will likely impact 30 vessels and result in each of those vessels reporting one time a year. Public reporting burden for submitting these pre-landing notification forms is also estimated to average 5 minutes per response with an associated cost of $1.25. Therefore, the total cost of this will impose total compliance costs of $38 (30 vessels x $1.25). The total additional burden from both of these new pre-landing requirements will be $1,823.

    NMFS sought public comment regarding: Whether this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. NMFS did not receive any comments regarding these collections of information.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. All currently approved NOAA collections of information may be viewed at: http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.

    This action contains no other compliance costs. It does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal law.

    Description of the Steps the Agency Has Taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes

    During the development of Framework 26, NMFS and the Council considered ways to reduce the regulatory burden on, and provide flexibility for, the regulated entities in this action. For example, they removed the requirement to send in broken trip forms and process compensation trips, and they allowed carryover of all access area allocation 60 days into the following fishing year. Final actions and alternatives are described in detail in Framework 26, which includes an EA, RIR, and IRFA (available at ADDRESSES). The measures implemented by this final rule minimize the long-term economic impacts on small entities to the extent practicable. The only alternatives for the prescribed catch limits that were analyzed were those that met the legal requirements to implement effective conservation measures. Catch limits are fundamentally a scientific calculation based on the Scallop FMP control rules and SSC approval, and therefore are legally limited to the numbers contained in this rule. Moreover, the limited number of alternatives available for this action must be evaluated in the context of an ever-changing fishery management plan that has considered numerous alternatives over the years and have provided many mitigating measures applicable every fishing year.

    Overall, this rule minimizes adverse long-term impacts by ensuring that management measures and catch limits result in sustainable fishing mortality rates that promote stock rebuilding, and as a result, maximize yield. The measures implemented by this final rule also provide additional flexibility for fishing operations in the short-term. This final rule implements several measures that enable small entities to offset some portion of the estimated economic impacts. These measure include: Removing the requirement to send in broken trip and compensation trip forms; allowing vessels to harvest access area quota in any of the three access areas; aligning the gear designed to protect sea turtles; allowing vessel landing at a port south of 39 degrees N. lat. to “declare out of fishery with product on board” to reduce DAS use while transiting; and modifying the State Waters Exemption Program to allow vessels to continue to fish in state waters if the NGOM TAC is reached.

    List of Subjects 50 CFR Part 223

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Transportation.

    50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 223 and 648 is amended 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 § 223.206, paragraph (d)(11) is revised to read as follows:
    § 223.206 Exceptions to prohibitions relating to sea turtles.

    (d) * * *

    (11) Restrictions applicable to sea scallop dredges in the mid-Atlantic—(i) Gear Modification. During the time period of May 1 through November 30, any vessel with a sea scallop dredge and required to have a Federal Atlantic sea scallop fishery permit, regardless of dredge size or vessel permit category, that enters waters west of 71° W. long., from the shoreline to the outer boundary of the Exclusive Economic Zone must have on each dredge a chain mat described as follows. The chain mat must be composed of horizontal (“tickler”) chains and vertical (“up-and-down”) chains that are configured such that the openings formed by the intersecting chains have no more than four sides. The vertical and horizontal chains must be hung to cover the opening of the dredge bag such that the vertical chains extend from the back of the cutting bar to the sweep. The horizontal chains must intersect the vertical chains such that the length of each side of the openings formed by the intersecting chains is less than or equal to 14 inches (35.5 cm) with the exception of the side of any individual opening created by the sweep. The chains must be connected to each other with a shackle or link at each intersection point. The measurement must be taken along the chain, with the chain held taut, and include one shackle or link at the intersection point and all links in the chain up to, but excluding, the shackle or link at the other intersection point.

    (ii) Any vessel that enters the waters described in paragraph (d)(11)(i) of this section and that is required to have a Federal Atlantic sea scallop fishery permit must have the chain mat configuration installed on all dredges for the duration of the trip.

    (iii) Vessels subject to the requirements in paragraphs (d)(11)(i) and (ii) of this section transiting waters west of 71° W. long., from the shoreline to the outer boundary of the Exclusive Economic Zone, will be exempted from the chain-mat requirements provided the dredge gear is not available for immediate use as defined by § 648.2 of this title and there are no scallops on-board.

    PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES 3. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    4. In § 648.10, paragraphs (e)(5)(iii) and (f)(4) are revised, and paragraph (f)(6) is added to read as follows:
    § 648.10 VMS and DAS requirements for vessel owners/operators.

    (e) * * *

    (5) * * *

    (iii) DAS counting for a vessel that is under the VMS notification requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, with the exception of vessels that have elected to fish exclusively in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area on a particular trip, as described in paragraph (e)(5) of this section, begins with the first location signal received showing that the vessel crossed the VMS Demarcation Line after leaving port. DAS counting ends with the first location signal received showing that the vessel crossed the VMS Demarcation Line upon its return to port, unless the vessel is declared into a limited access scallop DAS trip and, upon its return to port, declares out of the scallop fishery shoreward of the VMS Demarcation Line at or south of 39° N. lat., as specified in paragraph (f)(6) of this section, and lands in a port south of 39° N. lat.

    (f) * * *

    (4) Catch reports. (i) The owner or operator of a limited access or LAGC IFQ vessel that fishes for, possesses, or retains scallops, and is not fishing under a NE Multispecies DAS or sector allocation, must submit reports through the VMS, in accordance with instructions to be provided by the Regional Administrator, for each day fished, including open area trips, access area trips as described in § 648.60(a)(9), and trips accompanied by a NMFS-approved observer. The reports must be submitted for each day (beginning at 0000 hr and ending at 2400 hr) and not later than 0900 hr of the following day. Such reports must include the following information:

    (A) VTR serial number;

    (B) Date fish were caught;

    (C) Total pounds of scallop meats kept;

    (D) Total pounds of all fish kept.

    (ii) Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form for IFQ and NGOM vessels. A vessel issued an IFQ or NGOM scallop permit must report through VMS, using the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form, the amount of any scallops kept on each trip declared as a scallop trip, including declared scallop trips where no scallops were landed. In addition, vessels with an IFQ or NGOM permit must submit a Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form on trips that are not declared as scallop trips, but on which scallops are kept incidentally. A limited access vessel that also holds an IFQ or NGOM permit must submit the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form only when fishing under the provisions of the vessel's IFQ or NGOM permit. VMS Scallop Pre-Landing Notification forms must be submitted no less than 6 hours prior to arrival, or, if fishing ends less than 6 hours before arrival, immediately after fishing ends. If scallops will be landed, the report must include the vessel operator's permit number, the amount of scallop meats in pounds to be landed, the number of bushels of in-shell scallops to be landed, the estimated time of arrival in port, the landing port and state where the scallops will be offloaded, the VTR serial number recorded from that trip's VTR (the same VTR serial number as reported to the dealer), and whether any scallops were caught in the NGOM. If no scallops will be landed, a vessel issued an IFQ or NGOM scallop permit must provide only the vessel's captain/operator's permit number, the VTR serial number recorded from that trip's VTR (the same VTR serial number as reported to the dealer), and confirmation that no scallops will be landed. A vessel issued an IFQ or NGOM scallop permit may provide a corrected report. If the report is being submitted as a correction of a prior report, the information entered into the notification form will replace the data previously submitted in the prior report. Submitting a correction does not prevent NMFS from pursuing an enforcement action for any false reporting.

    (iii) Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form for limited access vessels fishing on Scallop Access Area trips. A limited access vessel on a declared Sea Scallop Access Area trip must report through VMS, using the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form, the amount of any scallops kept on each access area trip, including declared access area trips where no scallops were landed. The report must be submitted no less than 6 hours before arrival, or, if fishing ends less than 6 hours before arrival, immediately after fishing ends. If scallops will be landed, the report must include the vessel operator's permit number, the amount of scallop meats in pounds to be landed, the number of bushels of in-shell scallops to be landed, the estimated time of arrival, the landing port and state where the scallops will be offloaded, and the VTR serial number recorded from that trip's VTR (the same VTR serial number as reported to the dealer). If no scallops will be landed, a limited access vessel on a declared Sea Scallop Access Area trip must provide only the vessel's captain/operator's permit number, the VTR serial number recorded from that trip's VTR (the same VTR serial number as reported to the dealer), and confirmation that no scallops will be landed. A limited access scallop vessel may provide a corrected report. If the report is being submitted as a correction of a prior report, the information entered into the notification form will replace the data previously submitted in the prior report. Submitting a correction does not prevent NMFS from pursuing an enforcement action for any false reporting. A vessel may not offload its catch from a Sea Scallop Access Area trip at more than one location per trip.

    (iv) Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form for limited access vessels on a declared DAS trip landing scallops at ports located at or south of 39° N. lat. In order to end a declared Sea Scallop DAS trip and steam south of 39° N. lat., a limited access vessel must first report through VMS, using the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form, the amount of any scallops kept on its DAS trip. Upon crossing shoreward of the VMS Demarcation Line at or south of 39° N. lat., the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification form must be submitted. The report must include the vessel operator's permit number, the amount of scallop meats in pounds to be landed, the estimated time of arrival in port, the landing port and state where the scallops will be offloaded, and the VTR serial number recorded from that trip's VTR (the same VTR serial number as reported to the dealer). Prior to crossing seaward of the VMS Demarcation Line for the transit to a southern port at or south of 39° N. lat., the vessel must declare out of the scallop fishery. A limited access scallop vessel may provide a corrected report. If the report is being submitted as a correction of a prior report, the information entered into the notification form will replace the data previously submitted in the prior report. Submitting a correction does not prevent NMFS from pursuing an enforcement action for any false reporting.

    (6) Limited access scallop vessels fishing under the DAS program and landing scallops at ports south of 39° N. Lat. If landing scallops at a port located at or south of 39° N. lat., a limited access vessel participating in the scallop DAS program may end its DAS trip once it has crossed shoreward of the VMS Demarcation Line at or south of 39° N. lat. by declaring out of the scallop fishery and submitting the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form, as specified at paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section. Once declared out of the scallop fishery, and the vessel has submitted the Scallop Pre-Landing Notification Form, the vessel may cross seaward of the VMS Demarcation Line and steam to a port at or south of 39° N. lat., to land scallops while not on a DAS. Such vessels that elect to change their declaration to steam to ports with scallops onboard and not accrue DAS must comply with all the requirements at § 648.53(f)(3).

    5. In § 648.14, paragraphs (i)(2)(ii)(B), (i)(2)(iii)(C), (i)(2)(v)(D), (i)(3)(iii)(C) and (D), (i)(4)(i)(C), and (i)(5)(iii) are revised, and paragraphs (i)(2)(iv)(D) and (E) and (i)(2)(v)(E) are added to read as follows:

    § 648.14 Prohibitions.

    (i) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (B) While under or subject to the DAS allocation program, in possession of more than 40 lb (18.1 kg) of shucked scallops or 5 bu (1.76 hL) of in-shell scallops, or fishing for scallops in the EEZ:

    (1) Fish with, or have available for immediate use, trawl nets of mesh smaller than the minimum size specified in § 648.51(a)(2).

    (2) Fail to comply with any chafing gear or other gear obstruction restrictions specified in § 648.51(a)(3).

    (3) Fail to comply with the turtle deflector dredge vessel gear restrictions specified in § 648.51(b)(5), and turtle dredge chain mat requirements in § 223.206(d)(11) of this title.

    (4) Fish under the small dredge program specified in § 648.51(e), with, or while in possession of, a dredge that exceeds 10.5 ft (3.2 m) in overall width, as measured at the widest point in the bail of the dredge.

    (5) Fish under the small dredge program specified in § 648.51(e) with more persons on board the vessel, including the operator, than specified in § 648.51(e)(3), unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Administrator.

    (6) Participate in the DAS allocation program with more persons on board the vessel than the number specified in § 648.51(c), including the operator, when the vessel is not docked or moored in port, unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Administrator.

    (7) Fish in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as described in § 648.59(a), with more persons on board the vessel than the number specified in § 648.51(c) or § 648.51(e)(3)(i), unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Administrator.

    (8) Have a shucking or sorting machine on board a vessel that shucks scallops at sea while fishing under the DAS allocation program, unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Administrator.

    (9) Fish with, possess on board, or land scallops while in possession of trawl nets, when fishing for scallops under the DAS allocation program, unless exempted as provided for in § 648.51(f).

    (10) Fail to comply with the gear restrictions described in § 648.51.

    (iii) * * *

    (C) Fish for or land per trip, or possess at any time, scallops in the NGOM scallop management area after notification in the Federal Register that the NGOM scallop management area TAC has been harvested, as specified in § 648.62, unless the vessel possesses or lands scallops that were harvested south of 42°20′ N. lat. and the vessel only transits the NGOM scallop management area with the vessel's fishing gear properly stowed and not available for immediate use in accordance with § 648.2 or unless the vessel is fishing exclusively in state waters and is participating in an approved state waters exemption program as specified in § 648.54.

    (iv) * * *

    (D) Fail to comply with any requirements for declaring out of the DAS allocation program and steaming to land scallops at ports located at or south of 39° N. lat., as specified in § 648.53(f)(3).

    (E) Possess on board or land in-shell scallops if declaring out of the DAS allocation program and steaming to land scallops at ports located at or south of 39° N. lat.

    (v) * * *

    (D) Once declared into the scallop fishery in accordance with § 648.10(f), change its VMS declaration until the trip has ended and scallop catch has been offloaded, except as specified at § 648.53(f)(3).

    (E) Fail to submit a scallop access area pre-landing notification form through VMS as specified at § 648.10(f)(4)(iii).

    (3) * * *

    (iii) * * *

    (C) Declare into the NGOM scallop management area after the effective date of a notification published in the Federal Register stating that the NGOM scallop management area TAC has been harvested as specified in § 648.62, unless the vessel is fishing exclusively in state waters, declared a state-waters only NGOM trip, and is participating in an approved state waters exemption program as specified in § 648.54.

    (D) Fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from the NGOM scallop management area after the effective date of a notification published in the Federal Register that the NGOM scallop management area TAC has been harvested, as specified in § 648.62, unless the vessel possesses or lands scallops that were harvested south of 42°20′ N. lat., the vessel is transiting the NGOM scallop management area, and the vessel's fishing gear is properly stowed and not available for immediate use in accordance with § 648.2 or unless the vessel is fishing exclusively in state waters, declared a state-waters only NGOM trip, and is participating in an approved state waters exemption program as specified in § 648.54.

    (4) * * *

    (i) * * *

    (C) Declare into the NGOM scallop management area after the effective date of a notification published in the Federal Register stating that the NGOM scallop management area TAC has been harvested as specified in § 648.62, unless the vessel is fishing exclusively in state waters, declared a state-waters only NGOM trip, and is participating in an approved state waters exemption program as specified in § 648.54.

    (5) * * *

    (iii) Fish for, possess, or land scallops in state or Federal waters of the NGOM management area after the effective date of notification in the Federal Register that the NGOM scallop management area TAC has been harvested as specified in § 648.62, unless the vessel is fishing exclusively in state waters, declared a state-waters only NGOM trip, and is participating in an approved state waters exemption program as specified in § 648.54.

    4. In § 648.51: a. Paragraphs (b)(4)(iv) and (v), (b)(5)(ii)(A) introductory text, (b)(5)(ii)(A)(3), and (c) introductory text are revised; b. Paragraph (c)(1) is removed and reserved; and c. Paragraph (e)(3)(i) is revised.

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 648.51 Gear and crew restrictions.

    (b) * * *

    (4) * * *

    (iv) Twine top restrictions as a proactive accountability measure for bycatch. In addition to the minimum twine top mesh size specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, limited access and limited access general category IFQ vessels may not fish for scallops with a dredge having more than seven rows of non-overlapping steel rings unobstructed by netting or any other material between the terminus of the dredge (club stick) and the net material on the top of the dredge (twine top) (a copy of a diagram showing a schematic of a legal dredge with twine top is available from the Regional Administrator upon request).

    (v) Measurement of twine top mesh size. Twine top mesh size is measured by using a wedge-shaped gauge having a taper of 0.79 inches (2 cm) in 3.15 inches (8 cm) and a thickness of 0.09 inches (2.3 mm), inserted into the meshes under a pressure or pull of 17.64 lb (8 kg). The mesh size is the average of the measurements of any series of 20 consecutive meshes for twine tops having 75 or more meshes, and 10 consecutive meshes for twine tops having fewer than 75 meshes. The mesh in the twine top must be measured along the length of the twine top, running parallel to a longitudinal axis, and be at least five meshes away from where the twine top mesh meets the rings, running parallel to the long axis of the twine top.

    (5) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (A) From May 1 through November 30, any limited access scallop vessel using a dredge, regardless of dredge size or vessel permit category, or any LAGC IFQ scallop vessel fishing with a dredge with a width of 10.5 ft (3.2 m) or greater, that is fishing for scallops in waters west of 71° W. long., from the shoreline to the outer boundary of the EEZ, must use a TDD. The TDD requires five modifications to the rigid dredge frame, as specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(ii)(A)(1) through (5) of this section. See paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(D) of this section for more specific descriptions of the dredge elements mentioned below.

    (3) All bale bars must be removed, except the outer bale (single or double) bars and the center support beam, leaving an otherwise unobstructed space between the cutting bar and forward bale wheels, if present. The center support beam must be less than 6 inches (15.24 cm) wide. For the purpose of flaring and safe handling of the dredge, a minor appendage not to exceed 12 inches (30.5 cm) in length may be attached to each of the outer bale bars. If the flaring bar is attached in a u-shape, none of the three sides of the flaring bar shall exceed 12 inches (30.5 cm) in length. The appendage shall at no point be closer than 12 inches (30.5 cm) to the cutting bar.

    (c) Crew restrictions. A limited access vessel participating in or subject to the scallop DAS allocation program may have no more than seven people aboard, including the operator, and a limited access vessel participating in the Sea Scallop Area Access Program as specified in § 648.60 may have no more than eight people aboard, including the operator, when not docked or moored in port, except as follows:

    (e) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (i) A vessel participating in the Sea Scallop Area Access Program as specified in § 648.60 may have no more than six people, including the operator, on board.

    5. In § 648.53: a. Paragraphs (a), (b)(1), and (b)(4) are revised; b. Paragraph (f)(3) is added; and c. Paragraph (g)(1) is revised.

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 648.53 Acceptable biological catch (ABC), annual catch limits (ACL), annual catch targets (ACT), DAS allocations, and individual fishing quotas (IFQ).

    (a) Scallop fishery ABC. The ABC for the scallop fishery shall be established through the framework adjustment process specified in § 648.55 and is equal to the overall scallop fishery ACL minus discards. The ABC/ACL, after discards are removed, shall be divided as sub-ACLs between limited access vessels, limited access vessels that are fishing under a LAGC permit, and LAGC vessels as specified in paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section, after deducting the scallop incidental catch target TAC specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, observer set-aside specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, and research set-aside specified in § 648.56(d). The ABC/ACL for the 2016 fishing year is subject to change through a future framework adjustment.

    (1) ABC/ACL for fishing years 2015 through 2016, excluding discards, shall be:

    (i) 2015: 25,352 mt.

    (ii) 2016: 31,807 mt.

    (2) Scallop incidental catch target TAC. The annual incidental catch target TAC for vessels with incidental catch scallop permits is 22.7 mt.

    (3) Limited access fleet sub-ACL and ACT. The limited access scallop fishery shall be allocated 94.5 percent of the ACL specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, after deducting incidental catch, observer set-aside, and research set-aside, as specified in this paragraph (a)(3). ACT for the limited access scallop fishery shall be established through the framework adjustment process described in § 648.55. DAS specified in paragraph (b) of this section shall be based on the ACTs specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section. The limited access fleet sub-ACL and ACT for the 2016 fishing year are subject to change through a future framework adjustment.

    (i) The limited access fishery sub-ACLs for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are:

    (A) 2015: 23,161 mt.

    (B) 2016: 29,200 mt.

    (ii) The limited access fishery ACTs for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are:

    (A) 2015: 19,311 mt.

    (B) 2016: 23,016 mt.

    (4) LAGC fleet sub-ACL. The sub-ACL for the LAGC IFQ fishery shall be equal to 5.5 percent of the ACL specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, after deducting incidental catch, observer set-aside, and research set-aside, as specified in this paragraph (a)(4). The LAGC IFQ fishery ACT shall be equal to the LAGC IFQ fishery's ACL. The ACL for the LAGC IFQ fishery for vessels issued only a LAGC IFQ scallop permit shall be equal to 5 percent of the ACL specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, after deducting incidental catch, observer set-aside, and research set-aside, as specified in this paragraph (a)(4). The ACL for the LAGC IFQ fishery for vessels issued only both a LAGC IFQ scallop permit and a limited access scallop permit shall be 0.5 percent of the ACL specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, after deducting incidental catch, observer set-aside, and research set-aside, as specified in this paragraph (a)(4).

    (i) The ACLs for fishing years 2015 and 2016 for LAGC IFQ vessels without a limited access scallop permit are:

    (A) 2015: 1,225 mt.

    (B) 2016: 1,545 mt.

    (ii) The ACLs for fishing years 2015 and 2016 for vessels issued both a LAGC and a limited access scallop permits are:

    (A) 2015: 123 mt.

    (B) 2016: 154 mt.

    (b) * * *

    (1) Landings per unit effort (LPUE). LPUE is an estimate of the average amount of scallops, in pounds, that the limited access scallop fleet lands per DAS fished. The estimated LPUE is the average LPUE for all limited access scallop vessels fishing under DAS, and shall be used to calculate DAS specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the DAS reduction for the AM specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section, and the observer set-aside DAS allocation specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section. LPUE shall be:

    (i) 2015 fishing year: 2,594 lb/DAS (1,171 kg/DAS).

    (ii) 2016 fishing year: 2,715 lb/DAS (1,175 kg/DAS).

    (iii) [Reserved]

    (4) Each vessel qualifying for one of the three DAS categories specified in the table in this paragraph (b)(4) (full-time, part-time, or occasional) shall be allocated the maximum number of DAS for each fishing year it may participate in the open area limited access scallop fishery, according to its category, excluding carryover DAS in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section. DAS allocations shall be determined by distributing the portion of ACT specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, as reduced by access area allocations specified in § 648.59, and dividing that amount among vessels in the form of DAS calculated by applying estimates of open area LPUE specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Allocation for part-time and occasional scallop vessels shall be 40 percent and 8.33 percent of the full-time DAS allocations, respectively. The annual open area DAS allocations for each category of vessel for the fishing years indicated are as follows:

    Scallop Open Area DAS Allocations Permit
  • category
  • 2015 2016
    Full-Time 30.86 26 Part-Time 12.94 10.40 Occasional 2.58 2.17

    (i) [Reserved]

    (ii) Accountability measures (AM). Unless the limited access AM exception is implemented in accordance with the provision specified in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section, if the ACL specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section is exceeded for the applicable fishing year, the DAS specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section for each limited access vessel shall be reduced by an amount equal to the amount of landings in excess of the ACL divided by the applicable LPUE for the fishing year in which the AM will apply as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, then divided by the number of scallop vessels eligible to be issued a full-time limited access scallop permit. For example, assuming a 300,000-lb (136-mt) overage of the ACL in 2011, an open area LPUE of 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) per DAS in 2012, and 313 full-time vessels, each full-time vessel's DAS for 2012 would be reduced by 0.38 DAS (300,000 lb (136 mt)/2,500 lb (1.13 mt) per DAS = 120 lb (0.05 mt) per DAS/313 vessels = 0.38 DAS per vessel). Deductions in DAS for part-time and occasional scallop vessels shall be 40 percent and 8.33 percent of the full-time DAS deduction, respectively, as calculated pursuant to this paragraph (b)(4)(ii). The AM shall take effect in the fishing year following the fishing year in which the overage occurred. For example, landings in excess of the ACL in fishing year 2011 would result in the DAS reduction AM in fishing year 2012. If the AM takes effect, and a limited access vessel uses more open area DAS in the fishing year in which the AM is applied, the vessel shall have the DAS used in excess of the allocation after applying the AM deducted from its open area DAS allocation in the subsequent fishing year. For example, a vessel initially allocated 32 DAS in 2011 uses all 32 DAS prior to application of the AM. If, after application of the AM, the vessel's DAS allocation is reduced to 31 DAS, the vessel's DAS in 2012 would be reduced by 1 DAS.

    (iii) Limited access AM exception. If NMFS determines, in accordance with paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section, that the fishing mortality rate associated with the limited access fleet's landings in a fishing year is less than 0.34, the AM specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section shall not take effect. The fishing mortality rate of 0.34 is the fishing mortality rate that is one standard deviation below the fishing mortality rate for the scallop fishery ACL, currently estimated at 0.38.

    (iv) Limited access fleet AM and exception provision timing. The Regional Administrator shall determine whether the limited access fleet exceeded its ACL specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section by July of the fishing year following the year for which landings are being evaluated. On or about July 1, the Regional Administrator shall notify the New England Fishery Management Council of the determination of whether or not the ACL for the limited access fleet was exceeded, and the amount of landings in excess of the ACL. Upon this notification, the Scallop Plan Development Team (PDT) shall evaluate the overage and determine if the fishing mortality rate associated with total landings by the limited access scallop fleet is less than 0.34. On or about September 1 of each year, the Scallop PDT shall notify the Council of its determination, and the Council, on or about September 30, shall make a recommendation, based on the Scallop PDT findings, concerning whether to invoke the limited access AM exception. If NMFS concurs with the Scallop PDT's recommendation to invoke the limited access AM exception, in accordance with the APA, the limited access AM shall not be implemented. If NMFS does not concur, in accordance with the APA, the limited access AM shall be implemented as soon as possible after September 30 each year.

    (f) * * *

    (3) Limited access scallop vessels fishing under the DAS program and landing scallops at a port located at or south of 39° N. Lat. If landing scallops at a port located at or south of 39° N. lat., a limited access vessel participating in the scallop DAS program may end its DAS trip once shoreward of the VMS Demarcation Line at or south of 39° N. lat. by declaring out of the scallop fishery. Once declared out of the scallop fishery, the vessel may cross seaward of the VMS Demarcation Line and steam to ports at or south of 39° N. lat., to land scallops while not on a DAS, provided that the vessel complies with the following requirements:

    (i) The vessel must submit a Scallop Pre-landing Notification Form, as specified at § 648.10(f)(4)(iv);

    (ii) The vessel's fishing gear is stowed and not available for immediate use as defined in § 648.2;

    (iii) The vessel must return directly to port and offload scallops;

    (iv) The vessel must land scallops at a port located at or south of 39° N. lat.; and

    (v) The vessel may not possess in-shell scallops.

    (g) Set-asides for observer coverage. (1) To help defray the cost of carrying an observer, 1 percent of the ABC/ACL specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be set aside to be used by vessels that are assigned to take an at-sea observer on a trip. The total TAC for observer set aside is 254 mt in fishing year 2015, and 318 mt in fishing year 2016.

    6. In § 648.54, paragraphs (a)(4) and (b) through (g) are revised, and paragraph (h) is added, to read as follows:
    § 648.54 State waters exemption.

    (a) * * *

    (4) The Regional Administrator has determined that the State of Maine has a scallop fishery conservation program for its scallop fishery that does not jeopardize the biomass and fishing mortality/effort limit objectives of the Scallop FMP. A vessel fishing in State of Maine waters may fish under the State of Maine state waters exemption, subject to the exemptions specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, provided the vessel is in compliance with paragraphs (e) through (g) of this section.

    (b) Limited access scallop vessel exemption. Any vessel issued a limited access scallop permit is exempt from the DAS requirements specified in § 648.53(b) while fishing exclusively landward of the outer boundary of the waters of a state that has been issued a state waters exemption under paragraph (a)(4) of this section, provided the vessel complies with paragraphs (f) through (h) of this section.

    (c) Gear and possession limit restrictions. Any vessel issued a limited access scallop permit, an LAGC NGOM, or an LAGC IFQ scallop permit is exempt from the minimum twine top mesh size for scallop dredge gear specified in § 648.51(b)(2) and (b)(4)(iv) while fishing exclusively landward of the outer boundary of the waters of the State of Maine under the state waters exemption specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section, provided the vessel is in compliance with paragraphs (d) through (g) of this section.

    (d) NGOM closure exemption. Any vessel issued a Federal scallop permit may be exempt from the regulations specified in § 648.52(b)(2) requiring that once the NGOM Federal hard TAC is reached, no vessel issued a scallop permit may fish in the NGOM area. This exemption, which a state must apply for through the process specified in paragraph (a) of this section, would allow vessels to continue to fish for scallops within a state's waters inside the NGOM. A state applying for this exemption must clarify to which scallop permit types this exemption would apply.

    (e) Notification requirements. Vessels fishing under the exemptions specified in paragraph (b) and/or (c) of this section must notify the Regional Administrator in accordance with the provisions of § 648.10(e).

    (f) Restriction on fishing in the EEZ. A vessel fishing under a state waters exemption may not fish in the EEZ during the time in which it is fishing under the state waters exemption, as declared under the notification requirements of this section.

    (g) Duration of exemption. An exemption expires upon a change in the vessel's name or ownership, or upon notification through VMS by the participating vessel's owner.

    (h) Applicability of other provisions of this part. A vessel fishing under the exemptions provided by paragraph (b) and/or (c) of this section remains subject to all other requirements of this part.

    7. Section 648.58 is revised to read as follows:
    § 648.58 Rotational Closed Areas.

    (a) Closed Area I Closed Area. No vessel may fish for scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Closed Area I Closed Area. No vessel may possess scallops in the Closed Area I Closed Area, unless such vessel is only transiting the area as provided in paragraph (e) of this section. The Closed Area I Closed Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request), and so that the line connecting points CAIA3 and CAIA4 is the same as the portion of the western boundary line of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1), that lies between points CAIA3 and CAIA4:

    Point Latitude Longitude Note CAIA1 41°26′ N. 68°30′ W. CAIA2 40°58′ N. 68°30′ W. CAIA3 40°54.95′ N. 68°53.37′ W. (1) CAIA4 41°04′ N. 69°01′ W. (1) CAIA1 41°26′ N. 68°30′ W. 1 From Point CAIA3 to Point CAIA4 along the western boundary of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1).

    (b) Closed Area II Closed Area. No vessel may fish for scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Closed Area II Closed Area. No vessel may possess scallops in the Closed Area II Closed Area. The Closed Area II Closed Area is defined by straight lines, except where noted, connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

    Point Latitude Longitude Note CAIIA1 41°00′ N. 67°20′ W. CAIIA2 41°00′ N. 66°35.8′ W. CAIIA3 41°18.45′ N. (1) (2) CAIIA4 41°30′ N. (3) (2) CAIIA5 41°30′ N. 67°20′ W. CAIIA1 41°00′ N. 67°20′ W. 1 The intersection of 41°18.45′ N. lat. and the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximately 41°18.45′ N. lat. and 66°24.89′ W. long. 2 From Point CAIIA3 connected to Point CAIIA4 along the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary. 3 The intersection of 41°30′ N. lat. and the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximately 41°30′ N. lat., 66°34.73′ W. long.

    (c) Nantucket Lightship Closed Area. No vessel may fish for scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area. No vessel may possess scallops in the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area, unless such vessel is only transiting the area as provided in paragraph (e) of this section. The Nantucket Lightship Closed Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request),

    Point Latitude Longitude NLAA1 40°50′ N. 69°30′ W. NLAA2 40°50′ N. 69°00′ W. NLAA3 40°33′ N. 69°00′ W NLAA4 40°33′ N. 68°48′ W NLAA5 40°20′ N. 68°48′ W NLAA6 40°20′ N. 69°30′ W. NLAA1 40°50′ N. 69°30′ W.

    (d) Elephant Trunk Closed Area. No vessel may fish for scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Elephant Trunk Closed Area. No vessel may possess scallops in Elephant Trunk Closed Area. The Elephant Trunk Closed Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request).

    Point Latitude Longitude ETCA 1 38°50′ N. 74°20′ W. ETCA 2 38°50′ N. 73°40′ W. ETCA 3 38°40′ N. 73°40′ W. ETCA 4 38°40′ N. 73°50′ W. ETCA 5 38°30′ N. 73°50′ W. ETCA 6 38°30′ N. 74°20′ W. ETCA 1 38°50′ N. 74°20′ W.

    (e) Transiting. No vessel possessing scallops may enter or be in the area(s) specified in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section unless the vessel is transiting the area and the vessel's fishing gear is stowed and not available for immediate use as defined in § 648.2, or there is a compelling safety reason to be in such areas without such gear being stowed. A vessel may only transit the Closed Area II Closed Area, as described in paragraph (b) of this section, or the Elephant Trunk Closed Area, as described in paragraph (d) of this section, if there is a compelling safety reason for transiting the area and the vessel's fishing gear is stowed and not available for immediate use as defined in § 648.2.

    (f) Vessels fishing for species other than scallops. A vessel may fish for species other than scallops within the closed areas specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section as allowed in this part, provided the vessel does not fish for, catch, or retain scallops or intend to fish for, catch, or retain scallops. Declaration through VMS that the vessel is fishing in the LAGC scallop fishery is deemed to be an intent to fish for, catch, or retain scallops.

    8. In § 648.59:

    a. Paragraph (a) is added;

    b. Paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(3), (c) introductory text, and (c)(1) are revised;

    c. Paragraph (c)(2) is removed and reserved;

    d. Paragraphs (c)(3), (d) introductory text, and (d)(1) are revised; and

    e. Paragraphs (d)(2) and (e) are removed and reserved.

    The addition and revisions read as follows:

    § 648.59 Sea Scallop Access Areas.

    (a) Mid-Atlantic Scallop Access Area. (1) Beginning March 1, 2015, through February 28, 2017 (i.e., fishing years 2015 and 2016), a vessel issued a scallop permit may not fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from the area known as the Mid-Atlantic Access Area unless the vessel is participating in, and complies with the requirements of, the area access program described in § 648.60. The Mid-Atlantic Access Area is comprised of the following scallop access areas: The Delmarva Scallop Access Area, as described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section; the Elephant Trunk Scallop Access Area, as described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section; and the Hudson Canyon Scallop Access Area, as described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.

    (2) Delmarva Scallop Access Area. The Delmarva Scallop Access Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

    Point Latitude Longitude DMV1 38°10′ N. 74°50′ W. DMV2 38°10′ N. 74°00′ W. DMV3 37°15′ N. 74°00′ W. DMV4 37°15′ N. 74°50′ W. DMV1 38°10′ N. 74°50′ W.

    (i) Season. A vessel issued a scallop permit may not fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from the area known as the Delmarva Sea Scallop Access Area, described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, during the period of March 1, 2016, through March 31, 2016.

    (ii) [Reserved]

    (3) Elephant Trunk Scallop Access Area. The Elephant Trunk Scallop Access Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

    Point Latitude Longitude ETAA1 38°30′ N. 74°20′ W. ETAA2 38°30′ N. 73°50′ W. ETAA3 38°40′ N. 73°50′ W. ETAA4 38°40′ N. 73°40′ W. ETAA5 38°50′ N. 73°40′ W. ETAA6 38°50′ N. 73°30′ W. ETAA7 38°10′ N. 73°30′ W. ETAA8 38°10′ N. 74°20′ W. ETAA1 38°30′ N. 74°20′ W.

    (4) Hudson Canyon Scallop Access Area. The Hudson Canyon Scallop Access Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

    Point Latitude Longitude H1 39°30′ N. 73°10′ W. H2 39°30′ N. 72°30′ W. H3 38°30′ N. 73°30′ W. H4 38°50′ N. 73°30′ W. H5 38°50′ N. 73°42′ W. H1 39°30′ N. 73°10′ W.

    (b) Closed Area I Scallop Access Area. (1) From March 1, 2015, through February 28, 2017 (i.e., fishing years 2015 and 2016), a vessel issued a scallop permit may not fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from, the area known as the Closed Area I Scallop Access Area, described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, unless transiting in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section. A vessel issued both a NE multispecies permit and an LAGC scallop permit may not fish in an approved SAP under § 648.85 and under multispecies DAS in the scallop access area, unless it complies with restrictions in paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(C) of this section.

    (3) The Closed Area I Scallop Access Area is defined by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request), and so that the line connecting points CAIA3 and CAIA4 is the same as the portion of the western boundary line of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1), that lies between points CAIA3 and CAIA4:

    Point Latitude Longitude Note CAIA1 41°26′ N. 68°30′ W. CAIA2 40°58′ N. 68°30′ W. CAIA3 40°54.95′ N. 68°53.37′ W. (1) CAIA4 41°04′ N. 69°01′ W. (1) CAIA1 41°26′ N. 68°30′ W. 1 From Point CAIA3 to Point CAIA4 along the western boundary of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1).

    (c) Closed Area II Scallop Access Area. (1) From March 1, 2015, through February 28, 2017 (i.e., fishing years 2015 and 2016), a vessel issued a scallop permit may not fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from, the area known as the Closed Area II Access Area, described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, unless transiting in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section. A vessel issued both a NE multispecies permit and an LAGC scallop permit may not fish in an approved SAP under § 648.85 and under multispecies DAS in the scallop access area, unless it complies with restrictions in paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(C) of this section.

    (2) [Reserved]

    (3) The Closed Area II Scallop Access Area is defined by straight lines, except where noted, connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

    Point Latitude Longitude Note CAIIA1 41°00′ N. 67°20′ W. CAIIA2 41°00′ N. 66°35.8′ W. CAIIA3 41°18.45′ N. (1) (2) CAIIA4 41°30′ N. (3) (2) CAIIA5 41°30′ N. 67°20′ W. CAIIA1 41°00′ N. 67°20′ W. 1 The intersection of 41°18.45′ N. lat. and the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximately 41°18.45′ N. lat. and 66°24.89′ W. long. 2 From Point CAIIA3 connected to Point CAIIA4 along the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary. 3 The intersection of 41°30′ N. lat. and the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximately 41°30′ N. lat., 66°34.73′ W. long.

    (d) Nantucket Lightship Scallop Access Area. (1) From March 1, 2015, through February 28, 2017 (i.e., fishing years 2015 and 2016), a vessel issued a scallop permit may not fish for, possess, or land scallops in or from the area known as the Nantucket Lightship Access Area, described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, unless transiting pursuant to paragraph (f) of this section. A vessel issued both a NE multispecies permit and an LAGC scallop permit may not fish in an approved SAP under § 648.85 and under multispecies DAS in the scallop access area, unless it complies with restrictions in paragraph (d)(5)(ii)(C) of this section.

    9. In § 648.60, paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3), (a)(5)(i), (a)(9), (c), (e)(1), and (g)(3)(i) are revised to read as follows:
    § 648.60 Sea scallop access area program requirements.

    (a) * * *

    (1) VMS. Each vessel participating in the Sea Scallop Access Area Program must have installed on board an operational VMS unit that meets the minimum performance criteria specified in §§ 648.9 and 648.10, and paragraphs (a)(9) and (f) of this section.

    (3) Sea Scallop Access Area Allocations—(i) Limited access vessel allocations. (A) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, paragraphs (a)(3)(i)(B) through (E) of this section specify the total amount of scallops, in weight, that a limited access scallop vessel may harvest from Sea Scallop Access Areas during applicable seasons specified in § 648.59. A vessel may not possess or land in excess of its scallop allocation assigned to specific Sea Scallop Access Areas, unless authorized by the Regional Administrator, as specified in paragraph (d) of this section, unless the vessel owner has exchanged an area-specific scallop allocation with another vessel owner for additional scallop allocation in that area, as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section. A vessel may harvest its scallop allocation, as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i)(B) of this section, on any number of trips in a given fishing year, provided that no single trip exceeds the possession limits specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, unless authorized by the Regional Administrator, as specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section,

    (B) Full-time scallop vessels. (1) In fishing year 2015, each full-time vessel shall have a total of 51,000 lb (23,133 kg) of scallops that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a).

    (2) For the 2016 fishing year, each full-time vessel shall have a total of 17,000 lb (7,711 kg) of scallops that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a), starting on April 1, 2016.

    (C) Part-time scallop vessels. (1) For the 2015 fishing year, each part-time scallop vessel shall have a total of 20,400 lb (9,253 kg) of scallop that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a).

    (2) For the 2015 fishing year, each part-time scallop vessel shall have a total of 10,200 lb (4,627 kg) of scallop that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a), starting on April 1, 2016.

    (D) Occasional scallop vessels. (1) For the 2015 fishing year, each occasional scallop vessel shall have a total of 4,250 lb (1,928 kg) of scallop that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a).

    (2) For the 2016 fishing year, each occasional scallop vessel shall have a total of 1,420 lb (644 kg) of scallop that may be harvested from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area, as defined in § 648.59(a), starting on April 1, 2016.

    (ii) One-for-one area access allocation exchanges. The owner of a vessel issued a limited access scallop permit may exchange unharvested scallop pounds allocated into one access area for another vessel's unharvested scallop pounds allocated into another Sea Scallop Access Area. These exchanges may only be made for the amount of the current trip possession limit, as specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this section. For example, if the access area trip possession limit for full-time vessels is 17,000 lb (7,711 kg), a full-time vessel may exchange no less than 17,000 lb (7,711 kg), from one access area for no more or less than 17,000 lb (7,711 kg) allocated to another vessel for another access area. In addition, these exchanges may be made only between vessels with the same permit category: A full-time vessel may not exchange allocations with a part-time vessel, and vice versa. Vessel owners must request these exchanges by submitting a completed Access Area Allocation Exchange Form at least 15 days before the date on which the applicant desires the exchange to be effective. Exchange forms are available from the Regional Administrator upon request. Each vessel owner involved in an exchange is required to submit a completed Access Area Allocation Form. The Regional Administrator shall review the records for each vessel to confirm that each vessel has enough unharvested allocation remaining in a given access area to exchange. The exchange is not effective until the vessel owner(s) receive a confirmation in writing from the Regional Administrator that the allocation exchange has been made effective. A vessel owner may exchange equal allocations up to the current possession limit between two or more vessels under his/her ownership. A vessel owner holding a Confirmation of Permit History is not eligible to exchange allocations between another vessel and the vessel for which a Confirmation of Permit History has been issued.

    (5) Possession and landing limits—(i) Scallop possession limits. Unless authorized by the Regional Administrator, as specified in paragraph (d) of this section, after declaring a trip into a Sea Scallop Access Area, a vessel owner or operator of a limited access scallop vessel may fish for, possess, and land, per trip, scallops, up to the maximum amounts specified in the table in this paragraph (a)(5). No vessel declared into the Access Areas as described in § 648.59(a) through (e) may possess more than 50 bu (17.62 hL) of in-shell scallops outside of the Access Areas described in § 648.59(a) through (e).

    Fishing year Permit category possession limit Full-time Part-time Occasional 2015 17,000 lb (57,711 kg) 10,200 lb (4,627 kg) 1,420 lb (644 kg). 2016 17,000 lb (57,711 kg) 10,200 lb (4,627 kg) 1,420 lb (644 kg).

    (9) Reporting. The owner or operator must submit scallop catch reports through the VMS, as specified in § 648.10(f)(4)(i), and limited access scallop access area pre-landing notification forms, as specified in § 648.10(f)(4)(iii).

    (c) Access area scallop allocation carryover. Unless otherwise specified in § 648.59, a limited access scallop vessel operator may fish any unharvested Scallop Access Area allocation from a given fishing year within the first 60 days of the subsequent fishing year if the Access Area is open. For example, if a full-time vessel has 7,000 lb (3,175 kg) remaining in the Mid-Atlantic Access Area at the end of fishing year 2015, that vessel may harvest 7,000 lb (3,175 kg) from its 2016 fishing year scallop access area allocation during the first 60 days that the Mid-Atlantic Access Area is open in fishing year 2016 (March 1, 2016, through April 29, 2017). Unless otherwise specified in § 648.59, if an Access Area is not open in the subsequent fishing year, then the unharvested scallop allocation would expire at the end of the fishing year that the scallops were allocated.

    (e) Sea Scallop Research Set-Aside Harvest in Access Areas—(1) Access Areas available for harvest of research set-aside (RSA). Unless otherwise specified, RSA may be harvested in any access area that is open in a given fishing year, as specified through a framework adjustment and pursuant to § 648.56. The amount of scallops that can be harvested in each access area by vessels participating in approved RSA projects shall be determined through the RSA application review and approval process. The access areas open for RSA harvest for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are:

    (i) 2015: The Mid-Atlantic Scallop Access Area, as specified in § 648.59(a).

    (ii) 2016: None.

    (g) * * *

    (3) LAGC IFQ Access Area Trips. (i) An LAGC scallop vessel authorized to fish in the Access Areas specified in § 648.59(a) through (e) may land scallops, subject to the possession limit specified in § 648.52(a), unless the Regional Administrator has issued a notice that the number of LAGC IFQ access area trips have been or are projected to be taken. The total number of LAGC IFQ trips in a specified Access Area for fishing year 2015 and 2016 are:

    Access area 2015 2016 Mid-Atlantic Access Area 2,065 602 Closed Area 1 0 0 Closed Area 2 0 0 Nantucket Lightship 0 0
    10. In § 648.61, paragraph (a)(4) is revised to read as follows:
    § 648.61 EFH closed areas.

    (a) * * *

    (4) Closed Area I Habitat Closure Areas. The restrictions specified in paragraph (a) of this section apply to the Closed Area I Habitat Closure Areas, Closed Area I-North and Closed Area I-South, which are the areas bounded by straight lines connecting the following points in the order stated, and so that the lines connecting Point CIN4 to Point CIN1, and Point CIS4 to Point CIS1 is the same as the portion of the western boundary line of Closed Area I, defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, that lies between those points:

    Closed Area I—North Habitat Closure Area Point Latitude Longitude Note CIN1 41°30′ N. 69°23′ W. CIN2 41°30′ N. 68°30′ W. CIN3 41°26′ N. 68°30′ W. CIN4 41°04′ N. 69°01′ W. (1) CIN1 41°30′ N. 69°23′ W. (1) 1 From Point CIN4 back to Point CIN1 along the western boundary of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1). Closed Area I—South Habitat Closure Area Point Latitude Longitude Notes CIS1 40°54.95′ N. 68°53.37′ W. CIS2 40°58′ N. 68°30′ W. CIS3 40°45′ N. 68°30′ W. CIS4 40°45′ N. 68°45′ W. (1) CIS1 40°54.95′ N. 68°53.37′ W. (1) 1 From Point CIS4 back to Point CIS1 along the western boundary of Closed Area I, defined in § 648.81(a)(1).
    11. In § 648.64, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
    § 648.64 Yellowtail flounder sub-ACLs and AMs for the scallop fishery.

    (a) As specified in § 648.55(d), and pursuant to the biennial framework adjustment process specified in § 648.90, the scallop fishery shall be allocated a sub-ACL for the Georges Bank and Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic stocks of yellowtail flounder. The sub-ACLs are specified in § 648.90(a)(4)(iii)(C) of the NE multispecies regulations.

    12. In § 648.65, paragraph (b)(3)(ii) is revised to read as follows:
    § 648.65 Windowpane flounder sub-ACLs and AMs for the scallop fishery.

    (b) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (ii) The maximum hanging ratio for a net, net material, or any other material on the top of a scallop dredge (twine top) possessed or used by vessels fishing with scallop dredge gear does not exceed 1.5:1 overall. An overall hanging ratio of 1.5:1 means that the twine top is attached to the rings in a pattern of alternating 2 meshes per ring and 1 mesh per ring (counted at the bottom where the twine top connects to the apron), for an overall average of 1.5 meshes per ring for the entire width of the twine top. For example, an apron that is 40 rings wide subtracting 5 rings one each side of the side pieces, yielding 30 rings, would only be able to use a twine top with 45 or fewer meshes so that the overall ratio of meshes to rings did not exceed 1.5 (45 meshes/30 rings = 1.5).

    [FR Doc. 2015-09199 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 76 Tuesday, April 21, 2015 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-0625; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-09-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. Turboprop Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain serial number GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. M601E-11, M601E-11A, and M601F turboprop engines with certain part number (P/N) gas generator turbine (GGT) blades, installed. This proposed AD was prompted by the determination that certain GGT blades are susceptible to blade failure. This proposed AD would require removing from service any affected engine with certain GGT blades installed. We are proposing this AD to prevent GGT blade failure, which could lead to engine failure and loss of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact GE Aviation Czech s.r.o., Beranových 65, 199 02 Praha 9—Letňany, Czech Republic; phone: +420 222 538 111; fax: +420 222 538 222. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    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-2015-0625; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7754; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    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-2015-0625; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-09-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 with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD 2015-0015, dated January 30, 2015 (referred to hereinafter as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    It has been demonstrated that non-shot peened Gas Generator Turbine (GGT) blades are susceptible to blade separation in the shank area due to their reduced fatigue life.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to an in-flight engine shutdown and, consequently, reduced control of the aeroplane.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-0625.

    Related Service Information under 1 CFR Part 51

    GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. has issued Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. M601E-11/30, dated December 23, 2014, and ASB No. M601E-11/31, M601E-11A/18, M601F/28, dated December 23, 2014. The ASBs describe procedures for removal and replacement of GGT blades that are not shot peened. 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 the Czech Republic, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the European Community, EASA has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. This proposed AD would require removing from service any affected engine with GGT blades installed that are not shot peened.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects one engine installed on an airplane of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 64 hours per engine to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Required parts cost about $28,765 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $34,205.

    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 to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, 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): GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. (Type Certificate previously held by WALTER Engines a.s., Walter a.s., and MOTORLET a.s.): Docket No. FAA-2015-0625; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-09-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 22, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to certain serial number (S/N) GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. M601E-11, M601E-11A, and M601F turboprop engine models, with gas generator turbine (GGT) blade, part number (P/N) M601-3372.6 or M601-3372.51, installed, as follows:

    (1) Model M601E-11: S/Ns 862001, 863008, 894018, 034005, 034006, 034007, 034008, 041003, and 042002.

    (2) Model M601E-11A: S/Ns 042003, 042004, 044001, 044002, and 961001.

    (3) Model M601F: S/Ns 024001, 002001, 003001, 024001, 934001, 934002, 961001.

    (d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the determination that certain GGT blades are susceptible to blade failure. These blades are identified as blade P/Ns M601-3372.6 and M601-3372.51, and are installed on an engine S/N identified in paragraph (c) of this AD. We are issuing this AD to prevent GGT blade failure, which could lead to engine failure and loss of the airplane.

    (e) Actions and Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. After the effective date of this AD:

    (1) Do not return to service any affected engine with GGT blade, P/N M601-3372.6 or M601-3372.51, installed, after 300 hours time in service or six months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) If the affected engines are subsequently disassembled or overhauled, the non-shot peened GGT blades, P/N M601-3372.6 or M601-3372.51, are not eligible for installation in any other engine after removal.

    (f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may email your request to: [email protected]

    (g) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7754; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2015-0015, dated January 30, 2015, for more information. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2015-0625.

    (3) GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. M601E-11/30, dated December 23, 2014, which is co-published as one document with M601D-1/31, M601Z/29, and M601T/24, and ASB No. M601E-11/31, M601E-11A/18, M601F/28, dated December 23, 2014, which is co-published as one document with M601D-1/32, M601Z/30, M601E/61, M601T/25, M601FS/12, M601F-22/25, M601F-32/23, and M601E-21/28, are not incorporated by reference in this AD. The ASBs can be obtained from GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. using the contact information in paragraph (g)(4) of this proposed AD.

    (4) For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact GE Aviation Czech s.r.o., Beranových 65, 199 02 Praha 9—Letňany, Czech Republic; phone: +420 222 538 111; fax: +420 222 538 222.

    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 7, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09002 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2014-0363; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-08-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD) for all Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines. The NPRM proposed to require inspection of the fan case low-pressure (LP) fuel tubes and clips and the fuel oil heat exchanger (FOHE) mounts and hardware. The NPRM was prompted by fuel leaks caused by damage to the fan case LP fuel tube. This supplemental action revises the NPRM by expanding inspections and corrective actions, correcting a part number (P/N) and the costs of compliance, reducing the applicability, providing another method to comply with certain requirements, and giving credit for certain previous actions. We are proposing this SNPRM to prevent failure of the fan case LP fuel tube, which could lead to an in-flight engine shutdown, loss of thrust control, and damage to the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments by June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, England, DE24 8BJ; phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-249936; email: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp; Internet: https://www.aeromanager.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    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-2014-0363; 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 mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wego Wang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7134; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this SNPRM. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2014-0363; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-08-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this SNPRM 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 with FAA personnel concerning this SNPRM.

    Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to the specified products. The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2014 (79 FR 37965). The NPRM proposed to require inspection of the fan case LP fuel tubes and clips and the FOHE mounts and hardware.

    Related Service Information under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed RR Alert Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014; RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH837, initial issue, dated September 9, 2014; and RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-G848, Revision 3, dated June 12, 2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting, and replacing if required, the fan case LP fuel tube and clips, and the FOHE mounts and hardware. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or see ADDRESSES for other ways to access this service information.

    Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM (79 FR 37965, July 3, 2014), RR received reports of additional failures of clips associated with the LP fuel tube occurring prior to the next inspection as required by the NPRM. RR published NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH837, initial issue, dated September 9, 2014, to provide instructions for additional specific visual inspections, at shorter intervals, of the upper clip attaching feature and the bracket holding this clip to the oil tank and, based on inspection results, instructions for corrective actions. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) also issued EASA AD 2014-0243, dated November 6, 2014, and EASA AD 2014-0243R1, dated December 10, 2014, which mandate additional inspections and corrective actions, grant credit for certain prior inspections, allow a certain in-shop inspection to serve in lieu of a required visual inspection, and state that replacing parts as a result of the inspections required by those EASA ADs, and as described in paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of this AD, are not terminating action. We reviewed EASA's changes and concluded that they are necessary to correct the unsafe condition this SNPRM addresses. We incorporate EASA's changes into paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(4) of this SNPRM.

    In addition to these changes, we made other changes.

    Since we issued the NPRM (79 FR 37965, July 3, 2014), we found that we referenced a non-existent fan case LP fuel tube P/N in the NPRM. Specifically, fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW535776, does not exist. We changed paragraph (e)(3) of this SNPRM to eliminate the non-existent part number, replacing it with the correct one for the fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576.

    We also found that we did not include in our cost estimate an estimate of the number of engines that we expect will fail the proposed inspections. We revised our cost estimate in this SNPRM by adding an estimate of the number of engines that we expect will fail inspection, and the cost of replacement parts.

    We also found that we did not provide adequate information to identify the applicable engines affected by this AD. We changed the Applicability paragraph to specify that certain engine models outfitted with fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576, when installed by incorporating either RR production modification 73-F343, or RR Service Bulletin (SB) No. RB.211-73-F343, Revision 4, dated May 26, 2011, are affected by this SNPRM.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this proposed AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (79 FR 37965, July 3, 2014).

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM (79 FR 37965, July 3, 2014). As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.

    Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the NPRM, except as discussed in the Actions Since Previous NPRM was Issued paragraph.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects about 50 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 6 hours per engine to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We also estimate that 25 of the engines will fail the inspection proposed by this AD. Required parts cost about $4,031 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $126,275.

    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 AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 AD:

    (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 to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, 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.

    Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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): Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA-2014-0363; Directorate Identifier 2014-NE-08-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 22, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 768-60, 772-60, and 772B-60 turbofan engines, if fitted with fuel tube, part number (P/N) FW53576, which was incorporated through RR production modification 73-F343 or which were modified in service in accordance with RR Service Bulletin (SB) No. RB.211-73-F343, Revision 4, dated May 26, 2011, or earlier versions.

    (d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by fuel leaks caused by damage to the fan case low-pressure (LP) fuel tube. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the fan case LP fuel tube, which could lead to an in-flight engine shutdown, loss of thrust control, and damage to the airplane.

    (e) Actions and Compliance

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

    (1) Within 800 flight hours (FH) after the effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 800 FH, inspect the clip at the uppermost fan case LP fuel tube clip position, CP4881, and support bracket, P/N FW26692. Use Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.A, of RR Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) No. RB.211-73-AH837, initial issue, dated September 9, 2014, or paragraph 3.A. or 3.B. of RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014, or earlier versions, to do your inspection.

    (i) If the clip at the uppermost clip position, CP4881, fails inspection, replace the clip with a part eligible for installation and, before further flight, inspect the fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576, for fretting, and clips for cracks or failure, according to Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.A. of RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH837, initial issue, dated September 9, 2014, or paragraph 3.A. or 3.B. of RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014, or earlier versions.

    (ii) If the support bracket, P/N FW26692, fails inspection, replace the bracket before further flight with a part eligible for installation and inspect the fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576, and clips for cracks or failure.

    (2) Within 4,000 FH since new or 800 FH, whichever occurs later, after the effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,000 FH, inspect the fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576, and clips, and the fuel oil heat exchanger (FOHE) mounts and hardware, for damage, wear, or fretting. Use paragraph 3.A. or 3.B., Accomplishment Instructions, of RR Alert NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014, or earlier versions, to do the inspection.

    (i) If the fan case LP fuel tube, P/N FW53576, fails inspection, before further flight, replace the fuel tube and clips with parts eligible for installation.

    (ii) If any FOHE mount or hardware shows signs of damage, wear, or fretting, replace the damaged part before further flight with a part eligible for installation.

    (3) At each shop visit after the effective date of this AD, inspect the fan case LP fuel tubes, P/Ns FW26589, FW36335, FW26587, FW53577, and FW53576, and clips, and the FOHE mounts and hardware, for damage, wear, or fretting. Use paragraphs 3.B.(1) and 3.B.(2) of RR Alert NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014, or earlier versions, to do the inspection.

    (i) If any fan case LP fuel tube fails inspection, replace the fuel tube and clips before further flight with parts eligible for installation.

    (ii) If any FOHE mount or hardware shows signs of damage, wear, or fretting, replace the damaged part before further flight with a part eligible for installation.

    (4) If you replace any fan case LP fuel tube, clip, or FOHE mount or hardware as a result of the inspections of paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), or (e)(3) of this AD, you must still continue to perform the repetitive inspections of paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of this AD.

    (5) Any reports requested in the NMSB accomplishment instructions referenced in paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of this AD are not required by this AD.

    (f) Credit for Previous Actions

    If, before the effective date of this AD, you performed the inspections and corrective actions required by paragraph (e)(2) of this AD using RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-G848, Revision 3, dated June 12, 2014, or earlier versions, you met the initial inspection requirements of paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

    (g) Definitions

    For the purposes of this AD:

    (1) An “engine shop visit” is the induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the separation of pairs of major mating engine flanges, except that the separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of transportation without subsequent engine maintenance is not an engine shop visit.

    (2) The fan case LP fuel tubes and clips, and the FOHE mounts and hardware, are eligible for installation if they have passed the inspection requirements of paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of this AD.

    (h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs to this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may email your request to: [email protected]

    (i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wego Wang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7134; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2014-0243R1, dated December 10, 2014 for more information. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0363.

    (3) RR Alert NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH522, Revision 2, dated July 18, 2014, and earlier versions; RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-AH837, initial issue, dated September 9, 2014; and RR NMSB No. RB.211-73-G848, Revision 3, dated June 12, 2014, and earlier versions; which are not incorporated by reference in this AD, can be obtained from Rolls-Royce plc, using the contact information in paragraph (i)(4) of this proposed AD.

    (4) For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, England, DE24 8BJ; phone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-249936; email: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp; Internet: https://www.aeromanager.com.

    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 7, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09001 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2014-1130; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-04-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW4164-1D, PW4168-1D, PW4168A-1D and PW4170 engines, and certain PW4164, PW4168, and PW4168A turbofan engines. This proposed AD was prompted by fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold interface fuel leaks. This proposed AD would require inspecting fuel nozzles for signs of leakage, replacing hardware as required, and torqueing to specified requirement. We are proposing this AD to prevent fuel leaks which could result in engine fire and damage to the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 22, 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-8770; fax: 860-565-4503. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    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-2014-1130; 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 Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Katheryn Malatek, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7747; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this NPRM. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2014-1130; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-04-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because of 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 NPRM.

    Discussion

    We received reports of four fuel nozzle leaks in service and an additional six fuel nozzle leaks found during shop visits. The root cause is inadequate torque of the fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold B-nuts for the temperatures that the fuel nozzles experience. This condition, if not corrected, could result in engine fire and damage to the airplane.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW4G-100-A73-44, dated October 10, 2014. This service information contains information regarding fuel nozzle manifold inspection and fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold B-nut torque requirements. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or see ADDRESSES for other ways to access this service information.

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this NPRM because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This NPRM would require inspecting the fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold interface for evidence of leaks and replacing hardware in cases where fuel leaks are identified. This NPRM also requires torqueing certain B-nuts to the specified requirement.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    PW ASB No. PW4G-100-A73-44 uses calendar dates for compliance time. This NPRM uses cycles. Using cycles from the effective date of the AD supports the intent of the ASB and ensures adequate compliance time after the effective date of the AD.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 72 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We estimate that parts replacement will cost about $1,356 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $391,392.

    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 to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, 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): Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. FAA-2014-1130; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-04-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 22, 2015.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW4164-1D, PW4168-1D, PW4168A-1D and PW4170 engines; and all PW4164, PW4168, and PW4168A turbofan engines that have incorporated either PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW4G-100-72-214, dated December 15, 2011 or PW SB No. PW4G-100-72-219, Revision 1, dated October 5, 2011.

    (d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold interface fuel leaks. We are issuing this AD to prevent fuel leaks which could result in engine fire and damage to the airplane.

    (e) Compliance

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

    (1) Within 800 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, and within every 800 hours since last inspection thereafter, inspect all fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold interfaces for evidence of fuel leaks, soot, and coke formation. Use the Accomplishment Instructions, Part A, of PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW4G-100-A73-44, dated October 10, 2014 to do the inspections.

    (2) Replace hardware that fails an inspection. Use the Accomplishment Instructions, Part A, of PW ASB No. PW4G-100-A73-44, dated October 10, 2014 to do the replacement.

    (f) Mandatory Terminating Action

    (1) Inspect all fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold interfaces for fuel leaks, soot, and coke formation, replace hardware that fails inspection, and re-torque all fuel nozzle-to-fuel supply manifold B-nuts as follows:

    (i) For engines with fewer than 1,500 cycles on the effective date of this AD, before accumulating another 650 cycles, not to exceed 1,900 cycles.

    (ii) For engines with 1,500 cycles or more, but fewer than 2,500 cycles on the effective date of this AD, before accumulating another 400 cycles, not to exceed 2,700 cycles.

    (iii) For engines with 2,500 cycles or more on the effective date of this AD, before accumulating another 200 cycles.

    (2) Use the Accomplishment Instructions, Parts B through E, of PW ASB No. PW4G-100-A73-44, dated October 10, 2014 to do the inspection, replacement, and retorqueing.

    (g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD “cycles” is defined as cycles since new or cycles since the incorporation of PW SB No. PW4G-100-72-214, dated December 15, 2011 or SB No. PW4G-100-72-219, Revision 1, dated October 5, 2011.

    (h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may email your request to: [email protected].

    (i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Katheryn Malatek, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7747; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected].

    (2) PW ASB No. PW4G-100-A73-44, dated October 10, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference, can be obtained from Pratt & Whitney using the contact information in paragraph (j)(3) of this proposed rule.

    (3) For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860-565-8770; fax: 860-565-4503.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 10, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-08995 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0181] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone, Low Country Splash, Wando River, Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, Charleston, SC AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish temporary moving safety zone during the Low Country Splash, a swimming race occurring on the Wando River, the Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, in Charleston, South Carolina. The Low Country Splash is scheduled on May 30, 2015, from 7:30 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. The temporary moving safety zone is necessary to protect swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public during the event. Persons and vessels would be prohibited from entering the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before May 6, 2015. Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 30, 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 Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843)-740-3184, email [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-2015-0181 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-2015-0181 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. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    The purpose of the proposed rule is to ensure the safety of the swimmers, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public during the Low Country Splash.

    C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    On May 30, 2015, the Low Country Splash is scheduled to take place on the Wando River, the Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, in Charleston, South Carolina. Low Country Splash will consist of a 5 mile swim that starts at Daniel Island pier on the Wando River, crosses the main shipping channel of Wando River at Hobcaw Point, and finishes at the Charleston Harbor Resort Marina.

    The proposed rule would establish a temporary moving safety zone of 50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the first race participant, 50 yards behind the safety vessel trailing the last race participants, and at all times extend 100 yards on either side of the race participants and safety vessels. The temporary moving safety zone would be enforced from 7:30 a.m. until 9:45 a.m. on May 30, 2015.

    Persons and vessels would be prohibited from entering or transiting through the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative. Persons and vessels would be able to request authorization to enter or transit through the safety zone by contacting the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at (843) 740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16.

    D. 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.

    The economic impact of this proposed rule is not significant for the following reasons: (1) The safety zone would only be enforced for a total of two and one quarter hours; (2) the safety zone would move with the participant safety vessels so that once the swimmers clear a portion of the waterway, the safety zone would no longer be enforced in that portion of the waterway; (3) although persons and vessels would not be able to enter or transit through the safety zone without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, they would be able to operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (4) persons and vessels would still be able to enter or transit through the safety zone if authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative; and (5) the Coast Guard would provide advance notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    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 proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within that portion of the Wando River, the Cooper River, and Charleston Harbor, in Charleston, South Carolina encompassed within the safety zone from 7:30 a.m. until 9:45 a.m. on Saturday, May 30, 2015. For the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review section above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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 section 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 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 concluded 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 a special local regulation issued in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. 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 proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

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

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add a temporary § 165.T07-0181 to read as follows:
    § 165.T07-0181 Safety Zone; Low Country Splash, Charleston, SC.

    (a) Regulated Areas. The following regulated area is a moving safety zone: all waters 50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the first race participants, 50 yards behind the safety vessel trailing the last race participants, and at all times extend 100 yards on either side of the race participants and safety vessels. The Low Country Splash swimming race consists of a 5 mile course that starts at Daniel Island Pier on the Wando River, crosses the main shipping channel of Wando River at Hobcaw Point, and finishes at the Charleston Harbor Resort Marina.

    (b) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated areas.

    (c) Regulations.

    (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering or transiting through the regulated areas unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter or transit through the regulated areas may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at (843) 740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to enter or transit through the regulated areas is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.

    (d) Effective Date. This rule is effective on Saturday, May 30, 2015, and will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. until 9:45 a.m.

    Dated: April 9, 2015. B.D. Falk, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09048 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0227] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a 500-yard safety zone around each of five locations where the Block Island Wind Farm (BIWF) wind turbine generator (WTG) foundations will be constructed in the navigable waters of the Rhode Island Sound, RI, from July 1 to September 30, 2015. These safety zones are intended to safeguard mariners from the hazards associated with construction of the BIWF WTG foundations. Vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while construction vessels and associated equipment are present, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before May 21, 2015. Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on or before May 12, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2015-0227 using any one of the following methods:

    (1) Federal e-Rulemaking 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 proposed rule, contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Waterways Management Division at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, telephone 401-435-2351, email [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 BIWF Block Island Wind Farm FR Federal Register NTM Notice To Mariners WTG Wind Turbine Generator 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 (USCG-2015-0227), 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 (via 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 via http://www.regulations.gov, 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-2015-0227] 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-2015-0227) 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 Coast Guard has not promulgated a rule regarding construction of the BIWF WTG foundations.

    C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C., 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to establish safety zones.

    This rule is necessary to provide for the safety of life and navigation, for both workers and the boating public, within the vicinity of the BIWF in Rhode Island Sound, RI.

    D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a 500-yard safety zone around each of five locations where the BIWF WTG foundations will be constructed in the navigable waters of the Rhode Island Sound, RI, from 1 July to 30 September 2015. Locations of these platforms are:

    Platform Latitude Longitude WTG 1 41° 7.544′ N 71° 30.454′ W. WTG 2 41° 7.196′ N 71° 30.837′ W. WTG 3 41° 6.886′ N 71° 31.268′ W. WTG 4 41° 6.612′ N 71° 31.747′ W. WTG 5 41° 6.383′ N 71° 32.259′ W.

    These safety zones are intended to safeguard mariners from the hazards associated with construction of the BIWF WTG foundations. Vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while construction vessels and associated equipment are present unless authorized by the COTP, Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative.

    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 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

    1. Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    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, 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.

    We expect the adverse economic impact of this proposed rule to be minimal. Although this regulation may have some adverse impact on the public, the potential impact will be minimized for the following reasons: Although these safety zones will be in effect from 1 July 2015 to 30 September 2015, vessels will only be restricted from the zones during periods of actual construction activity; the BIWF is located approximately three miles offshore of Block Island and the safety zone are only 500-yards in radius centered on the five BIWF WTG foundation locations, allowing plenty of room for vessels to pass without having to divert a long distance around the construction areas.

    Notification of BIWF construction activity and the effective enforcement periods of the associated safety zones will be made to mariners through the Rhode Island Port Safety Forum, and local and broadcast NTMs.

    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 proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: owners or operators of vessels intending to enter, transit, moor, or anchor within 500 yards of the five BIWF WTG foundation construction locations.

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 rulemaking 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 so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rulemaking 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 under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not result in such 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 rulemaking 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 appears to be one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.

    A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. These safety zones are intended to safeguard mariners from the hazards associated with wind farm construction activity. Vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while construction vessels and associated equipment are present unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative. It appears that this action will qualify for Coast Guard Categorical Exclusion (34)(g), as described in figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction.

    We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 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 proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

    PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for Part 165 reads as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.T0227 to read as follows:
    § 165.T0227 Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI.

    (a) Location. Areas within a 500-yard radius of the following five positions are safety zones:

    Platform Latitude Longitude WTG 1 41° 7.544′ N. 71° 30.454′ W. WTG 2 41° 7.196′ N. 71° 30.837′ W. WTG 3 41° 6.886′ N. 71° 31.268′ W. WTG 4 41° 6.612′ N. 71° 31.747′ W. WTG 5 41° 6.383′ N. 71° 32.259′ W.

    (b) Enforcement Period. From 1 July to 30 September 2015, vessels will be prohibited from entering into any of these safety zones, when enforced, during construction activity of five Block Island Wind Farm (BIWF) wind turbine generators (WTG) located in the positions listed in 2(a) above.

    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:

    Designated representative. A “designated representative” is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector Southeastern New England (COTP), to act on his or her behalf.

    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 as well as the following regulations apply to the safety zones established in conjunction with the construction of the Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI. These regulations may be enforced for the duration of construction.

    (2) Vessels may not enter into, transit through, moor, or anchor in these safety zones during periods of enforcement unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative. Vessels permitted to transit must operate at a no-wake speed, in a manner which will not endanger construction vessels or associated equipment.

    (3) Failure to comply with a lawful direction from the Captain of the Port (COTP), Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.

    Dated: April 1, 2015. J.T. Kondratowicz, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Southeastern New England.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09036 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0209; FRL-9926-46-Region 4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Charlotte; Base Year Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state implementation plan revision submitted by the State of North Carolina, through North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, on July 7, 2014, to address the base year emissions inventory and emissions statement requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for the State's portion of the Charlotte Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina Area. Annual emissions reporting (i.e., emission statement) and a base year emissions inventory are required for all ozone nonattainment areas. The Area is comprised of the entire county of Mecklenburg and portions of Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Rowan and Union Counties in North Carolina; and a portion of York County in South Carolina. EPA will consider and take action on the South Carolina submission for the emissions inventory and emissions statement for its portion of this Area in a separate action.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0209 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-2015-0209,” Air Regulatory Management 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: Lynorae Benjamin, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 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 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jane Spann, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-9029. Ms. Spann can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For additional information see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this Federal Register. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time.

    Dated: April 9, 2015. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09049 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management 43 CFR Part 3100 [LLWO3100 L13100000.PP0000] RIN 1004-AE41 Oil and Gas Leasing; Royalty on Production, Rental Payments, Minimum Acceptable Bids, Bonding Requirements, and Civil Penalty Assessments AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is issuing this Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) to solicit public comments and suggestions that may be used to update the BLM's regulations related to royalty rates, annual rental payments, minimum acceptable bids, bonding requirements, and civil penalty assessments for Federal onshore oil and gas leases. As explained below, each of these elements is important to the appropriate management of the public's oil and gas resources. They help ensure a fair return to the taxpayer, diligent development of leased resources, adequate reclamation when development is complete; and that there is adequate deterrence for violations of legal requirements, including trespass and unauthorized removal. Aspects of these elements are fixed by statute and beyond the Secretary's authority to revise; however, in many instances they have been further constrained by regulatory provisions (e.g., minimum bond amounts) that have not been reviewed or adjusted in decades. The purpose of this ANPR is to seek comments on this situation and the need for, and content of, potential changes or updates to the existing regulations in these areas.

    Specifically, the BLM is seeking comments and suggestions that would assist the agency in preparing a proposed rule that gives the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), through the BLM, the flexibility to adjust royalty rates in response to changes in the oil and gas market. Absent near-term enactment of new statutory flexibility for new non-competitively issued leases, a future proposed rule would limit any contemplated royalty rate changes to new competitively issued oil and gas leases on BLM-managed lands, because the royalty rate that is charged on non-competitively issued leases is currently fixed by statute at 12.5 percent. The intent of any anticipated changes to the royalty rate regulations would be to provide the BLM with the necessary tools to ensure that the American people receive a fair return on the oil and gas resources extracted from BLM-managed lands.

    In addition to the royalty rate, the BLM is also seeking input on: (1) How to update its annual rental payment, minimum acceptable bid, and bonding requirements for oil and gas leases, and (2) Whether to remove the caps established by existing regulations on civil penalties that may be assessed under the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act (FOGRMA). With respect to annual rental payments, the intent of any potential increase in annual payments would be to provide a greater financial incentive for oil and gas companies to develop their leases promptly or relinquish them, including for potential re-leasing, as appropriate, by other parties, and to ensure that leases acquired non-competitively provide a fair financial return to the taxpayer. With respect to the minimum acceptable bid, the intent of any potential changes is to ensure that the American taxpayers receive a fair financial return at BLM oil and gas lease sale auctions. With respect to bonding requirements, the intent of any potential bonding updates would be to ensure that bonds required for oil and gas activities on public lands adequately capture costs associated with potential non-compliance with any terms and conditions applicable to a Federal onshore oil and gas lease. The BLM's existing regulations currently set bond minimums that have not been adjusted in 50 years. With respect to penalty assessments, the intent of the potential removal of the regulatory caps would be to ensure that the penalties provide adequate deterrence of unlawful conduct, particularly drilling on Federal onshore leases without authorization and drilling into leased parcels in knowing and willful trespass.

    The anticipated updates to BLM's onshore oil and gas royalty rate regulations and other potential changes to its standard lease fiscal terms address recommendations from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and will help ensure that taxpayers are receiving a fair return from the development of these resources. The anticipated changes to the royalty rate regulations will also support implementation of reform proposals in the Administration's Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 budget.

    DATES:

    The BLM will accept comments and suggestions on this ANPR on or before June 5, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Mail: Director (630) Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C St. NW., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20240, Attention: 1004-AE41.

    Personal or messenger delivery: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 20 M Street SE., Room 2134LM, Attention: Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20003.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at this Web site.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dylan Fuge, Office of the Director, at 202-208-5235, Steven Wells, Division of Fluid Minerals, at 202-912-7143, or Jully McQuilliams, Division of Fluid Minerals, at 202-912-7156, for information regarding the substance of this ANPR. For information on procedural matters or the rulemaking process generally, you may contact Anna Atkinson, Regulatory Affairs, at 202-912-7438. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to contact the above individuals.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of the Interior (Department) oversees and manages much of the nation's Federal mineral resources, including onshore oil and natural gas located on the 245 million surface acres and 700 million subsurface acres managed by the BLM. It is responsible for ensuring that the development of those resources occurs in an environmentally-responsible manner, while also meeting the nation's energy needs. Key components of the Department's management responsibility are ensuring that: (1) The American public receives a fair return from the production of those resources; (2) Issued leases are developed diligently and responsibly; (3) There are adequate financial measures in place to address the risks associated with development; and (4) Appropriate civil penalty provisions are in place to address violations of applicable legal requirements.

    With respect to fair return, the BLM recognizes there is a need to periodically assess the onshore oil and gas fiscal system and review existing regulations and policies related to onshore royalty rates and minimum acceptable bids. With respect to diligent development, the BLM believes it may be appropriate to increase annual rental payments to provide a greater incentive for lessees to develop leases promptly or relinquish them so that they may be re-leased to other parties, as appropriate. With respect to lessees' financial assurance obligations, there may be a need to update existing bonding requirements to ensure that the bonds provide adequate resources to reclaim and restore lands and surface resources affected by leasing activities and development. With respect to civil penalty assessments, there may be a need to ensure that civil penalties adequately deter the unauthorized removal of or trespass on leased Federal oil and gas resources, which unlawfully deprive both the taxpayers and the lessees of the leased resources or their value.

    The purpose of this ANPR is to solicit public comments and suggestions that would be helpful to the BLM in preparing a subsequent proposed rule, as well as to gather input that is needed to update onshore royalty rates, annual rental payments, the minimum acceptable bid, bonding requirements, and caps on civil penalty assessments. The scope of the anticipated proposed rule is likely to include a combination of existing BLM onshore oil and gas regulations and policies, including onshore royalty rates, oil and gas lease rental payments, minimum acceptable bids, and bonding requirements, and civil penalty assessments. See section III of this ANPR for a list of specific questions relating to these topics.

    I. Public Comment Procedures Commenting on the ANPR

    You may submit comments on the ANPR by mail, personal or messenger delivery, or electronic mail.

    Mail: Director (630) Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C St. NW., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20240, Attention: Regulatory Affairs, 1004-AE41.

    Personal or messenger delivery: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 20 M Street SE., Room 2134LM, Attention: Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20003.

    Electronic mail: You may access and comment on the ANPR at the Federal eRulemaking Portal by following the instructions at that site (see ADDRESSES).

    Written comments and suggestions should:

    —Be specific; —Explain the reasoning behind your comments and suggestions; and —Address the issues outlined in the ANPR.

    For comments and suggestions to be the most useful, and most likely to inform decisions on the content of any proposed rule, they should:

    —Be substantive; and —Facilitate the development and implementation of an environmentally and fiscally responsible process for leasing public lands for oil and gas production.

    The BLM is particularly interested in receiving comments and suggestions in response to the questions listed in section III of this ANPR. These specific questions will focus the feedback on matters most in need of public input for the development of the regulations. This public input will assist the BLM in considering and proposing appropriate adjustments to onshore lease royalty rates, annual rental payments, minimum acceptable bids, bonding requirements, and civil penalty or other assessments. All communications on these topics should refer to RIN 1004-AE41 and may be submitted by the methods listed under the ADDRESSES section of this ANPR.

    Comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES section of this ANPR) may not necessarily be considered or included in the Administrative Record for the proposed rule. Likewise, comments delivered to an address other than those listed under the ADDRESSES section of this ANPR may not necessarily be considered or included in the Administrative Record for the proposed rule.

    Reviewing Comments Submitted by Others

    Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the personal or messenger delivery address listed under ADDRESSES during regular business hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. They will also be available at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at this Web site for submitting, accessing, and/or reviewing comments.

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

    II. Background Onshore Royalty Rates

    The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) (MLA), the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands of 1947, as amended (30 U.S.C. 351 et seq.) (MLAAL), and other statutes pertaining to specific categories of land authorize the Secretary to lease Federal oil and gas resources. The MLA and MLAAL prescribe the minimum percentage of royalty reserved to the United States under an onshore oil and gas lease on most Federal lands, as discussed further below. The BLM is responsible for regulating onshore leasing activities for BLM-managed lands and subsurface estate.

    These authorities are implemented by the BLM through regulations at 43 CFR 3100. The BLM utilizes both competitive and non-competitive leasing processes. Pursuant to the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA), which amended the MLA, the BLM must first offer parcels on a competitive basis.1 Leases are issued to the highest qualified bidder as determined by an auction process.2 Parcels that do not receive bids at auction must be made available for leasing on a non-competitive basis to the first qualified applicant for a period of two years after the lease sale at which those parcels were initially offered. These non-competitive leases can be obtained, as explained below, after payment of the first year's rent and an administrative fee (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(A); 43 CFR 3120.6). In aggregate, approximately 40 percent of the BLM-issued leases that are currently in force have been issued non-competitively (GAO-14-50 at 8). In FY 2014, approximately 10 percent of leases were issued non-competitively.

    1 The MLA, as amended by the FOOGLRA, directs the BLM to hold lease sales in each State where eligible lands are available for leasing at least quarterly. 30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(A).

    2 Under the MLA, lease sale auctions were, until recently, required to be conducted by oral bidding. Id. In 2014, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 gave the BLM the authority for the first time to hold Internet auctions. Public Law 113-291, Sec. 3022. The BLM has not yet implemented that authority.

    For all competitively-issued leases, the MLA requires a royalty “at a rate of not less than 12.5 percent in amount or value of the production removed or sold from the lease” (emphasis added) (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(A); 30 U.S.C. 352 (applying that requirement to leases on acquired land)). Although the BLM is authorized under the MLA to specify a royalty rate higher than 12.5 percent for competitive leases, its existing regulations set a flat rate of 12.5 percent for such leases (43 CFR 3103.3-1(a)(1)).3 For non-competitive leases, the royalty rate is fixed at a flat 12.5 percent of the value of the production by statute (30 U.S.C. 226(c) and 30 U.S.C. 352 (acquired lands)).

    3 Before the FOOGLRA, the BLM issued leases with royalty rates at or above 12.5 percent. Leases reinstated after termination due to failure to pay annual rental are subject to a higher royalty rate (43 CFR 3103.3-1(a)(2) and (3)).

    With this ANPR, the BLM seeks comments and suggestions on potential revisions to the royalty rate system that are consistent with the applicable statutory authorities (e.g., the statutory floor of 12.5 percent). Consistent with existing requirements, any potential revisions to royalty rates, like those discussed below, would apply only to new leases obtained competitively; non-competitive leases would remain at the statutorily mandated 12.5 percent. Also, any potential revisions would not apply to leases issued under the Indian Mineral Leasing Act (tribal leases), 25 U.S.C. 396 (allotted leases), or the Indian Mineral Development Act. It should also be noted that any revisions to royalty rates would apply only to leases issued after the effective date of any final rule.

    Revenue generated from developing public energy resources that belong to all Americans helps fund critical investments in communities across the United States and creates American jobs, fosters land and water conservation efforts, improves critical infrastructure, and supports education. For FY 2014, onshore Federal oil and gas leases produced about 148 million barrels of oil, 2.48 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 2.9 billion gallons of natural gas liquids, with a market value of almost $27 billion and generating royalties of almost $3.1 billion. Nearly half of these revenues are distributed to the States in which the leases are located.

    The adequacy of the Department's oil and gas fiscal system has been the subject of many studies by GAO, the Interior Department's Office of the Inspector General (OIG), and other entities. The total government revenues as a share of total lease revenues is the revenue generated from taxes, fees, rental payments, bonus payments, and royalties. This revenue in aggregate is commonly referred to as the “government take.” GAO uses government take figures to compare various oil and gas fiscal systems, such as those used on State-managed lands and in certain foreign countries. The BLM's goal is to design an oil and gas fiscal system that both ensures that the United States' oil and gas resources are developed and managed in an environmentally-responsible way that meets our energy needs, while also ensuring that the American people receive a fair return on those resources (GAO-14-50 at 7).

    In 2007 and 2008, the GAO released two reports focused on the adequacy of the United States' oil and gas fiscal system. The first report,4 which compared oil and gas revenues received by the United States Government with the revenues that foreign governments receive from the development of public oil and gas resources in those countries, concluded that the United States Government receives one of the lowest percentages in government revenue from public oil and gas resource development in the world (GAO-07-676R at 2). The second report,5 which focused on whether the Department received a fair return on the resources it managed, cited the “lack of price flexibility in royalty rates” and “the inability to change fiscal terms on existing leases,” in support of GAO's finding that the United States could be foregoing significant revenue from the production of Federal oil and gas resources (GAO-08-691 at 6). The report also faulted the Department for not having procedures in place to routinely evaluate the ranking of the Federal oil and gas fiscal system, or the industry rates of return on Federal leases versus other resource owners (GAO-08-691 at 6). As a result, GAO recommended that the U.S. Congress direct the Secretary to convene an independent panel to conduct a review of the Federal oil and gas fiscal system and establish procedures to periodically evaluate the system going forward. The U.S. Congress did not take any action on the GAO's recommendation; however, as explained below, the Department, including the BLM, undertook its own review in response to the GAO's findings.

    4 Government Accountability Office (May 2007). Oil and Gas Royalties: A Comparison of the Share of Revenue Received from Oil and Gas Production by the Federal Government and Other Resource Owners (GAO-07-676R).

    5 Government Accountability Office (September 2008). Oil and Gas Royalties: The Federal System for Collecting Oil and Gas Revenues Needs Comprehensive Reassessment, September 2008 (GAO-08-691).

    In an effort to respond to the GAO's findings, the BLM, in coordination with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), contracted for a comparative assessment of oil and gas fiscal systems on selected Department-managed Federal lands, State-managed lands, and in certain foreign countries (IHS CERA Study).6 The Study identified four factors that are amenable to relative comparisons: government take, internal rate of return, profit-investment ratio, and progressivity. The Study also considered measures of revenue risk and fiscal system stability. In net, the IHS CERA Study found that as of the time of its report, the Federal Government's fiscal system and overall government take in aggregate were generally in the mainstream nationally and internationally. However, the report estimated a relatively wide range of government take, even within specific geographic regions, and the Study's authors acknowledged that government take varies with commodity prices, reserve size, reservoir characteristics, resource location and development costs, distance from infrastructure, water depth, and other factors. As a result, the IHS CERA Study's authors tended to favor a sliding-scale royalty system over a fixed-rate royalty due to its relative progressivity and ability to respond to changes in commodity market conditions.

    6 IHS CERA (October 2011). Comparative Assessment of the Federal Oil and Gas Fiscal System. Available at http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/comparative_assessment.html.

    In addition to the IHS CERA Study, the BLM also reviewed a separate study that was conducted by industry, independent of the BLM's efforts (Van Meurs Study (2011)).7 The Van Meurs Study looked at a wide range of jurisdictions and regions across North America and provided a comparison of the oil and gas fiscal systems on Federal, State, and private lands throughout the United States and the provinces in Canada. At the time it was published, the Van Meurs Study suggested that in the United States: (1) Government take was generally lower on Federal lands than the lessor's “take” on State lands or private lands; (2) Government take was higher for gas than for oil; and (3) The internal rate of return on leases was lower for gas than for oil. The Report also made several recommendations to State and Federal Governments in the United States and Canada, such as the application of different fiscal terms to oil leases relative to gas leases based on the prevailing prices of oil and gas at the time the report was published. The continued growth of natural gas production in the United States since the report was published raises questions about its conclusions related to the intersection of specific prices and individual government fiscal terms.

    7 PFC Energy, Van Meurs Corporation, and Rodgers Oil & Gas Consulting (2011). World Rating of Oil and Gas Terms: Volume 1—Rating of North American Terms for Oil and Gas Wells with a Special Report on Shale Plays.

    As reflected by the findings in the reports discussed above, there are challenges and uncertainties involved in comparing the relative government take across regions or among nations. As a result, the BLM is seeking through this ANPR additional points of comparison for evaluating whether or not the BLM could achieve a better return through changes to its royalty rate regulations. One such point of comparison would be an evaluation of royalty rates charged by States on oil and gas activities on State lands. This comparison is important because while the Federal Government is a large player, it is only one of many mineral rights owners in the United States. As a result, the royalty rates charged by other significant mineral rights owners in the United States are relevant to any assessment of the adequacy of the Federal system.

    For purposes of discussion and comparison, the Table below presents information about royalty rates charged by the States for production on State lands. The States listed below were selected because they have significant oil and gas production or there is significant production from Federal onshore oil and gas resources there. The information in the Table is current as of December 2014. It should be noted that these States receive all of the royalty from production on State lands. On Federal lands, under the MLA, before the marginal “net receipts sharing” deduction of 2 percent before distribution, the States receive 50 percent of the royalty from production under most Federal leases located within that State by way of permanent indefinite appropriation (except Alaska where the State's share is 90 percent) (see 30 U.S.C. 191(a)).8 As the table below shows, the royalty rates on production from leases on private or State lands vary, but are generally believed to be between 12.5 percent and 25 percent.

    8 After “net receipts sharing” deductions, the percentage of MLA lease revenues distributed to the states is 88.2 percent in Alaska and 49 percent in all other states. Remaining receipts are deposited in the Reclamation Fund and miscellaneous receipts in the U.S. Treasury.

    9 Texas General Land Office, Oil and Gas Lease Bid Application (Jan. 20, 2015), available at http://www.glo.texas.gov/what-we-do/energy-and-minerals/_documents/sealed-bids/bid01-20-15/web-notice-01-15.pdf.

    10 University Lands, The University of Texas System, Standard Oil and Gas Lease Agreement Form, available at http://www.utlands.utsystem.edu/forms/pdfs/LeaseAgreement45.pdf?201410.

    Summary of State & Private Land Royalty Rates Jurisdiction Royalty rate Comment California (State lands) Negotiated on a lease-by-lease basis, but generally not less than 16.67 percent The California State Lands Commission does not auction parcels. It negotiates lease terms, but it generally cannot issue a lease with a royalty rate below 16.67 percent, by statute. Lease terms are often based on neighboring leases. Colorado (State lands) 16.67 percent Information from the Colorado State Land Board Frequently Asked Questions. Montana (State lands) 16.67 percent Montana statutes (Mont. Code Ann. § 77-3-432) establishes a royalty of no less than 12.5 percent. Montana's rule (Sec. 36.25.210) sets the royalty rate at 16.67 percent, unless the lease sale notice announces a higher rate; the most recent sale, in December 2014, did not specify a higher rate. New Mexico (State lands) 18.75 percent for development leases; 16.67 percent for discovery leases Information from the December 2014 lease sale notice. North Dakota (State lands) 18.75 percent or 16.67 percent depending on the county Leases in Billings, Divide, Dunn, Golden Valley, McKenzie, Mountrail, and Williams counties carry an 18.75 percent royalty rate. Leases in other counties carry a 16.67 percent royalty rate. The statutory minimum royalty rate for oil is 12.5 percent. N.D. Cent. Code 15-05-10. Current Board of University and School Lands rules (§ 85-06-06-05), as amended in 2012, set the higher rates noted above. Texas (State lands) 20 to 25 percent depending on the type of State land being leased By statute (Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann. § 52.022), the School Land Board must set a royalty rate of at least 12.5 percent. The effective royalty rates are specified in the notice for bids. The royalty applies to all subsequent wells drilled on a lease, so long as the first well met the time specifications. The specific rate applied to new leases currently varies between 20 to 25 percent depending on the type of State land the lease is located on, with most categories subject to a 25 percent royalty rate.9 New leases on University Lands are currently subject to 25 percent royalty rate.10 Utah (State lands) 12.5 percent or 16.67 percent By regulation (Utah Admin. Code. R. 652-20-1000), oil and gas leases must have a royalty rate of at least 12.5 percent. The 16.67 percent royalty rate is specified in the October 2014 lease sale notice. Wyoming (State lands) 16.67 percent; 12.5 percent if the parcel was offered in a previous lease sale but did not receive a bid Information from the November 2014 lease sale notice. By statute (Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 36-6-101(c)), royalty rate must not be less than 5 percent of oil and gas produced and saved. Private Lands Generally 12.5 percent to 25 percent Varies by contract.

    In 2013, the GAO issued another report identifying specific actions for the Department to take to ensure that the Federal Government is receiving a fair return on the resources it manages for the American public.11 The GAO acknowledged that actions had been taken in response to its prior recommendations (GAO-14-50 at 11), but remained concerned that the Department has not taken steps to change the onshore royalty rate regulations and had not established procedures for the periodic assessment of the Federal oil and gas fiscal system (GAO-14-50 at 23).

    11 Government Accountability Office (December 2013). Oil and Gas Resources: Actions Needed for the Interior to Better Ensure a Fair Return (GAO-14-50).

    This ANPR directly addresses the GAO's first concern, because through it the BLM is seeking additional information to help it resolve some of the potentially contradictory inferences that can be drawn from the reports described above as it considers potential changes to its onshore royalty rate regulations. The BLM would be particularly interested in information that would help it assess the adequacy of existing rates. With respect to the periodic assessment of the onshore oil and gas fiscal system, the BLM has completed a formal assessment (see IHS CERA Study above) and the Department has taken steps to track market conditions. However, it should be noted that because existing regulations set a fixed royalty rate for new competitive leases, periodic assessments of the fiscal system are of limited utility unless those rules are amended. Because the BLM is considering potential changes that would provide flexibility in setting royalty rates, it poses some questions below on the scope, proper methodologies, and recommended frequency of fiscal system assessments.12

    12 The BLM notes that rulemaking would not be required to establish procedures for the periodic assessment of the onshore oil and gas fiscal system.

    In addition to the statutory requirements, there are several general economic factors that should be considered in assessing potential changes to the current royalty rate. First, it should be noted that there would be positive revenue benefits to the Federal Government from adopting reasonable royalty rate increases.13 In the near term, these benefits may be partially offset by a reduction in the demand for new Federal competitive oil and gas leases. Such demand may decrease to varying degrees depending on the magnitude of an increase in royalty rate and the extent to which operators absorb the added costs. Thus, the BLM is interested in receiving information about how the magnitude of a particular royalty rate change might impact the relative attractiveness of Federal leases compared to State and private leases.

    13 See Draft Reports prepared by Enegis, LLC, for the BLM (Contract No. L10PD03433)—Benefit-Cost and Economic Impact Analysis of Raising the Onshore Royalty Rate Associated with New Federal Oil Leasing (April and July 2011 versions).

    The BLM acknowledges that current oil and gas prices are low, relative to the average price over the past decade; however, recognizing the historic variability of those prices, the BLM would be interested in information on the impacts of any royalty rate change at a range of oil and gas prices. Additionally, the BLM would be interested in information about the interplay between commodity prices and a royalty rate's impact on the relative attractiveness of Federal oil and gas leases.

    It may be argued that potential production decreases resulting from higher royalty rates could result in environmental benefits on Federal lands, such as a reduction in the number of surface acres disturbed by drilling and its associated infrastructure. The BLM would be interested in receiving information related to these potential environmental benefits, particularly studies where those benefits are quantified—e.g., to what extent might such benefits be realized? Or, would they be largely offset by drilling and production shifting to State or private lands?

    The BLM is also seeking input on how changes to the royalty rate might affect the strategies employed by potential lessees for obtaining Federal onshore oil and gas leases. As explained above, a company can either obtain a parcel during a lease sale (resulting in a competitive lease) or purchase those parcels that were not leased at the sale after-the-fact on a first-come, first-serve basis (resulting in a non-competitive lease). Under the first scenario, the operator has to pay a bonus bid and would be subject to any changes to the royalty rate set under amended regulations. For the non-competitive leases, there would be no bonus bid and the royalty rate on the lease is set by statute at a fixed 12.5 percent.14 Thus, there is a possibility that prospective lessees may adjust their behavior in response to royalty rate changes, either by bidding less for competitive leases or by trying to obtain more leases non-competitively. The BLM is interested in information about the extent to which such a shift might occur and, if so, how to mitigate the effects of any shift in bidding behavior. However, the current belief is that the most attractive parcels (i.e., those where discovery and development prospects are strongest) will continue to be sold at auction, as there is an inherent risk to the potential lessee of lost opportunity in wagering that there will be no bids on such parcels. For more marginal parcels, prospective lessees may be more likely to take the risk that they can obtain them non-competitively after an auction; however, as a general matter, marginal parcels are also less likely to be developed.

    14 Parties acquiring a lease non-competitively must also pay an application fee that is indexed for inflation. The fee amount for FY 2015 is $405.

    What the foregoing illustrates from the BLM's perspective is that selecting a royalty rate involves a series of trade-offs that have both positive and negative consequences. The goal is to find the right balance between higher revenue collections, oil and gas production, and the relative attractiveness of leasing on Federal lands. According to the GAO, in the royalty rate context, that means finding a government take that “would strike a balance between encouraging private companies to invest in the development of oil and gas resources on federal lands . . . while maintaining the public's interest in collecting the appropriate level of revenues from the sale of the public's resources” (GAO-08-691 at 2).

    It should also be remembered that oil and gas companies consider a range of factors in deciding where to invest. In addition to government take, they look at the size and availability of the oil and gas resources and the costs associated with extracting those resources (e.g., technological and labor costs) in a given area. They also look at compliance costs, commodity prices, and infrastructure limitations. For example, a company may decide to invest in the United States given its stability, proven resources, and market access, even if government take and certain other costs were higher relative to another country.

    Oil and Gas Lease Annual Rental Payments

    Under the MLA, as amended by FOOGLRA in 1987, prior to the commencement of production of oil or gas in paying quantities, lessees are required to pay annual rent of “not less than $1.50 per acre per year for the first through fifth years of the lease and not less than $2 per acre per year for each year thereafter” (30 U.S.C. 226(d)). Following the commencement of production, this rental requirement converts to a minimum royalty in lieu of rental. The minimum royalty is “not less than the rental which otherwise would be required for that lease year . . .” when production began in paying quantities (Id.; 43 CFR 3103.2-2(c)) (explaining that rental payments are not due on leases for which royalty or minimum royalty is being paid). The BLM's regulations implementing this requirement fix the rental rates for leases issued after December 22, 1987, at “$1.50 per acre or fraction thereof for the first 5 years of the lease term and $2 per acre or fraction thereof for any subsequent year” (43 CFR 3103.2-2(a)).

    The BLM has not increased the rental rates since they were initially set in 1987, even though the MLA only sets a floor for the rates that must be charged by the BLM. The BLM anticipates updating its rental rate requirements and seeks comments on appropriate changes as discussed further below. The BLM would be particularly interested in information about the rental rates charged by States and private landowners for acreage leased, but not yet producing.

    Minimum Acceptable Bid

    In addition to requiring onshore oil and gas leases to first be offered competitively, the MLA, as amended by FOOGLRA, also requires the Secretary to accept “the highest bid from a responsible qualified bidder which is equal to or greater than the national minimum acceptable bid, without evaluation of the value of the lands proposed for lease” (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(A)) (emphasis added). The MLA sets the minimum bid at $2 per acre for a period of two years from December 22, 1987 (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(B)). Notably, the MLA specifically contemplates that the Secretary may, at the conclusion of the two-year period established by the statute, “establish by regulation a higher national minimum acceptable bid for all leases based upon a finding that such action is necessary: (i) To enhance financial returns to the United States; and (ii) to promote more efficient management of oil and gas resources on Federal lands” Id. 15 The Secretary (through the BLM) has not exercised this authority.16

    15 The MLA also requires that “[n]inety days before the Secretary makes any change in the national minimum acceptable bid, the Secretary shall notify the Committee on Natural Resources of the United States House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate.” 30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(B).

    16 If the BLM were to increase the minimum acceptable bid, it would also have to amend the regulations at 43 CFR 3120.5-2, which currently require the winning bidder to pay at the day of sale the minimum acceptable bid of $2 per acre, in addition to the first year's rent, and a processing fee.

    The minimum acceptable bid is important because it establishes the starting bid at the BLM's oil and gas lease sale auctions. Ideally, the starting bid at any auction should be set at a level to ensure a fair financial return for U.S. taxpayers on parcels acquired by third parties competitively. The BLM's experience indicates that most parcels sell for well in excess of the current minimum acceptable bid, which may suggest the current minimum acceptable bid could be higher. Therefore, the BLM is considering amending its regulations to increase the minimum acceptable bid and seeks comments on appropriate changes as discussed further below. The BLM would be particularly interested in information about any minimum bid requirements imposed by States that offer oil and gas leases competitively.

    Additionally, the BLM would also be interested in information about the potential impacts of any increase in the minimum acceptable bid amount. As explained above, the minimum acceptable bid sets the floor at which BLM will accept a bid for a parcel offered at a lease sale auction. If the BLM does not receive bids that are equal to or greater than the minimum bid for a parcel, then it does not lease the parcel at the competitive sale. Parcels that are not leased competitively are available, per the MLA, for lease non-competitively for a period of two years following the auction. Entities leasing such parcels non-competitively are required to pay an administrative fee and the first year's rent, but a minimum acceptable bid or other bonus bid is not required. As a result, the BLM has an interest in ensuring that the minimum acceptable bid is not set so high as to encourage parcels to be leased non-competitively. The BLM would be interested in receiving information about whether or how to adjust the minimum acceptable bid and whether the BLM should consider establishing a different annual rental rate for non-competitively leased parcels to compensate for not receiving a minimum bid when the BLM issues leases non-competitively.

    Oil and Gas Lease Bonding

    The MLA authorizes the Secretary to establish standards “. . . as may be necessary to ensure that an adequate bond, surety, or other financial arrangement will be established prior to the commencement of surface-disturbing activities on any lease, to ensure the complete and timely reclamation of the lease tract, and the restoration of any lands or surface waters adversely affected by lease operations after the abandonment or cessation of oil and gas operations on the lease” (30 U.S.C. 226(g)). Consistent with this statutory direction, the existing regulations at 43 CFR 3104.1 require that, prior to surface disturbing activities related to drilling operations, the lessee, sublessee, or operator submit a surety or personal bond.

    The purpose of the bond is to ensure the “complete and timely plugging of the well(s), reclamation of the lease area(s), and the restoration of any lands or surface waters adversely affected by lease operations after the abandonment or cessation of oil and gas operations” (43 CFR 3104.1(a)). The regulations at 43 CFR 3104.2-3104.4 set forth four different bond types:

    (1) Lease/Individual Bonds, which by regulation only provide coverage for one lease and must be in an amount of not less than $10,000;

    (2) Statewide Bonds, which cover all leases and operations in one State and must be in an amount of not less than $25,000;

    (3) Nationwide Bonds, which cover all leases and operations nationwide and by regulation must be in an amount of not less than $150,000; and

    (4) Unit Operator's Bonds, which may be used in lieu of individual lease, statewide, or nationwide bonds for operations conducted on leases committed to an approved unit agreement. Existing regulations do not set a minimum amount for these types of bonds, but rather specify that the amount will be set by the Authorized Officer. The BLM has not increased the minimum bond amounts provided in the existing regulations since 1960. As a result, those minimums do not reflect inflation and likely do not cover the costs associated with the reclamation and restoration of any individual oil and gas operation. The BLM anticipates updating its bonding requirements and seeks comments on appropriate changes as discussed further below.

    Civil Penalty Assessment

    In a recent report (No. CR-IS-BLM-0004-2014), the Department's OIG expressed concern about the BLM's existing policies and procedures to detect trespass in or drilling without approval on Federal onshore oil and gas leases. Among other things, the OIG expressed concern about the adequacy of the BLM's policies to deter such activities and recommended that the BLM pursue increased monetary fines. In response to these concerns and as explained below, the BLM is seeking input on removing or modifying the caps on civil penalty assessments currently imposed by its existing regulations.

    The civil penalty provisions in section 109 of FOGRMA (30 U.S.C. 1719), provide authority for the BLM to assess civil penalties in connection with certain activities on Federal onshore oil and gas leasing and operations. Section 109(a) and (b) (30 U.S.C. 1719(a) and (b)) provide for assessment of civil penalties of up to $500 per violation per day for failure to comply with FOGRMA, any mineral leasing law, any rule or regulation thereunder, or the terms of any lease. Such penalties accrue only after the issuance of a notice of the violation and failure by the party receiving the notice to correct the violation within 20 days after issuance of the notice. Penalties run from the date of the notice. If corrective action is not taken within 40 days, the maximum daily penalty increases to up to $5,000 per violation per day, dating from the date of the notice. Existing regulations at 43 CFR 3163.2(b) impose a cap on the total civil penalty that can be assessed under sections 109(a) and (b) at a maximum of 60 days, which results in a maximum possible civil penalty assessment of $300,000.

    Section 109(c)(2) of FOGRMA (30 U.S.C. 1719(c)(2)) provides for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation per day (without a requirement for prior notice and opportunity to correct) for failure or refusal to permit lawful entry or inspection. Current BLM regulations at 43 CFR 3163.2(e) cap the total assessment under section 109(c)(2) at a maximum of 20 days, resulting in a maximum penalty of $200,000.

    Finally, section 109(d)(1) and (2) of FOGRMA (30 U.S.C. 1719(d)(1) and (2)), provide for a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per day (again without a requirement for prior notice and opportunity to correct) for knowingly or willfully preparing or submitting false, inaccurate, or misleading reports or information (subsection (d)(1)) or for knowingly or willfully taking, removing, or diverting oil or gas from any lease site without valid legal authority (subsection (d)(2)). Current BLM rules cap this penalty assessment at 20 days, or a maximum of $500,000 (43 CFR 3163.2(f)).

    If a lessee or designated operator of a Federal onshore lease drills a well without an approved application for permit to drill (APD), the lessee or operator is liable for civil penalties under section 109(a) and (b) after notice and failure to timely correct. In such circumstances, the corrective action would be to obtain approval of an APD. The maximum penalty under such circumstances is $300,000. A person who knowingly or willfully drills a well into leased Federal land when that person is not a lessee or operator of the Federal lease is liable for civil penalties under section 109(d)(2), which are subject to a maximum penalty of $500,000. The OIG has questioned whether these penalty levels, which were established in the mid-1980s, provide an adequate deterrence given the current costs for completing a well in places like North Dakota, which the OIG reported as ranging between $8 to $12 million dollars.17 The BLM anticipates updating its civil penalty regulations and seeks comments on appropriate changes as discussed further below.

    17 Trespass actions involving unleased parcels are subject to the regulations at 43 CFR 9239.5-2, which provide as follows:

    For oil trespass in a State where there is no State law governing such trespass, the measure of damages will be as follows:

    (a) Innocent trespass. Value of oil taken, less amount of expense incurred in taking the same.

    (b) Willful trespass. Value of the oil taken without credit or deduction for the expense incurred by the wrongdoers in getting it. Mason v. United States (273 Fed. 135).

    III. Description of Information Requested Onshore Royalty Rates and Periodic Assessments of the Onshore Fiscal System

    The BLM is interested in receiving feedback on the following questions related to potential revisions to the royalty rate regulations governing competitively-issued onshore oil and gas leases:

    1. The various reports and assessments of the Federal oil and gas fiscal system that the BLM has received, prepared, or reviewed, create potentially inconsistent inferences as to the adequacy existing royalty rates. What information should the BLM consider that would help it resolve those inconsistencies?

    2. In evaluating whether or not existing royalty rates are providing a fair return to the public for leased oil and gas resources, what should the BLM consider, and on what factors should the BLM place the most weight?

    a. Given the uncertainties associated with comparing current information on government take among countries and at different commodity prices, should the BLM primarily rely on comparisons to State and private land royalty rates?

    b. To what extent should the BLM factor in the effects on production in assessing the appropriateness of applying a given royalty rate?

    3. Should the BLM consider other factors in determining what royalty level might provide a fair return, such as life cycle costs, externalities, or the social costs associated with the extraction and use of the oil and gas resources? If the BLM should consider such factors, please explain how it should do so. The BLM currently offers all new competitive Federal oil and gas leases at a fixed royalty rate of 12.5 percent. Should the BLM:

    a. Increase the royalty rate on oil and gas production above 12.5 percent to a different fixed royalty rate? If so, what should that rate be? For example, should the rate be increased to 18.75 percent consistent with the rate set for recent offshore lease sales? If not, why not?

    b. Consider a sliding-scale royalty-rate structure based on an established index of oil and gas prices during a given period of time, as suggested by GAO? If so, how many price tiers would be optimal to balance administrative complexity with the opportunity to distinguish between meaningful price swings? What price thresholds would be appropriate for each tier? Should the thresholds be fixed (in real dollar terms), or should they float relative to a published index?

    4. Whether the BLM keeps royalty rates fixed or adopts a sliding-scale rate structure, should it:

    a. Maintain a national or uniform rate or rate schedule for all new competitive leases?

    b. Establish potentially different royalty rates or rate schedules for new leases by region, State, lease sale, formation, resource type (e.g., crude oil, crude oil from tight formations, natural gas, and natural gas from shale formations) or other category? In each case, how should the BLM determine what the royalty rates should be? For instance, if by region, how would the various rates for different regions be determined?

    5. What other royalty rate structures (not listed previously) should the BLM consider?

    6. Instead of amending the regulations to set a new fixed rate or impose an adjustable rate structure as part of a new formal regulation, should the BLM revise its regulations so that the Secretary (through the BLM) has the authority to set the royalty rate terms for new leases outside of a formal rulemaking process?

    a. One option would be to set the rate terms in individual Notice of Lease Sale documents in a manner similar to the existing offshore authorities, but this raises other potential complications (e.g., loss of transparency, greater challenges in revenue tracking and estimation) given the frequency and processes used for BLM lease sales compared to offshore sales. If the terms are set on a lease sale-by-sale basis, what market conditions or factors should be considered in setting the royalty rates for a particular sale? What weight should be given to individual factors?

    b. Is there another approach that should be considered to strike a balance between the competing objectives of flexibility, transparency, and simplicity? Should the BLM (or the Secretary) maintain a set national rate schedule that would be updated periodically on a fixed schedule (e.g., annually) or as circumstances warrant (e.g., when certain price triggers are hit)?

    7. How should the BLM undertake assessments of the oil and gas fiscal system?

    a. What methodologies, information, and resources should it consider as part of such assessments? In responding, please consider whether any factor should be given more weight than another.

    b. How often should such assessments occur? Every year? Every five years? Every 10 years? As necessary based on some trigger? If you recommend a trigger-based approach, please identify the trigger.

    Annual Rental Payments

    The BLM is interested in receiving feedback on the following questions related to potential changes to its annual rental payment requirements:

    1. Should the BLM increase the annual rental payments set forth in 43 CFR subpart 3103? If so, by how much? If not, why are current payment levels sufficient to ensure the diligent development of an oil and gas lease?

    2. If the BLM were to increase annual rental payments, what factors should it consider in proposing an increase?

    a. Should rental payments simply be adjusted to reflect inflation?

    b. Are there other factors the BLM should consider?

    3. If the BLM were to increase the annual rental payments:

    a. How should the BLM implement those changes—e.g., should it consider a phase-in?

    b. Is there another way to have annual rentals escalate over time besides the current category of years 1 through 5 and then a higher rental for years 6-10?

    4. Are there any other changes or refinements that the BLM should consider to its current annual rental payment requirements?

    5. What are the comparable State practices with respect to annual rental payments?

    Minimum Acceptable Bid

    The BLM is interested in receiving feedback on the following questions related to potential changes to its regulations to increase the minimum acceptable bid required for oil and gas leases offered competitively:

    1. Should the BLM increase the current minimum acceptable bid of $2 per acre? If so, by how much?

    2. If the BLM were to increase the minimum bid:

    a. What factors should it consider in proposing an increase? For any factors, please explain how they relate to: (1) Enhancing financial returns to the United States; and (2) promoting more efficient management of oil and gas resources on Federal lands.

    b. What are the potential impacts of any such increase? Does it vary by the magnitude of the increase?

    c. Should the BLM amend its regulations to give the Authorized Officer discretion to adjust the minimum bid based upon market conditions?

    d. Should the BLM raise the rental rates for leases acquired non-competitively to compensate for not receiving even minimum bids for such leases? If so, what would a reasonable rental rate be for non-competitively issued leases?

    3. What are the comparable State practices with respect to minimum bids for leases acquired competitively?

    Bonding

    The BLM is interested in receiving feedback on the following questions related to potential changes to its bonding requirements:

    1. Should the BLM increase the minimum bond amounts set forth in 43 CFR subpart 3104? If so, by how much? If not, why are current bonding levels sufficient?

    2. If the BLM were to increase minimum bonds amounts, what factors should it consider?

    a. Should bond minimums simply be adjusted to reflect inflation?

    b. Should they be adjusted to reflect an estimate of best case, average, or worst case reclamation and restoration costs? In connection with this question, the BLM would be interested in receiving estimates of such reclamation and restoration costs.

    c. Are there other factors the BLM should consider? Are there best practices at the State level that the BLM should consider adopting?

    3. If the BLM were to increase the minimum bond amounts:

    a. Should it provide a way for those amounts to automatically rise, such as if they were to track inflation?

    b. How should it implement those changes—e.g., should it consider a phase-in?

    c. Existing authorities permit the BLM to adjust bond amounts up and down, but no lower than the minimum amount. In light of those authorities, if the BLM were to increase bond minimums, should it consider provisions to allow a party to request, on a case-by-case basis, a decrease in its bond amount to below the minimum if, for example, the BLM were to determine that the potential liabilities on a particular lease are less than the applicable minimum bond amounts? Please identify any standards the BLM should use to determine whether to approve such a request.

    4. Are there any other activities for which the BLM should consider requiring a bond?

    a. In the past the BLM has considered adding a new bond for inactive wells; should the BLM revisit such a proposal?

    b. Similarly should the BLM consider adding a royalty bond to address issues related to unpaid royalties? Adding a royalty bond would mean that funds available under the other, general bonds would not need to be used for anything other than reclamation. Currently, the bonds can address reclamation and royalty issues, among other things.

    c. For any new bond types that you think the BLM should consider, please explain how the bond amounts should be set and what the scope of coverage should be.

    5. Are there any other changes or refinements that the BLM should consider to its current oil and gas bonding, surety and financial arrangement requirements?

    Civil Penalty Assessments

    The BLM is interested in receiving feedback on the following questions related to changes to the current caps on civil penalty assessments:

    1. Should the current regulatory caps on the amount of civil penalties that may be assessed be removed?

    2. If regulatory caps on the maximum amount of civil penalty assessments should remain, at what level should they be set to adequately deter improper action—in particular, drilling without an approved APD or drilling into Federal leases in knowing or willful trespass?

    Non-Penalty Assessments and Trespass

    1. In addition to the caps on civil penalties set forth at 43 CFR 3163.2, should the BLM consider revising any of the assessments set forth in 43 CFR 3163.1? If so, what changes should be made and on what basis?

    2. Should the BLM consider revising its oil trespass regulations set forth at 43 CFR 9239.5-2? If so, what changes should be made and on what basis?

    In addition to the specific information requests identified above, the BLM is also interested in receiving any other comments you may have regarding royalty rates, annual rental payments, minimum acceptable bids, bonding requirements, or the current regulatory caps on civil penalty assessments for BLM-managed oil and gas leases.

    Janice M. Schneider, Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09033 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-84-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 660 [Docket No. 150305219-5219-01] RIN 0648-BE78 Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Species Fisheries AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is proposing to modify the existing Pacific bluefin tuna (PBF) Thunnus orientalis recreational daily bag limit in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off California, and to establish filleting-at-sea requirements for any tuna species in the U.S. EEZ south of Point Conception, Santa Barbara County, under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). This action is intended to conserve PBF, and is based on a recommendation of the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council).

    DATES:

    Comments on the proposed rule must be submitted in writing by May 6, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2015-0029, by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0029, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Craig Heberer, NMFS West Coast Region Long Beach Office, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. Include the identifier “NOAA-NMFS-2015-0029” in the comments.

    Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above methods to ensure they are received, documented, and considered by NMFS. Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    Copies of the draft Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and other supporting documents are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-NMFS-2015-0029, or contact the Regional Administrator, William W. Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Regional Office, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Bldg 1, Seattle, WA. 98115-0070, or [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Craig Heberer, NMFS, 760-431-9440, ext. 303.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On April 7, 2004, NMFS published a final rule (69 FR 18444) to implement the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP) that included annual specification guidelines at 50 CFR 660.709. These guidelines establish a process for the Council to take final action at its regularly-scheduled November meeting on any necessary harvest guideline, quota, or other management measure and recommend any such action to NMFS. At their November 2014, meeting, the Council adopted a recommendation (http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/1114decisions.pdf) to modify the existing daily bag limit regulations at 50 CFR 660.721 for sport caught PBF harvested in the EEZ off the coast of California and to promulgate at-sea fillet regulations applicable south of Santa Barbara as routine management measures for the 2014-2015 biennial management cycle. The Council's recommendation and NMFS' proposed rulemaking are intended to reduce fishing mortality and aid in rebuilding the PBF stock, which is overfished and subject to overfishing (78 FR 41033, July 9, 2013; 80 FR 12621, March 9, 2015) and to satisfy the United States' obligation to reduce catches of PBF by sportfishing vessels in accordance with Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) Resolution C-14-06. (http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Resolutions/C-14-06-Conservation-of-bluefin-2015-2016.pdf).

    Resolution C-14-06 requires that “in 2015, all IATTC Members and Cooperating non-Members (CPCs) must take meaningful measures to reduce catches of PBF by sportfishing vessels operating under their jurisdiction to levels comparable to the levels of reduction applied under this resolution to the EPO commercial fisheries until such time that the stock is rebuilt.” The proposed daily bag limit of two fish per day being considered under this proposed rule would reduce the U.S. recreational harvest of PBF by approximately 30 percent, which is consistent with the IATTC scientific staff's conservation recommendation for a 20-45 percent PBF harvest reduction and meets the requirements of IATTC Resolution C-14-06. The filleting-at-sea measures will assist in the enforcement of the proposed regulations by enabling enforcement personnel to differentiate PBF from other tuna species. This proposed rule is consistent with procedures established at 50 CFR 660.709(a)(4) of the implementing regulations for the HMS FMP.

    The proposed regulations would reduce the existing bag limit of 10 PBF per day to 2 PBF per day and the maximum multiday possession limit (i.e., for trips of 3 days or more) from 30 PBF to 6 PBF. For fishing trips of less than 3 days, the daily bag limit is multiplied by the number of days fishing to determine the multiday possession limit (e.g., the possession limit for a 1-day trip would be two fish and for a 2-day trip, four fish). A day is defined as a 24-hour period from the time of departure. Thus a trip spanning 2 calendar days could count as only 1 day for the purpose of enforcing possession limits.

    Most PBF caught by U.S. anglers are taken in the EEZ of Mexico, both on private vessels and on Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels (CPFV). The bulk of these trips originate from and return to San Diego, CA, ports. During 2004 through 2013, approximately 78 percent of the fishing effort for PBF (measured by angler days) by U.S. West Coast recreational fishing vessels occurred in Mexico's EEZ. Fishing by U.S. recreational vessels in Mexico's EEZ is a permitted activity that is subject to management by the Government of Mexico, which has imposed bag and possession limits.

    The daily bag and multiday possession limits being proposed for the U.S. EEZ off the coast of California might be more or less conservative than Mexico's limits. The proposed U.S. recreational limits would not apply to U.S. anglers while in Mexico's waters, but to facilitate enforcement and monitoring, the limits would apply to U.S. vessels in the U.S. EEZ or landing to U.S. ports, regardless of where the fish were harvested.

    The proposed regulations would also establish requirements for filleting tuna at-sea (e.g., each fish must be cut into six pieces placed in an individual bag so that certain diagnostic characteristics are left intact), which will assist law enforcement personnel in accurately identifying different species given morphometric and phenotypic similarities between tuna species, specifically, yellowfin (Thunnus albacares) and PBF. These requirements would apply to any tuna species caught south of Santa Barbara (i.e., south of a line running west true from Point Conception, Santa Barbara County (34°27′ N. lat.)) In addition to enhancing enforcement, the proposed fillet measures would also assist port samplers and fishery biologists conducting fishery surveys in accurately identifying tuna species.

    The State of California has informed NMFS that it intends to implement companion regulations to the Federal regulations being proposed here by imposing daily PBF bag limits applicable to recreational angling and possession of fish in state waters (0-3 nm). Currently, California State regulations allow, by special permit, the retention of up to three daily bag limits for a trip occurring over multiple, consecutive days. California State regulations also allow for two or more persons angling for finfish aboard a vessel in ocean waters off California to continue fishing until boat limits are reached. NMFS and the Council consider these additional state restrictions to be consistent with Federal regulations implementing the HMS FMP, including this proposed rule if implemented. The proposed fillet requirements differ from current State of California requirements, which allow tuna filleting as long as a 1-inch square patch of skin is left on the fillet.

    Several comments received during public scoping for this action called for an exception to the fillet requirements for skipjack tuna, Katsuwonus pelamis. The Council recommendation to NMFS did not provide an exception for skipjack tuna. However, the California Fish and Game Commission is considering a possible exception, such that skipjack tuna taken from and possessed aboard a vessel south of Point Conception (Santa Barbara County) may be processed by removing the entire fillet on each side and shall bear the entire skin attached. Skipjack tuna possess distinct horizontal bands on their belly that remain visible and distinct allowing for accurate identification, even after the fish or fillet has been frozen. NMFS is seeking further guidance from the public on the issue of a possible exception to the proposed fillet requirements for skipjack tuna.

    The proposed rule would apply only to recreational fisheries in Federal waters off California. Although PBF are occasionally caught and retained in Oregon and Washington, the catches are negligible. Therefore, the benefits expected from monitoring and regulating PBF catch in waters off those states does not justify the administrative or regulatory burden of doing so.

    Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the MSA, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the HMS FMP, other provisions of the Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    The Council prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for this action that discusses the impact on the environment as a result of this proposed rule. None of the bag and possession limit alternatives analyzed in the EA are expected to jeopardize the sustainability of the PBF. However, the preferred alternative, which reflects the action proposed in this rule, is likely to have negative economic impacts on the affected fishing communities. The alternatives, including the preferred alternative, for tuna filleting procedures are not expected to result in significant socioeconomic impacts.

    Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if implemented, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for this determination under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) is as follows:

    The proposed regulations would reduce the existing bag limit of 10 PBF per day to 2 PBF per day and the maximum multiday possession limit (i.e., for trips of 3 days or more) from 30 PBF to 6 PBF. For fishing trips of less than 3 days, the daily bag limit is multiplied by the number of days fishing to determine the multiday possession limit (e.g., the possession limit for a 1-day trip would be two fish and for a 2-day trip, four fish). These limits will apply to recreational anglers in U.S. waters off the West Coast or any other ocean waters that return to U.S. waters and/or ports. This rule also proposes that tunas caught by recreational anglers to be filleted according to specified configurations for bag limit monitoring and enforcement purposes.

    This proposed rule, if implemented, would not be expected to directly affect any small entities. This proposed rule would change the PBF recreational bag limit and the filleting requirements for caught tuna, which affects only individual recreational anglers. Recreational anglers, by definition, may not sell catch, and thus are not considered to be a business. Because recreational anglers are not considered to be a small entity under the RFA, the economic effects of this proposed rule on these anglers are outside the scope of the RFA. Although the for-hire sector of the sport fishery may experience indirect economic impacts due to the imposition of reduced daily bag and possession limits, those impacts are not required elements of the RFA analysis for this action.

    Because this proposed rule, if implemented, would not be expected to have a significant direct adverse economic effect on a substantial number of small entities, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no new collection-of-information requirements associated with this action that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, existing collection-of-information requirements associated with the U.S. West Coast Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan still apply. These existing requirements have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0648-0204.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 660—FISHERIES OFF THE WEST COAST STATES 1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.

    2. In § 660.721, revise the section heading, introductory text, paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (b), and add paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 660.721 Recreational fishing bag limits and filleting requirements.

    This section applies to recreational fishing for albacore tuna in the U.S. EEZ off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington and for bluefin tuna in the U.S. EEZ off the coast of California. In addition to individual fishermen, the operator of a U.S. sportsfishing vessel that fishes for albacore or bluefin tuna is responsible for ensuring that the bag and possession limits of this section are not exceeded. The bag limits of this section apply on the basis of each 24-hour period at sea, regardless of the number of trips per day. The provisions of this section do not authorize any person to take and retain more than one daily bag limit of fish during 1 calendar day. Federal recreational HMS regulations are not intended to supersede any more restrictive state recreational HMS regulations relating to federally-managed HMS.

    (a) Albacore Tuna Daily Bag Limit. Except pursuant to a multi-day possession permit referenced in paragraph (c) of this section, a recreational fisherman may take and retain, or possess onboard no more than:

    (b) Bluefin Tuna Daily Bag Limit. A recreational fisherman may take and retain, or possess on board no more than two bluefin tuna during any part of a fishing trip that occurs in the U.S. EEZ off California south of a line running due west true from the California-Oregon border [42°00′ N. latitude].

    (e) Restrictions on Filleting of Tuna South of Point Conception. South of a line running due west true from Point Conception, Santa Barbara County (34°27′ N. latitude) to the U.S.-Mexico border, any tuna that has been filleted must be individually bagged as follows:

    (1) The bag must be marked with the species' common name, and

    (2) the fish must be cut into the following six pieces with all skin attached: the four loins, the collar removed as one piece with both pectoral fins attached and intact, and the belly cut to include the vent and with both pelvic fins attached and intact.

    [FR Doc. 2015-09093 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 665 [Docket No. 140113035-5354-01] RIN 0648-XD082 Pacific Island Fisheries; 2014-15 Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures; Main Hawaiian Islands Deep 7 Bottomfish AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed specifications; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS proposes to specify an annual catch limit (ACL) of 346,000 lb for Deep 7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) for the 2014-15 fishing year. If the ACL is projected to be reached, NMFS would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish for the remainder of the fishing year. The proposed specifications and fishery closure support the long-term sustainability of Hawaii bottomfish.

    DATES:

    NMFS must receive comments by May 6, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2013-0174, by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2013-0174, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Send written comments to Michael D. Tosatto, Regional Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd. Bldg. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818.

    Instructions: NMFS may not consider comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jarad Makaiau, NMFS PIR Sustainable Fisheries, 808-725-5176.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The bottomfish fishery in Federal waters around Hawaii is managed under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the Hawaiian Archipelago (Hawaii FEP), developed by the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The regulations at Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 665 (50 CFR 665.4) require NMFS to specify an ACL for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish each fishing year, based on a recommendation from the Council. The Deep 7 bottomfish are onaga (Etelis coruscans), ehu (E. carbunculus), gindai (Pristipomoides zonatus), kalekale (P. sieboldii), opakapaka (P. filamentosus), lehi (Aphareus rutilans), and hapuupuu (Epinephelus quernus).

    NMFS proposes to specify an ACL of 346,000 lb of Deep 7 bottomfish in the MHI for the 2014-15 fishing year. The Council recommended the ACL at its 160th and 161st meetings held in June and October 2014, respectively. The proposed specification is identical to the ACL that NMFS specified for the past three consecutive fishing years (i.e., 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14). NMFS monitors Deep 7 bottomfish catches based on data provided by commercial fishermen to the State of Hawaii. If NMFS projects the fishery will reach this limit, NMFS would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish for the remainder of the fishing year, as an accountability measure (AM). In addition, if NMFS and the Council determine that the final 2014-15 Deep 7 bottomfish catch exceeds the ACL, NMFS would reduce the Deep 7 bottomfish ACL for the 2015-16 fishing year by the amount of the overage. The fishery did not attain the specified ACL in 2011-12, 2012-13, or 2013-14, and NMFS does not anticipate the fishery will attain the limit in the current fishing year, which began on September 1, 2014, and ends on August 31, 2015.

    The Council recommended the ACL and AMs based on a 2011 NMFS bottomfish stock assessment, and in consideration of the risk of overfishing, past fishery performance, the acceptable biological catch (ABC) recommendation from its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), and input from the public. The 2011 NMFS bottomfish stock assessment estimates the overfishing limit (OFL) for the MHI Deep 7 bottomfish stock complex to be 383,000 lb. The proposed ACL of 346,000 lb is equal to the SSC's ABC recommendation, and is associated with a 41 percent probability of overfishing. This risk level is more conservative than the 50 percent risk threshold allowed under NMFS guidelines for National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

    The Council also considered the results of a NMFS draft 2014 stock assessment update that used the previous 2011 stock assessment's methods for data analysis, modeling, and stock projections, with one improvement—it included the State of Hawaii's commercial marine license (CML) data as a variable to standardize catch-per-unit of effort (CPUE) from 1994 to 2013. The State began issuing CMLs uniquely and consistently to individuals through time starting in 1994. Therefore, beginning in 1994 the CML number assigned to an individual has remained the same, allowing NMFS to improve CPUE standardization from that year onward. However, the Council did not base its ACL recommendation on the 2014 assessment update because the Council had a number of questions and concerns regarding the application of the new CPUE standardization methods. The Council also recommended the 2014 assessment be independently reviewed.

    In December 2014, PIFSC contracted the Center for Independent Experts (CIE) to review a final draft of the 2014 stock assessment update. The CIE panel found that including individual CML data as a variable to standardize CPUE over time was an improvement over the method used in the 2011 stock assessment. However, the CIE panel had strong reservations regarding the quality of input catch data and CPUE index of abundance used in both the 2011 and 2014 stock assessments. Specifically, the panel raised concern about the pre-1990 data for CPUE calculation and estimates of unreported catch.

    Given the concerns with the incomplete effort information, the CIE panel concluded that the 2014 stock assessment had serious flaws that compromised its utility for management. In particular, the CIE panel noted that because the 2014 stock assessment was an update only, and required improvements in the index and the population model, the science reviewed in the 2014 stock assessment is not considered the best available. The reports of the CIE reviewers are available on NMFS Web site at http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/science-quality-assurance/cie-peer-reviews/cie-review-2015.

    In March 2015, the NMFS Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) outlined the reasons why the fisheries data in the 2014 assessment produced results that the CIE panel advised were not ready for management application, and identified two ways in which the fisheries data can be improved for future application in the new CPUE standardization method, as follows:

    1. Although catch per day fished is the best available CPUE that is available continuously over the whole time series (1949-2013), it may not be the best available over the most recent time series (1994-2013). If the time series is to be split with CPUE issues addressed differently before and after the split, one could also analyze and include detailed effort data that has been collected only for the last dozen years. These data could strongly influence recent trends. Because it is a complex undertaking, PIFSC did not see this as work that could be done as a simple update in 2014.

    The use of CPUE defined as catch per day fished is subject to great criticism, and one way to address this is by using details about hours and numbers of lines and/or hooks used by fishermen over the last dozen years. Only inexplicit, undescribed differences among fishermen linked through time were applied to the recent stanza (1993-2013) in the 2014 CPUE standardization. Using the recent effort detail would still allow differences between individual fishermen to be standardized, and also allow changes in effort details through time, to be addressed. Both were factors of great concern to the reviewers. Differences among areas and seasons and other such factors that can be applied throughout the whole time series have remained part of the CPUE standardization in both 2011 and 2014.

    2. Further efforts could be made to apply the CPUE standardization to account for differences among fishermen to more data using various exploratory methods and other data sets. The 2014 assessment overlooked a compilation of confidential non-electronic records held by the State of Hawaii that may help to link fishermen identities back through an earlier stanza of time.

    Although the CIE panel noted the improvement in catch rate standardization in the 2014 stock assessment compared to 2011, it had strong reservations regarding the input catch data in both stock assessments. However, because it is a complex undertaking, PIFSC cannot improve the assessment for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish in the ways described above for the current fishing year.

    PIFSC believes that a simpler update of the 2011 assessment using data from the three most recent years available (i.e., 2011-2013) provides the best scientific information available for management. However, this information was not available at the June and October 2014 SSC and Council meetings when these bodies provided their respective ABC and ACL recommendations to NMFS for the ongoing fishing year. Moreover, because the 118th SSC and the 162nd Council were scheduled to meet starting on March 10 and March 16, 2015, respectively, there was insufficient time to publish a notice in the Federal Register revising the meeting agendas to include an action item to revisit the SSC and Council's 2014-15 ABC/ACL recommendation of 346,000 lb.

    While NMFS will add this topic as an action item to be discussed at the June 2015 SSC and Council meetings, it is unlikely NMFS could implement a revised ABC/ACL recommendation for the 2014-15 fishing year, as the season will end on August 31, 2015. The National Standard 2 Guidelines, 50 CFR 600.315(a)(6)(v), recognize that data collection is a continuous process, and that new information that cannot be considered in decision-making may be reserved for use in subsequent updates. For these reasons, NMFS proposes to implement the recommended ACL of 346,000 lb for the 2014-15 fishing year. NMFS will request the SSC and Council to consider in June 2015 the new information when recommending an ABC and ACL for the 2015-16 fishing year, which begins on September 1, 2015.

    NMFS does not expect the proposed ACL and AM specifications for 2014-15 to result in a change in fishing operations or other changes to the conduct of the fishery that would result in significant environmental impacts. After considering public comments on the proposed ACL and AMs, NMFS will publish the final specifications.

    To be considered, NMFS must receive any comments on these proposed specifications by May 6, 2015, not postmarked or otherwise transmitted by that date.

    Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries has determined that this proposed specification is consistent with the Hawaii FEP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    This action is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Certification of Finding of No Significant Impact on Substantial Number of Small Entities

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that these proposed specifications, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for it are contained in the preamble to these proposed specifications.

    NMFS proposes to specify an annual catch limit (ACL) of 346,000 lb for Main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) Deep 7 bottomfish for the 2014-15 fishing year, as recommended by the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council). NMFS monitors MHI Deep 7 bottomfish catches based on data provided by commercial fishermen to the State of Hawaii. If NMFS projects the fishery to reach this limit, NMFS, as an accountability measure (AM), would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish for the remainder of the fishing year. The proposed ACL and AM specifications are identical to those that NMFS implemented for the past three consecutive fishing years, (i.e., 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14). The fishery did not reach the ACL in any of those past three fishing years, and NMFS does not expect the fishery to reach the ACL in the 2014-15 fishing year, which began on September 1, 2014 and will end on August 31, 2015.

    This rule would impact vessels in the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish. In the previous fishing year (2013-14), 419 fishermen reported landing 309,485 lb of Deep 7 bottomfish. On June 12, 2014, the Small Business Administration issued an interim final rule revising small business size standards (79 FR 33647). The rule increased the size standard for Finfish Fishing to $20.5 million. Based on available information, NMFS has determined that all vessels in the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish are small entities under the Small Business Administration's definition of a small entity. That is, they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, independently owned or operated, not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $20.5 million, the small business size standard for finfish fishing. Therefore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities. Furthermore, there are would be no disproportionate economic impacts among the universe of vessels based on gear, home port, or vessel length.

    As for the revenues earned by Deep 7 bottomfish fishermen, State of Hawaii records report 343 of the 419 fishermen sold their Deep 7 bottomfish catch. These 343 individuals sold a combined total of 269,571 lb (87% of reported catch) at a value of $1,798,713. Based on these revenues, the average price for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish in 2013-14 was approximately $6.67/lb. NMFS assumes that the remaining 76 commercial fishermen either sold no fish or the State of Hawaii reporting program did not capture their sales.

    Assuming the fishery attains the ACL of 346,000 in 2014-15, using the 2013-14 average price of $6.67, the potential fleet wide revenue during 2014-15 is expected to be $2,307,820 ($2,007,803 under the assumption that 87% of catch is sold). If the same number of fishermen sell MHI Deep 7 bottomfish in 2014-15 as in 2013-14, each of these 343 commercial fishermen could potentially sell an average of 1,008.8 lb (878.6 lb if 87% of potential catch is sold) of MHI Deep 7 bottomfish valued at $6,728.34 ($5,860.33 if 87% of potential catch is sold) per individual.

    In general, the relative importance of MHI bottomfish to commercial participants as a percentage of overall fishing or household income is unknown, as the total suite of fishing and other income-generating activities by individual operations across the year has not been examined.

    In terms of scenarios immediately beyond the 2014-15 fishing year, three possible outcomes may occur. First, if fishery does not reach the ACL in 2014-15, the ACL could remain the same for the 2015-16 fishing year. Second, if the fishery exceeds the ACL for the 2014-15 fishing year, NMFS would reduce the Deep 7 bottomfish ACL for the 2015-16 fishing year by the amount of the overage. The last possible scenario is one where NMFS would prepare a new stock assessment or update that NMFS and the Council would use to set a new 2015-2016 ACL (without inclusion of any overage, even if catch exceeds ACL for the 2014-15 fishing year).

    Even though this proposed specification would apply to a substantial number of vessels, i.e., 100 percent of the bottomfish fleet, NMFS does not expect the rule will have a significantly adverse economic impact to individual vessels. Landings information from the 2013-14 fishing year, and from the catch to date in the 2014-15 fishing year, suggest that Deep 7 bottomfish landings are not likely to exceed the ACL proposed for 2014-15.

    Therefore, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, this proposed action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09055 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    80 76 Tuesday, April 21, 2015 Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE U.S. Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Management and Organizational Practices Survey AGENCY:

    U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the email at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Julius Smith, Jr., U.S. Census Bureau, Economy-Wide Statistics Division, Room 7K055, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233, (301) 763-7662 (or via the email at [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The Census Bureau plans to conduct the Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS) for survey year 2015 with subsequent data collection activities for this survey pending funding. The MOPS will utilize the Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM) mail-out sample and will collect information on management and organizational practices at the establishment level. The Census Bureau has conducted the ASM since 1949 to provide key measures of manufacturing activity during intercensal periods. In census years ending in “2” and “7”, we mail and collect the ASM as part of the Economic Census covering the Manufacturing Sector. The ASM is an integral part of the Government's statistical program, furnishing up-to-date estimates of employment and payroll, hours and wages of production workers, value added by manufacture, cost of materials, value of shipments by product class, inventories, and expenditures for both plant and equipment and structures. The data obtained from the MOPS will allow us to estimate a firm's stock of management and organizational assets, specifically the use of decentralized decision rights and establishment performance data such as production targets in decision-making. These data will provide information on investments in management and organizational practices, which will lead to a better understanding of the benefits from these investments when measured in terms of firm productivity or firm market value. This survey on management and organizational practices will provide information on the dimensions of organizational capital for this sector not currently available elsewhere. This clearance request will be for the survey year 2015. Policy makers, such as the Federal Reserve Board and World Bank will use the MOPS to understand the levels and evolution of management practices over time and to forecast future productivity growth.

    II. Method of Collection

    The 2015 MOPS will be mailed separately from the 2015 ASM and will utilize mail-out/mail-back survey forms. Respondents will have the option of responding electronically through the Census Bureau's Centurion online reporting system. The sample for the 2015 MOPS will consist of the approximately 50,000 establishments in the 2015 ASM mail-out sample. The mail-out sample for the ASM is redesigned at 5-year intervals beginning the second survey year after the Economic Census. For the 2014 ASM, a new probability sample was selected from a frame of approximately 101,000 manufacturing establishments in the 2012 Economic Census that have paid employees, are located in the United States, and are associated with multi-location companies or large single-establishment companies. On an annual basis, the mail-out sample is supplemented with large, newly active single-establishment companies identified from a list provided by the Internal Revenue Service and new manufacturing establishments of multi-location companies identified from the Census Bureau's Company Organization Survey.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0963.

    Form Number(s): MP-10002.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Business or Other for Profit, Non-profit Institutions, Small Businesses or Organizations, and State or Local Governments.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 50,000.

    Estimated Time per Response: 30 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 25,000.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, sections 131, 182, 224, and 225.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Glenna Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09234 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Current Population Survey (CPS) School Enrollment Supplement AGENCY:

    U.S. Census Bureau. Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Karen Woods, U.S. Census Bureau, DSD/CPS HQ-7H110F, Washington, DC 20233-8400, (301) 763-3806.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The Census Bureau plans to request clearance for the collection of data concerning the School Enrollment Supplement to be conducted in conjunction with the October 2015 CPS. Title 13, United States Code, Sections 141 and 182, and Title 29, United States Code, Sections 1-9, authorize the collection of the CPS information. The Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) sponsor the basic annual school enrollment questions, which have been collected annually in the CPS for 50 years.

    This survey provides information on public/private elementary school, secondary school, and college enrollment, and on characteristics of private school students and their families, which is used for tracking historical trends, policy planning, and support.

    This survey is the only source of national data on the age distribution and family characteristics of college students and the only source of demographic data on preprimary school enrollment. As part of the federal government's efforts to collect data and provide timely information to local governments for policymaking decisions, the survey provides national trends in enrollment and progress in school.

    II. Method of Collection

    The school enrollment information will be collected by both personal visit and telephone interviews in conjunction with the regular October CPS interviewing. All interviews are conducted using computer-assisted interviewing.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0464.

    Form Number: There are no forms. We conduct all interviews on computers.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 59,000.

    Estimated Time per Response: 3.0 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,950.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    Respondents Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority:

    Title 13 U.S.C. Sections 141 and 182, and Title 29, U.S.C., Sections 1-9.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Glenna Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09071 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Licensing Responsibilities and Enforcement AGENCY:

    Bureau of Industry and Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Mark Crace, BIS ICB Liaison, (202) 482-8093, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    This information collection supports the various collections, notifications, reports, and information exchanges that are needed by the Office of Export Enforcement and Customs to enforce the Export Administration Regulations and maintain the National Security of the United States.

    II. Method of Collection

    Submitted electronically or on paper.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0694-0122.

    Form Number(s): N/A.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,821,891.

    Estimated Time per Response: 5 seconds to 2 hours per response.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 78,576 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09095 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-979] Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Rescission of 2013—2014 Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is conducting a new shipper review (“NSR”) of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules (solar cells), from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). The NSR covers one exporter and producer of subject merchandise, Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd. (“DMEGC”). The period of review (“POR”) is December 1, 2013, through May 31, 2014. The Department preliminarily determines that DMEGC's sale to the United States was not bona fide; therefore, we are preliminarily rescinding this NSR. Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results of this review.

    DATES:

    Effective: April 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeffrey Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2769.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On July 28, 2014, the Department published a notice of initiation of a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from the PRC.1 The Department subsequently issued an antidumping duty questionnaire, and supplemental questionnaires, to DMEGC and received timely responses thereto. Also, interested parties submitted comments on surrogate country and surrogate value selection. The Department extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results of this review until April 7, 2015.2

    1See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review, 79 FR 43710 (July 28, 2014).

    2See the memoranda to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from Jeff Pedersen, International Trade Analyst, Office IV, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, entitled, “Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review” dated January 13, 2015 and February 11, 2015 and the memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from Valerie Ellis, International Trade Analyst, Office IV, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, entitled, “Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review” dated March 16, 2015.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order is crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates, and panels, consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including, but not limited to, modules, laminates, panels and building integrated materials.3 Merchandise covered by this review is classifiable under subheadings 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.80, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030, and 8501.31.8000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    3 For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entititled “Preliminary Rescission of the 2013-2014 Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People's Republic of China” issued concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”) and 19 CFR 351.214. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Preliminary Rescission of the Antidumping New Shipper Review of DMEGC

    As discussed in the Bona Fide Sales Analysis Memorandum,4 the Department preliminarily finds that the sale made by DMEGC to the United States is not a bona fide sale. The Department reached this conclusion based on the totality of circumstances surrounding the reported sale, including, among other things, the price and quantity of the sale and DMEGC's failure to provide evidence that the subject merchandise was resold at a profit. Because the non-bona fide sale was the only reported sale of subject merchandise during the POR, and thus there are no reviewable transactions on this record, we are preliminarily rescinding the instant administrative review. See 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3). Because much of the factual information used in our analysis of DMEGC's sale involves business proprietary information, a full discussion of the basis for our preliminary determination is set forth in the Memorandum to Howard Smith, Acting Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, “Preliminary Bona Fide Sales Analysis for Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd.,” dated April 7, 2015, which is on the record of this proceeding.

    4See Memorandum from Jeffrey Pedersen, International Trade Analyst, Office IV AD/CVD Operations, to Howard Smith, Acting Director, Office IV, AD/CVD Operations entitled “2013-2014 Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Bona Fide Sales Analysis for Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd.” dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (“Bona Fide Sales Analysis Memorandum”).

    Public Comment

    Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results of review.5 Rebuttals to case briefs may be filed no later than five days after the briefs are filed. All rebuttal comments must be limited to comments raised in the case briefs.6

    5See 19 CFR 351.309(c).

    6See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.7 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral argument presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a date and time to be determined.8 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    7See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    8See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (“ET”) on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.9

    9See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this NSR, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any briefs received, no later than 90 days after the date these preliminary results of review are issued pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”).

    Assessment Rates

    If the Department proceeds to a final rescission of DMEGC's NSR, the assessment rate to which DMEGC's shipments will be subject will not be affected by this review. However, the Department initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from the PRC covering numerous exporters, including DMEGC, and the period December 1, 2013 through November 30, 2014, which encompasses the POR of this NSR.10 Thus, if the Department proceeds to a final rescission, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend entries during the period December 1, 2013 through November 30, 2014 of subject merchandise exported by DMEGC until CBP receives instructions relating to the administrative review of this order covering the period December 1, 2013 through November 30, 2014.

    10See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 6041, 6042 (February 4, 2015).

    If the Department does not proceed to a final rescission of this new shipper review, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer-specific (or customer) assessment rates based on the final results of this review. However, pursuant to the Department's refinement to its assessment practice in NME cases, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales database submitted by DMEGC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide rate.11

    11 For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    Effective upon publication of the final rescission or the final results of this NSR, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(e), the Department will instruct CBP to discontinue the option of posting a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for entries of subject merchandise by DMEGC. If the Department proceeds to a final rescission of this new shipper review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the PRC-wide rate for DMEGC because the Department will not have determined an individual margin of dumping for DMEGC. If the Department issues final results for this new shipper review, the Department will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits, effective upon the publication of the final results, at the rates established therein.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 7, 2015. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Scope 2. Bona Fide Sales Analysis
    [FR Doc. 2015-09206 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-916] Laminated Woven Sacks From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On January 28, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) published the Preliminary Results1 of the 2013-2014 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on laminated woven sacks (“sacks”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). The period of review (“POR”) is August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results, but we received none. The final dumping margin for the PRC-wide entity is listed in the “Final Results of Review” section below.

    1See Laminated Woven Sacks from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 4537 (January 28, 2015) (“Preliminary Results”) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    DATES:

    April 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Irene Gorelik, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6905.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    We received no comments from interested parties on our Preliminary Results dated January 28, 2015. The Department conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the Order2 is laminated woven sacks. Laminated woven sacks are bags or sacks consisting of one or more plies of fabric consisting of woven polypropylene strip and/or woven polyethylene strip, regardless of the width of the strip; with or without an extrusion coating of polypropylene and/or polyethylene on one or both sides of the fabric; laminated by any method either to an exterior ply of plastic film such as biaxially-oriented polypropylene (“BOPP”) or to an exterior ply of paper that is suitable for high quality print graphics; 3 printed with three colors or more in register; with or without lining; whether or not closed on one end; whether or not in roll form (including sheets, lay-flat tubing, and sleeves); with or without handles; with or without special closing features; not exceeding one kilogram in weight. Laminated woven sacks are typically used for retail packaging of consumer goods such as pet foods and bird seed.

    2See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Laminated Woven Sacks from the People's Republic of China, 73 FR 45941 (August 7, 2008) (“Order”).

    3 “Paper suitable for high quality print graphics,” as used herein, means paper having an ISO brightness of 82 or higher and a Sheffield Smoothness of 250 or less. Coated free sheet is an example of a paper suitable for high quality print graphics.

    Effective July 1, 2007, laminated woven sacks are classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) subheadings 6305.33.0050 and 6305.33.0080. Laminated woven sacks were previously classifiable under HTSUS subheading 6305.33.0020. If entered with plastic coating on both sides of the fabric consisting of woven polypropylene strip and/or woven polyethylene strip, laminated woven sacks may be classifiable under HTSUS subheadings 3923.21.0080, 3923.21.0095, and 3923.29.0000. If entered not closed on one end or in roll form (including sheets, lay-flat tubing, and sleeves), laminated woven sacks may be classifiable under other HTSUS subheadings including 3917.39.0050, 3921.90.1100, 3921.90.1500, and 5903.90.2500. If the polypropylene strips and/or polyethylene strips making up the fabric measure more than 5 millimeters in width, laminated woven sacks may be classifiable under other HTSUS subheadings including 4601.99.0500, 4601.99.9000, and 4602.90.0000.4 Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    4 At the request of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), the Department added the USHTS subheading 6305.33.0040 to the ACE CRF for the antidumping duty order. See “Memorandum to the File, from Irene Gorelik, Analyst, re: Addition of U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (“USHTS”) Numbers to the Automated Commercial Enterprise (“ACE”) Case Reference File (“CRF”),” dated September 24, 2014.

    Preliminary Results

    Upon initiation 5 of the administrative review, we provided all companies 6 initiated for review the opportunity to submit either a “no shipment” certification or the separate rate application or certification. None of the nine companies initiated for review submitted “no shipment” certifications. Furthermore, none of the nine companies under review submitted separate rate eligibility documentation. As a result, we preliminarily found that these nine companies are part of the PRC-wide entity.7 The rate previously established for the PRC-wide entity in this proceeding is 47.64 percent.8

    5See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation, in Part, 79 FR 58729 (September 30, 2014) (“Initiation Notice”).

    6 The nine companies are: Changle Baodu Plastic Co., Ltd., Shangdong Qikai Plastics Product Co., Ltd., Wenzhou Hotsun Plastics Co., Ltd., Zibo Aifudi Plastic Packaging Co., Ltd., Zibo Linzi Luitong Plastic Fabric Co., Ltd., Zibo Linzi Shuaiqiang Plastics Co., Ltd., Zibo Linzi Qitianli Plastic Fabric Co., Ltd., Zibo Linzi Worun Packing Product Co., Ltd., and Zibo Qigao Plastic Cement Co., Ltd.

    7See Preliminary Results, 80 FR 4537-4538 and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Pursuant to the Department's change in practice, the Department no longer considers the non-market economy entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 2013). Under this practice, the non-market economy entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or the Department self-initiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the entity, the entity is not under review and the entity's rate is not subject to change.

    8See Implementation of Determinations under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires; Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe; Laminated Woven Sacks; and Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China, 77 FR 52683, 52688 (August 30, 2012).

    Final Results of Review

    The Department did not receive any comments from interested parties after issuing the Preliminary Results. Thus, because nothing has changed since the Preliminary Results with respect to the above-noted nine companies initiated for review, we continue to find them to be part of the PRC-wide entity, to which we are assigning the previously established rate of 47.64 percent for the period August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014.

    Assessment

    The Department determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review. For those companies subject to this review found to be part of the PRC-wide entity, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise at the PRC-wide rate of 47.67 percent.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not noted above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (2) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 47.64 percent; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporters that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notifications

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

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

    We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09229 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; NOAA Satellite Ground Station Customer Questionnaire AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Kay Metcalf, 301-817-4558 or [email protected]; Scott Rogerson, 301-817-4543 or [email protected]; or Paul Seymour, 301-817-4521 or [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for an extension of a currently approved information collection. NOAA asks people who operate ground receiving stations that receive data from NOAA satellites to complete a questionnaire about the types of data received, its use, the equipment involved, and similar subjects. The data obtained are used by NOAA for short-term operations and long-term planning. Collection of this data assists us in complying with the terms of our Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the World Meteorological Organization: United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on area of common interest (2008).

    II. Method of Collection

    The information is collected via an online questionnaire.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0227.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; business or other for-profit organizations, individuals or households; federal government; state, local or tribal Government.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 300.

    Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 25.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in capital and recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09173 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-HR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD906 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene a meeting of the Risk of Overfishing (denoted by P*) Working Group (P* WG) for the Main Hawaiian Island Deep 7 Bottomfish Fishery. The P* WG will review the P* dimensions and criteria, provide new scores (as appropriate), and recommend an appropriate risk of overfishing levels. This will be the basis for the specification of Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) levels for the Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) to consider.

    DATES:

    The P* WG meeting will be on May 6, 2015. For specific times and agendas, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The P* WG meeting will be held at the Council office, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813; telephone: (808) 522-8220.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; telephone: (808) 522-8220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Public comment periods will be provided. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.

    Schedule and Agenda for the P* WG Meeting May 6, 2015—10 a.m.-4 p.m. 1. Introductions 2. Recommendations from previous Council meetings 3. Overview of the P* process 4. State of the Science for the Main Hawaiian Island Deep 7 Bottomfish a. Summary of comments from the Center for Independent Expert reviewers affecting uncertainties b. Report on assessment update using 2011 model with 3 years of data 5. Review of the P* Dimensions and Criteria a. Assessment information b. Uncertainty characterization c. Stock status d. Productivity and susceptibility 6. Working group revision of criteria (if needed) 7. Working group re-scoring session 8. General discussion 9. Public comment 10. Summary of scores and P* recommendations Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least five days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09195 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No: CFPB-2014-0008] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is proposing a new information collection titled, “Consumer Complaint Intake System Company Portal Boarding Form Information Collection System.”

    DATES:

    Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before May 21, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

    • Electronic: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    • OMB: Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 or fax to (202) 395-5806. Mailed or faxed comments to OMB should be to the attention of the OMB Desk Officer for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or social security numbers, should not be included.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.reginfo.gov (this link active on the day following publication of this notice). Select “information Collection Review,” under “Currently under review, use the dropdown menu “Select Agency” and select “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” (recent submissions to OMB will be at the top of the list). The same documentation is also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: [email protected] Please do not submit comments to this email box.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Consumer Complaint Intake System Company Portal Boarding Form Information Collection System.

    OMB Control Number: 3170-XXXX.

    Type of Review: New collection (Request for a new OMB control number).

    Affected Public: Private sector.

    Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1,500.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,175.

    Abstract: The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, Title X, provides for CFPB's consumer complaint handling function. Among other things, the CFPB is to facilitate the centralized collection of, monitoring of, and response to complaints concerning consumer financial products and services. To support the appropriate routing of complaints to the companies that are the subjects of the complaints, the CFPB is developing a form which will allow companies to proactively participate in the CFPB's Company Portal (Company Portal), a secure, web-based interface between the CFPB's Office of Consumer Response (Consumer Response) and companies. The Company Portal allows companies to view and respond to complaints submitted through the CFPB's complaint handling system. Many companies have sought to register with the Company Portal before consumer complaints have been submitted to the CFPB about their companies to ensure early notice of potential complaints and allow companies' users to acclimate to the software and security protocols needed to access the Company Portal. The CFPB's proposed Form, the Company Portal Boarding Form (Boarding Form), will serve to streamline information collection from these companies, result in a greatly enhanced and efficient experience from both the consumers and companies' perspectives.

    Request for Comments: The CFPB issued a 60-day Federal Register notice on December 4, 2014 (79 FR 71984). Comments were solicited and continue to be invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the CFPB, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the CFPB's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Ashwin Vasan, Chief Information Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09251 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Patent License to Hydro-Québec; Montreal Canada AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i), the Department of the Army hereby gives notice of its intent to grant to Hydro Québec; a corporation having its principle place of business at 75 René-Lévesque Blvd. West Montréal, Québec, H2Z 1A4, Canada, exclusive license relative to the following U.S. Patent and Patent Application Titled “High Voltage Lithium Ion Positive Electrode Material”:

    • United States Utility Patent Application Serial No. US 14/281,924

    • United States Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 61/911,700

    • All foreign counterpart applications

    DATES:

    The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license.

    Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written objections to Thomas Mulkern, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Technology Applications, ATTN: RDRL-DPP, B321, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5425.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Mulkern, (410) 278-0889.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    None.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09170 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees AGENCY:

    DoD.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of Federal Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that it is renewing the charter for the Inland Waterways Users Board (“the Board”).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jim Freeman, Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703-692-5952.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This committee's charter is being renewed under the provisions of 33 U.S.C. 2251 and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(a). The Board is a non-discretionary Federal advisory committee that shall provide the Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army and the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to construction and rehabilitation priorities and spending levels on the commercial navigation features and components of the U.S. inland waterways and inland harbors. According to 33 U.S.C. 2251(b), the Board shall file their recommendations with the Secretary of the Army and with Congress, annually.

    Board members, as determined by the DoD, shall be representative members and, under the provisions of 33 U.S.C. 2251(a), the Board shall be composed of 11 members.

    Based upon the Secretary of the Army's recommendation, the Secretary of Defense shall invite primary commercial users and shippers of the inland and intra-coastal waterways to serve on the Board. Commercial users and shippers invited to serve on the Board shall designate an individual, subject to Secretary of Defense approval, to represent the organization's interests. The DoD, shall ensure selections represent various regions of the country and a spectrum of the primary users and shippers utilizing the inland and intra-coastal waterways for commercial purposes, when considering prospective users and shippers to be represented on the Board. Due consideration shall be given to assure a balance among the members based on the ton-mile shipments of the various categories of commodities shipped on inland and intra-coastal waterways.

    A primary user or shipper may be represented on the Board, at the request of the Secretary of the Army and with the approval of the Secretary of Defense, for a two-year term of service. A user or shipper may not be represented on the Board for more than two consecutive terms of service (four years), without prior approval from the Secretary of Defense. A user or shipper may be subsequently represented on the Board, but only after being off the Board for at least two years. In addition to the primary users and shippers invited by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army shall designate, and the Secretaries of Agriculture, Transportation, and Commerce may each designate, a representative to act as an observer of the Board. These observers, who have no voting rights, shall each be a full-time or permanent part-time employee of his or her respective agency.

    Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 2251(a), the Secretary of the Army shall designate one Board member to serve as the Board's Chairperson. With the exception of travel and per diem for official travel, all Board members shall serve without compensation.

    The DoD, when necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, and working groups to support the Board. Establishment of subcommittees will be based upon a written determination, to include terms of reference, by the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of the Army, as the DoD Sponsor. All subcommittees, task forces, or working groups shall operate under the provisions of FACA, the Sunshine Act, other governing Federal statutes and regulations, and established DoD policies and procedures.

    Currently, the Board does not use subcommittees. If the Department determines that the establishment of subcommittees is warranted, the Board's charter must be amended prior to such establishment.

    All subcommittees operate under the provisions of FACA, the Sunshine Act, governing Federal statutes and regulations, and established DoD policies and procedures.

    Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 2251(b), the Board shall meet at least semi-annually.

    The Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO), pursuant to DoD policy, shall be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee appointed in accordance with governing DoD policies and procedures.

    The Board's DFO is required to be in attendance at all meetings of the Board and any of its subcommittees for the entire duration of each and every meeting. However, in the absence of the Board's DFO, a properly approved Alternate DFO, duly appointed to the Board according to established DoD policies and procedures, shall attend the entire duration of the Board or any subcommittee meeting.

    The DFO, or the Alternate DFO, shall call all meetings of the Board and its subcommittees; prepare and approve all meeting agendas; and adjourn any meeting when the DFO, or the Alternate DFO, determines adjournment to be in the public interest or required by governing regulations or DoD policies and procedures.

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to Inland Waterways Users Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the Inland Waterways Users Board.

    All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the Inland Waterways Users Board and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the Inland Waterways Users Board DFO can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database—http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

    The DFO, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, will announce planned meetings of the Inland Waterways Users Board. The DFO, at that time, may provide additional guidance on the submission of written statements that are in response to the stated agenda for the planned meeting in question.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09182 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2015-ICCD-0046] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application for Grants Under the Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions Program 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 May 21, 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-0046 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 2E103, Washington, DC 20202.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Bora Mpinja, 202-502-7629.

    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 for Grants Under the Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions Program.

    OMB Control Number: 1840-0816.

    Type of Review: A reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Private Sector.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 50.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 2,000.

    Abstract: The Title III, Part A Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions Program provides grants and related assistance to Native American Serving-Non Tribal Institutions to enable such institutions to plan, develop, undertake, and carry out activities to improve and expand such institutions' capacity to serve Native American and low-income individuals.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and Records Management Services, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09175 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.

    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication.

    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v).

    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Docket No. File date Presenter or requester Prohibited: 1. ER15-623-000
  • ER15-945-000
  • 4-1-15 FERC Staff.1
    2. CP13-499-000 4-6-15 Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic, Inc. Exempt: 1. CP14-347-000 2-24-15 Calcasieu Parish Police Jury. 2. CP14-347-000 2-26-15 Lake Charles Harbor & Terminal District. 3. CP14-347-000 3-9-15 Hon. David Vitter. 4. CP12-507-000 3-31-15 Cities of Portland and Corpus Christi, Texas. 5. CP12-507-000 3-31-15 Hon. J.M. Lozano. 6. CP13-483-000 3-31-15 U.S. Congress.2 7. CP12-507-000 4-6-15 Hon. Todd Hunter. 8. CP14-96-000 4-6-15 U.S. Congress.3 9. CP12-507-000 4-7-15 Hon. Judith Zaffirini. 1 Email record. 2 Hons. Pat Roberts, Jerry Moran, and Kevin Yoder. 3 Hons. Charles E. Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Nita M. Lowey.
    Dated: April 14, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09046 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-1429-000] Emera Maine; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on April 3, 2015, Emera Maine tendered for filing workpapers in support of a transmission cost of service formula rate that was filed in the above docket on April 1, 2015. A June 1, 2015 effective date is requested for the transmission cost of service formula rate, which was noticed on April 1, 2015.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 22, 2015.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09179 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-1471-000] Blue Sky West, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, of Blue Sky West, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability is May 4, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09045 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-788-001.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Thresholds for Uneconomic Prod. Investigation Deficiency Response in E15-788 to be effective 3/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5304.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-943-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing per 35: 2015-04-13_SA 6502 Illinois Power-Edwards SSR Renewal Compliance Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5165.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1211-001.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Update to WPSC Annual PEB/PBOP Filing to be effective 4/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5125.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1498-000.

    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Compliance tariff revs to implement a competitive entry exemption to BSM Rules to be effective 2/26/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5324.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1499-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions to City of Independence, Missouri Stated Rate to be effective 6/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5325.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09041 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-870-000.

    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate PAL Agreement: Koch Energy Services, LLC to be effective 4/10/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/9/15.

    Accession Number: 20150409-5045.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-871-000.

    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate—BP Energy to be effective 5/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/9/15.

    Accession Number: 20150409-5078.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-872-000.

    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Clean Up of Summary of Non-Conforming and Negotiated Rate Agreements to be effective 5/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/9/15.

    Accession Number: 20150409-5129.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-873-000.

    Applicants: Empire Pipeline, Inc.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Reservation Charge Credits and ROFR to be effective 5/9/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/9/15.

    Accession Number: 20150409-5166.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-874-000.

    Applicants: Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC—Tariff Changes to be effective 5/10/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/10/15.

    Accession Number: 20150410-5158.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-875-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: April 14-28, 2015 to be effective 4/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/10/15.

    Accession Number: 20150410-5167.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-876-000.

    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing- April 2015- LER 0222 Att A to be effective 4/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/10/15.

    Accession Number: 20150410-5216.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-877-000.

    Applicants: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, L.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing to Amend LER 5680's Attachment A_4-10-15 to be effective 4/10/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/10/15.

    Accession Number: 20150410-5266.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 13, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09042 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-878-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Non-conforming and NegRate Agreement—Infinite Energy 911250 to be effective 4/13/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5086.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-879-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 04/13/15 Negotiated Rates—ConEdison Energy Inc. (HUB) 2275-89 to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5181.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-880-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 04/13/15 Negotiated Rates—Mercuria Energy Gas Trading LLC (HUB) 7540-89 to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5190.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-881-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 04/13/15 Negotiated Rates—Sequent Energy Management (HUB) 3075-89 to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5197.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-882-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 04/13/15 Negotiated Rates—United Energy Trading, LLC (HUB) 5095-89 to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5216.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-883-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: Request for Waiver and Extensions of El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5249.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-884-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 04/13/15 Negotiated Rates—DTE Energy Trading Inc. (HUB) 1830-89 to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/13/15.

    Accession Number: 20150413-5298.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09043 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC15-121-000.

    Applicants: Meadow Creek Project Company LLC, Goshen Phase II LLC, Canadian Hills Wind, LLC, Rockland Wind Farm LLC, Burley Butte Wind Park, LLC, Golden Valley Wind Park, LLC, Milner Dam Wind Park, LLC, Oregon Trail Wind Park, LLC, Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park, LLC, Thousand Springs Wind Park, LLC, Tuana Gulch Wind Park, LLC, Camp Reed Wind Park, LLC, Payne's Ferry Wind Park, LLC, Salmon Falls Wind Park, LLC, Yahoo Creek Wind Park, LLC, TerraForm AP Acquisition Holdings, LLC, Wolverine Creek Goshen Interconnection L.

    Description: Application for Authorization of Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities and Requests for Waivers, Confidential Treatment and Expedited Consideration of Meadow Creek Project Company LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5274.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-517-001.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Cross-Sound Cable Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Supplemental Req. for Waiver of Stnds. for Bus. Prac. & Comm. Protocols to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5142.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1019-000.

    Applicants: Fowler Ridge IV Wind Farm LLC.

    Description: Second Supplement to February 10, 2015 Fowler Ridge IV Wind Farm LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1170-001.

    Applicants: Bear Mountain Limited.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Supplement to MBR Application to be effective 4/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5203.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1171-001.

    Applicants: Chalk Cliff Limited.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Supplement to MBR Application to be effective 4/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5206.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1172-001.

    Applicants: Live Oak Limited.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Supplement to MBR Application to be effective 4/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5209.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1173-001.

    Applicants: McKittrick Limited.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Supplement to MBR Application to be effective 4/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5212.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1500-000.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): OATT Non-substantive Revisions to be effective 6/14/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5141.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1501-000.

    Applicants: Duquesne Keystone, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions to MBR to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5175.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1502-000.

    Applicants: Duquesne Conemaugh, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions MBR to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5187.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1503-000.

    Applicants: Duquesne Power, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions MBR to be effective 4/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5190.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1504-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Virginia Electric and Power Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Dominion submits revisions to OATT Attachment H-16A and H16-C re: OPEB Expense to be effective 1/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5215.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1505-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-04-14_SA 6500 Escanaba SSR Termination to be effective 6/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5225.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1506-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-04-14_Cancel Schedule 43 Escanaba SSR to be effective 6/15/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5227.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1507-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Notice of Cancellation of Service Agreement No. 3635; Queue No. V4-024 to be effective 6/2/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5236.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1508-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Joint OATT Real Power Loss (2015) to be effective 5/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5041.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1509-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool Participants Committee.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Do Not Exceed Real-Time Dispatch to be effective 4/10/2016.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5062.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-19-011; OA07-43-012; ER07-1171-012.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits its annual compliance report on penalty assessments and distributions.

    Filed Date: 4/14/15.

    Accession Number: 20150414-5276.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09177 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-1475-000] North Star Solar, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, of North Star Solar, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability is May 5, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09180 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2721-005.

    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.

    Description: Non-Material Change in Status Filing of El Paso Electric Company.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5237.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1176-001.

    Applicants: South Jersey Energy ISO6, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to Market-Based Rate application to be effective 3/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5255.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1177-001.

    Applicants: South Jersey Energy ISO7, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 3/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5253.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1178-001.

    Applicants: South Jersey Energy ISO8, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 3/5/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5250.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1510-000.

    Applicants: FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Normal filing to be effective 4/16/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5161.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1511-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1166R23 Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority NITSA and NOA to be effective 4/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5238.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1512-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2199 Grand River Dam Authority PTP Notice of Cancellation to be effective 1/27/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5240.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1513-000.

    Applicants: Duquesne Conemaugh, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Conemaugh Revisions to be effective 1/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5275.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1514-000.

    Applicants: Duquesne Keystone, LLC.

    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revision to MBR to be effective 1/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5280.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES15-14-000.

    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.

    Description: Supplement to March 19, 2015 Application for Authorization Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act to Issue Securities of NorthWestern Corporation.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5155.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/15.

    Docket Numbers: ES15-15-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: Application of ISO New England Inc. Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act For An Order Authorizing the Issuance of Securities.

    Filed Date: 4/15/15.

    Accession Number: 20150415-5165.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09178 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER15-1463-000] Triton Energy, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, of Triton Energy, Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability is May 4, 2015.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 14, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09044 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9926-65-OECA] Applicability Determination Index (ADI) Database System Recent Posting: Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations Pertaining to Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces applicability determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory interpretations that EPA has made under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP); and/or the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    An electronic copy of each complete document posted on the Applicability Determination Index (ADI) database system is available on the Internet through the Resources and Guidance Documents for Compliance Assistance page of the Clean Air Act Compliance Monitoring Web site under “Air” at: http://www2.epa.gov/compliance/resources-and-guidance-documents-compliance-assistance. The letters and memoranda on the ADI may be located by control number, date, author, subpart, or subject search. For questions about the ADI or this notice, contact Maria Malave at EPA by phone at: (202) 564-7027, or by email at: [email protected] For technical questions about individual applicability determinations or monitoring decisions, refer to the contact person identified in the individual documents, or in the absence of a contact person, refer to the author of the document.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The General Provisions of the NSPS in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 60 and the General Provisions of the NESHAP in 40 CFR part 61 provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as applicability determinations. See 40 CFR 60.5 and 61.06. Although the part 63 NESHAP regulations [which include Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) and/or Generally Available Control Technology (GACT)standards] and § 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) contain no specific regulatory provision providing that sources may request applicability determinations, EPA also responds to written inquiries regarding applicability for the part 63 and § 111(d) programs. The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping that is different from the promulgated requirements. See 40 CFR 60.13(i), 61.14(g), 63.8(b)(1), 63.8(f), and 63.10(f). EPA's written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as alternative monitoring decisions. Furthermore, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a whole source category. These inquiries may pertain, for example, to the type of sources to which the regulation applies, or to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements contained in the regulation. EPA's written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as regulatory interpretations.

    EPA currently compiles EPA-issued NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory interpretations, and posts them to the ADI. In addition, the ADI contains EPA-issued responses to requests pursuant to the stratospheric ozone regulations, contained in 40 CFR part 82. The ADI is an electronic index on the Internet with over one thousand EPA letters and memoranda pertaining to the applicability, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the NSPS, NESHAP, and stratospheric ozone regulations. Users can search for letters and memoranda by date, office of issuance, subpart, citation, control number, or by string word searches.

    Today's notice comprises a summary of 56 such documents added to the ADI on April 7, 2015. This notice lists the subject and header of each letter and memorandum, as well as a brief abstract of the letter or memorandum. Complete copies of these documents may be obtained from the ADI through the OECA Web site at: www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/programs/caa/adi.html.

    Summary of Headers and Abstracts

    The following table identifies the database control number for each document posted on the ADI database system on April 7, 2015; the applicable category; the section(s) and/or subpart(s) of 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63 (as applicable) addressed in the document; and the title of the document, which provides a brief description of the subject matter.

    We have also included an abstract of each document identified with its control number after the table. These abstracts are provided solely to alert the public to possible items of interest and are not intended as substitutes for the full text of the documents. This notice does not change the status of any document with respect to whether it is “of nationwide scope or effect” for purposes of CAA § 307(b)(1). For example, this notice does not convert an applicability determination for a particular source into a nationwide rule. Neither does it purport to make a previously non-binding document binding.

    ADI Determinations Uploaded on April 7, 2015 Control Number Categories Subparts Title M110015 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP, NSPS CC, G, Kb Rule Interpretation on Raw Data Definition and Retention for Storage Vessels. 1400038 NSPS OOO Applicability of Rule to Gypsum Handling Equipment at a Power Plant with Fuel Gas Desulfurization Units. 1100018 NSPS J Alternative Monitoring Plan for Low Sulfur Bearing Fuel Gas Stream. Z140006 MACT, Part 63 NESHAP YYYYY Performance Test Waiver Request for EAF Secondary Dust Collection System. M120012 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP FFFF Alternative Monitoring Plan For Grab Sampling in Lieu of Continuous Monitoring of Caustic Scrubbers. Z120001 Part 61 NESHAP J, V Applicability Determination for NESHAP Subparts J and V Benzene Fugitive Equipment Leaks. M120015 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP, NSPS J, UUU Alternate Work Practice—SRU Sulfur Pit Bypass Lines. Z140005 Part 63 NESHAP WWWWWW Applicability Determination for Research and Development Unit under NESHAP Subpart WWWWWW. M120018 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP, NSPS J, UUU Alternative Monitoring in Lieu of COMS for Regenerators. M120020 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP NNNNN Alternative Monitoring for Caustic Scrubber Parametric Monitoring. 1200038 NSPS D Stack COMS Relocation Determined By Equivalency Testing. M120021 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP G, H Approval of a Common Report Schedule—MACT Subparts G and H. 1200039 NSPS J Alternative Monitoring for Hydrocracker Feed Surge Drum Vent Stream. 1200040 NSPS J Alternative Monitoring for NHT Feed Surge Drum Off—Gas Vent Stream. 1200041 NSPS J Alternative Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring for Oleflex Reactor Vent Stream. 1200042 NSPS J Alternative Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring for Truck Loading, Storage Tank and Well Vent Gas Streams. 1200046 NSPS JJJJ Single-Point Testing In Place of Method 1 or 1A—Engine Emission Testing. 1200062 NSPS KKK, Kb Applicability of NSPS Subparts Kb and KKK for a Vapor Recovery Unit and Storage Tanks. M120027 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP JJJ Timing Issues in Determining MACT and Title V Applicability. M120029 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP S Approval of an Alternative Monitoring Frequency under the Pulp and Paper MACT. 1200087 NSPS Db Revision to NSPS Method of Determining Compliance for Combined Effluent NOX CEMS. Z140004 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP ZZZZ Exemption for Emergency Engines at Commercial Area Sources from RICE NESHAP—Regulatory Interpretation. 1400016 NSPS EEEE, FFFF Applicability Determination for Commercially Operated Contraband Incinerator. 1400019 NSPS WWW Guidance on Alternative Compliance Timeline Requests for Landfill. A140003 Asbestos M Applicability of the Asbestos NESHAP as it Applies to Concrete Bridges. M140006 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP A, MMMM Continuing Requirements when Surface Coating Operations no Longer Meets Affected Source Criteria. M140008 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP CC, G Interpretation of Required Tank Inspection Frequency. 1400021 NSPS Dc, Ja NOx Requirements for Boilers. M140009 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP ZZZZ Disapproval of an Engine De-Rate Proposal. M140010 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP ZZZZ Approval of an Engine De-rate Proposal. M140011 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP, NSPS IIII, ZZZZ Applicability to a Non-stationary Engine Relocated For Use as a Stationary Engine. M140012 PART 63 NESHAP A, JJJJJJ Determination of Force Majeure. M140013 PART 63 NESHAP JJJJJJ Regulatory Interpretation of Tune-up Requirements for Spreader Stoker Boiler. M140014 PART 63 NESHAP JJJJJJ Compliance Extension for Replacement Energy Source. Z140007 Part 63 NESHAP BBBBBBB, VVVVVV Rule Applicability to HAP-Containing Mixing Operations to Produce Acrylic-Based Stucco. A140004 Asbestos M Small Residence Exemption. A140005 Asbestos M Interim Method of Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Insulation Samples and Transmission Electron Microscopy. M140016 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP DDDDD Categorization and applicability of a Boiler using natural gas and tire derived fuel. 1400022 NSPS J NSPS Fuel Gas Definition and Alternative Monitoring of Marine Vessel Loading Vapors. 1400023 NSPS J Conditional CEMS Exemption Approval for Low Sulfur Combustion of Off-gas Vent Stream. 1400024 NSPS J CEMS Exemption in Lieu of Alternative Monitoring for Combustion of Commercial Grade Natural Gas and Refinery Fuel Gas. 1400025 NSPS KKK Regulatory Interpretation for Gas Plant Propane Refrigeration System. 1400026 NSPS OOOO Applicability Determination for Reciprocating Compressors. 1400027 MACT, PART 63 NESHAP, NSPS J, UUU Alternative Monitoring Plan for Wet Gas Scrubber on a Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit. 1400028 NSPS NNN, RRR Alternative Monitoring and Waiver of Testing Request for Distillation Vent Gas to Process Heaters. 1400029 NSPS Ja Request for Alternative Monitoring of Condensate Splitter Flare. 1400030 NSPS Ja Alternative Monitoring Plan for Oxygen in Boiler Stack Emissions. 1400031 NSPS J, Ja Alternative Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring in Tank Degassing Vapors Combusted in Portable Thermal Oxidizers. 1400032 NSPS OOOO Regulatory Interpretation—Submission of Photographs For Natural Gas Well Completion Annual Reports. 1400033 NSPS J, Ja Alternative Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring in Tank Degassing Vapors Combusted in Portable Thermal Oxidizers. 1400034 NSPS A, D Regulatory Interpretation—Demonstrating Continuous Compliance and Reporting Excess Emissions for NSPS and Title V. 1400035 NSPS Ec Alternative Operating Parameters for a Wet Gas Scrubber Followed By Carbon Adsorber and Cartridge Filter at an HMIWI. 1400036 NSPS Db Alternative Monitoring Plan for Fuel Analysis from Subpart Db Boiler. 1400037 NSPS J Conditional CEMS Exemption Approval for Low Sulfur Combustion of Off-gas Vent Stream. 1100017 NSPS J Alternative Monitoring of Opacity for a Wet Gas Scrubber. Abstracts Abstract for [M110015]

    Q1: What is EPA interpretation of raw data, in reference to 40 CFR 63.654 and 40 CFR 60.115b and the storage vessel recordkeeping provisions in NSPS subpart Kb, and Part 63 NESHAP subparts G and CC?

    A1: EPA indicated to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Region 14 that although the phrase “raw data” does not have a regulatory definition, EPA has issued guidance on this subject to deal with air pollution measurement systems and the quality assurance procedures associated with such systems. In general, raw data is data that is captured and recorded on field data sheets during a measurement of some sort, such as sampling of emissions or testing of control equipment.

    Q2: May a source, after transferring data from field data sheets into an electronic database, dispose of the field data sheets?

    A2: No. Original field data sheets must be preserved whenever any sort of emissions sampling or equipment testing, such as measuring seal gaps in a storage tank, is performed. Transferring raw data into a database can introduce additional error in data transcription and entry.

    Abstract for [1400038]

    Q1: Is gypsum handling equipment at the Dominion Chesterfield Power Station in Chester, Virginia, subject to NSPS subpart OOO for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants? Dominion acknowledges that a limestone crushing process at Chesterfield is subject to subpart OOO.

    A1: Yes. The gypsum handling equipment is also subject to NSPS subpart OOO. The facility meets the definition of a nonmetallic mineral processing plant, and each affected facility at Chesterfield is subject to subpart OOO, including the belt conveyors used to transfer gypsum to storage sheds or loading docks.

    Q2: Must the crushing or grinding of gypsum take place in the “production line” to be subject to subpart OOO?

    A2: No. The definition of production line does not require that every affected facility be part of a production line with crushing or grinding. If crushing or grinding of a nonmetallic mineral occurs anywhere at the facility, then each affected facility is subject regardless of its location within the plant.

    Q3: Are there other power plants with flue gas desulfurization units where the gypsum handling equipment is subject to subpart OOO?

    A3: Yes. Based on a brief review of similar permits, EPA found at least three such power plants with permits where subpart OOO was applied to the gypsum handling equipment.

    Abstract for [1100018]

    Q: Does EPA approve the ConocoPhillips Sweeny, Texas Refinery Alternate Monitoring Plan (AMP) under NSPS subpart J? Conoco claims an exemption per 40 CFR 60.105(a)(4)(iv) because Flare #7 receives fuel gas waste from catalytic reforming units.

    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves ConocoPhillips's AMP. Conditional approval of alternative monitoring parameters is granted based on a requirement that the flare receive low sulfur/sulfide bearing streams waste fuel gas only from catalytic reformers. Any significant increase in the sulfur/sulfide concentration detected in the stream would initiate continuous monitoring under 40 CFR 60.105(a)(3) or (4). Introduction of other streams that are not from catalytic reformers require application of another AMP.

    Abstract for [Z140006]

    Q1: Does EPA approve of a waiver in the number of performance test sampling locations required to comply with particulate stack sampling requirements under 40 CFR part 63 subpart YYYYY for the electric arc furnace at ArcelorMittal's LaPlace, Louisiana facility?

    A1: No. Based on the information provided, EPA could not approve the request to sample only three of the six emission points. Without the results of a previous performance test which included results for all six emission points, EPA could not confirm that emissions from three of the emission points might be representative of all six. Additionally, EPA reserves the right to determine which emission points should be sampled.

    Q2: Can the 60-day testing notification requirement be waived, allowing ArcelorMittal a 30-day notification period?

    A2: Yes. Based on the timing of ArcelorMittal's testing waiver request and the testing schedule, EPA is allowing a reduced testing notification timeframe. EPA asked that ArcelorMittal provide the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) a written notice at least ten (10) days prior to the intended testing dates in order that DEQ be afforded the opportunity to observe the testing.

    Abstract for [M120012]

    Q: Does EPA approve the Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring the caustic strength of scrubber effluent by a grab sample monitoring system, in lieu of continuously measuring caustic strength, under MACT subpart FFFF for the miscellaneous organic chemical manufacturing process units and caustic scrubbers controlling Group 1 Process Vents at the Dow Chemical plant in La Porte, Texas?

    A: Yes. EPA approves the AMP based on the information provided. The plan to monitor scrubber caustic strength by grab sampling, in lieu of continuously measuring caustic strength, is technically acceptable. Subpart FFFF requires that the scrubbers be monitored continuously either via continuous pH measurement and recording as specified in 40 CFR 63.994(c)(1)(i) and 63.998(a)(2)(ii)(D), or via continuously monitoring and recording the caustic strength of the effluent. Use of a continuous pH meter or caustic strength analyzer may be unreliable due to fouling. The AMP includes frequent grab sampling to monitor caustic strength based on a worst case loading scenario.

    Abstract for [Z120001]

    Q: Is an inter-plant pipeline which transports liquids that are at least 10 percent benzene by weight between two major source facilities, each belonging to Equistar Chemicals in Alvin, Texas, subject to part 61 NESHAP subparts J and V?

    A: Yes. An inter-plant pipeline that transports benzene liquids is an emission source that is in benzene service according to 40 CFR 61.110 and 61.111, regardless of whether or not the pipeline is defined as a discrete process unit. 40 CFR 61.110(a) includes valves, connectors or systems in benzene service, regardless of their location, and subpart V applies as the leak detection provision for subpart J, per 40 CFR 61.111.

    Abstract for [M120015]

    Q: Does EPA approve an alternate work practice for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) at bypass lines associated with sulfur recovery unit (SRU) sulfur pits, which are subject to both MACT subpart UUU and NSPS subpart J, and the terms of a Consent Decree (CD), at the Flint Hills Resources Corpus Christi, Texas East and West refineries?

    A: No. EPA does not approve the alternate work practice because it would be in direct conflict with both the rule and the intent of the CD, and would result in non-compliance. The SRUs and sulfur pits are subject to a CD that requires sulfur pit emissions to be continuously monitored and counted toward SRU total emissions for compliance demonstration with the NSPS subpart J limit for sulfur dioxide (SO2). Since the alternative work practice proposed by Flint Hills did not include continuous monitoring per 40 CFR 60.104(a)(2), the data necessary to comply with the portion of the CD requiring aggregation of sulfur pit emissions for compliance demonstration with the NSPS subpart J SO2 limit would not be collected.

    Abstract for [Z140005]

    Q: Does EPA approve an exemption from NESHAP subpart WWWWWW under the definition of research and development for the electroplating and surface finishing facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico?

    A: Yes. Based on a review of 40 CFR 63.11505(d)(2) and the definition of a research and development process unit at 40 CFR 63.11511, EPA determines that the facility meets the definition and is not subject to NESHAP subpart WWWWWW.

    Abstract for [M120018]

    Q: Will EPA approve Motiva Enterprises' (Motiva) Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) under 40 CFR 60.8 and 60.13(i)(3) for monitoring wet gas scrubbers (WGS) on a refinery Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU), in lieu of a Continuous Opacity Monitoring System (COMS), due to moisture interference on opacity readings in the stack, to demonstrate compliance with the opacity limit under 40 CFR 60.102(a)(2) and requirements of MACT subpart UUU at Motiva's Port Arthur, Texas refinery?

    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Motiva's AMP. A performance test is necessary to establish Operating Parameter Limits (OPLs) and other operating and monitoring conditions required for demonstrating compliance with NSPS subpart J, MACT subpart UUU and the Consent Decree for each WGS. The EPA response letter specifies the operating conditions, operating parameters, test notice deadlines, and notification content that are conditions of the approval. Interim OPLs are provided.

    Abstract for [M120020]

    Q: Does EPA approve the Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for parametric monitoring on caustic scrubbers used to control hydrochloric acid emissions from storage tanks, loading, and process vents under 40 CFR part 63 subpart NNNNN at the Rubicon facility in Geismar, Louisiana?

    A: Yes. Based on the information provided in Rubicon's request, EPA conditionally approves the AMP. A minimum pH operating parameter limit (OPL), and a minimum recirculating liquid flow rate, pursuant to 40 CFR 63.9020(e)(1)(i), must be established during a performance test conducted under worst case emissions operating scenario. The scrubbers' effectiveness in meeting subpart NNNNN emission standards during normal operations will be ensured by continuous monitoring of the two OPLs.

    Abstract for [1200038]

    Q1: Can equivalency testing be approved to relocate the flue gas continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) on the stack outlet of a wet gas scrubber (WGS) covered under NSPS subpart D at the Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA) Gibbons Creek Electric Steam Generating Station Unit 1?

    A1: Yes. 40 CFR part 60 Appendix B Performance Specification 1 (PS 1) Section 8.1 (2)(i) and (ii) specify measurement location and light beam path requirements for COMS. If the proposed alternate COMS locations do not meet these requirements, equivalency testing must be conducted in accordance with PS 1 Section 8.1 (2)(iii) for each possible alternative location. Based on the test proposal, EPA approves the request for conducting preliminary equivalency testing only, with a 60-day notification provided to the State authority.

    Q2: What if there are separate ducts that split the vent stream gas flow?

    A2: Relocation and the preliminary equivalency testing must include the use of two COMS units in order to provide opacity readings representative of total emissions.

    Q3: What must the facility do to obtain subsequent approval for permanent relocation of the stack COMS?

    A3: TMPA must provide the data and operating information from the preliminary equivalency testing for the alternative location ultimately selected, in accordance with the applicable performance test reporting requirements of NSPS subparts A and D. In accordance with PS 1 Section 8.1 (2)(iii), the average opacity value measured at each temporary COMS at the selected alternate location must be within +/− 10 percent of the average opacity value measured at the existing flue gas stack COMS, and the difference between any two average opacity values must be less than 2 percent opacity (absolute value).

    Abstract for [M120021]

    Q: Does EPA approve a common schedule for submitting periodic reports under the Hazardous Organic part 63 NESHAP, subparts G and H, at the Union Carbide Texas City, Texas facility?

    A: Yes. EPA approves the common schedule provided the reporting requirement of 40 CFR 63.152(c)(1) is satisfied, which only allows a 60-day lag between the end of the reporting period and the due date of a periodic report. EPA reviewed the requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(a)(6) and 63.9(i), and concurred that the proposed reporting schedule satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 63.152(c)(1).

    Abstract for [1200039]

    Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) for a refinery hydrocracker feed surge drum off-gas vent stream combusted at four hydrocracker heaters at the Valero Refining Corpus Christi, Texas West refinery?

    A: Yes. EPA approves Valero's AMP based on the description of the process vent streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. The approval specifies operating parameter limits for total sulfur and temperature. Valero must follow the seven step process detailed in the Valero consent decree appendix on Alternative Monitoring Plans for NSPS subpart J Refinery Fuel Gas.

    Abstract for [1200040]

    Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) for a refinery process feed surge drum off-gas vent stream combusted at a charge heater under NSPS subpart J at the Valero Refining Corpus Christi, Texas West refinery?

    A: Yes. EPA approves Valero's AMP based on the description of the process vent stream, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. The approval specifies operating parameter limits for total sulfur and temperature. Valero must follow the seven step process detailed in the Valero consent decree appendix on Alternative Monitoring Plans for NSPS subpart J Refinery Fuel Gas.

    Abstract for [1200041]

    Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring request for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) the No. 4 vent stream at the Valero Refining West Plant in Corpus Christi, Texas? The request involves vent streams from the Oleflex Reactor Lock Hopper Engager off-gas vent stream combusted at the Oleflex Interheater.

    A: Yes. EPA approves Valero's alternative monitoring request based on the description of the process vent stream, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. There will be no points where sour gas can be introduced into the vent gas stream. The effluent is to be sampled and tested daily. Valero must follow the seven step process (Alternative Monitoring Plans for NSPS subpart J Refinery Fuel Gas) in the consent decree for the No. 4 vent stream.

    Abstract for [1200042]

    Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) of vent gases from the control of diesel and jet fuel truck loading, toluene and reformate storage tanks, and groundwater recovery wells at the Valero Refining Corpus Christi, Texas East refinery? The vent streams are combusted at the truck rack thermal oxidizer enclosed vapor combustor.

    A: Yes. EPA approves Valero's AMP based on the description of the process vent stream, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. Valero must follow the seven step process detailed in the Alternative Monitoring Plans for NSPS subpart J Refinery Fuel Gas appendix of Valero's consent decree. The approval specifies an H2S operating limit from each of the emission sources (e.g., loading, tanks, wells) covered by the AMP.

    Abstract for [1200046]

    Q: Does EPA approve single-point testing in place of Method 1 or 1A for required testing of engine emissions under 40 CFR part 60 subpart JJJJ, for the ConocoPhillips Lake Pelto Compressor Barge, located offshore in southern Louisiana?

    A: Yes. EPA approves ConocoPhillips' single-point testing, since the engines are located over water, and are difficult to test due to limited space.

    Abstract for [1200062]

    Q1: Is the installation of a backup vapor recovery unit (BU-VRU) to capture emissions from a glycol dehydrator unit, which includes a compressor, at the Marathon Petroleum Indian Basin Gas Plant near Carlsbad, New Mexico, considered a modification of an affected facility and thus subject to NSPS subpart KKK?

    A1: Based on the information provided by the Air Quality Bureau of the New Mexico Environment Department (AQB-NMED), EPA determines that the installation of the BU-VRU compressor at the Indian Basin Gas Plant is subject to NSPS subpart KKK. The compressor is an affected facility under NSPS subpart KKK that was constructed after the applicability date and is presumed to be in VOC or wet gas service. The pollution control device exemption in 40 CFR 60.14(e) of the General Provisions is superseded by 40 CFR 60.630 and therefore does not apply. In addition, the NSPS subpart KKK does not include exemptions for compressor emergency operations or operating less than 500 hours per year. With respect to whether the other affected facility, which includes all other equipment (except compressors), that are part of the glycol dehydrator process unit, EPA cannot make a modification determination since there is no information on emission increases or decreases available.

    Q2: Are the two storage tanks at the Indian Basin Gas Plant subject to NSPS subpart Kb, or are they exempt under the custody transfer exemption in 40 CFR 60.110b(d)(4)?

    A2: Based on the information provided by AQB-NMED, EPA determines that the storage tanks are subject to NSPS subpart Kb. The Indian Basin Gas Plant is not part of the producing operation and its tanks are after the point of custody transfer as defined at 40 CFR 60.111(b). Therefore, the tanks do not qualify for the “prior to custody transfer” exemption in 40 CFR 60.110b(d)(4).

    Abstract for [M120027]

    Q1: Does EPA agree with the determinations of the Portsmouth Local Air Agency and the Southeast District Office of the Ohio EPA that the America Styrenics Hanging Rock and Marietta, Ohio facilities are subject to the MACT if they changed processes after the compliance date such that their potential emissions are well below the HAP major source thresholds?

    A1: Yes. Based on the information provided by the Portsmouth Local Air Agency, EPA determines that the facilities are still subject to the major source MACT standard because it is EPA's position that any source that is a major source of HAP on the first substantive compliance date of an applicable NESHAP will remain subject to that NESHAP regardless of the level of the source's subsequent emissions.

    Q2: Are these facilities still subject to Title V if their HAP emissions potential was the only criteria that made them subject to Title V requirements?

    A2: Yes. Because the facilities are subject to a major source MACT standard, they are also subject to Title V permitting requirements under Section 502(a) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661a(a).

    Abstract for [M120029]

    Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring frequency for inspections of once per month rather than every 30 days under the Pulp and Paper MACT for Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation in Coshocton, Ohio?

    A: Yes. EPA approves this minor modification to the monitoring frequency under 40 CFR 63.8(b)(i) provided that the monitoring events are at least 21 days apart.

    Abstract for [1200087]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request to use a subtractive method for the NOx compliance determination and use of a temporary Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMs) for the initial performance test for a NSPS subpart Db affected facility at Valero Refining's Ethanol Plant in Bloomingburg, Ohio? The proposed method uses combined emissions from this subpart Db facility and another affected facility as determined by a Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS), and subtracts the emissions from the other facility as read by a separate CEMS.

    A: Yes. EPA approves the subtractive compliance determination approach under 40 CFR 60.8(b) authority for the initial performance testing. This request was necessary because, while the NSPS allows for the location of a CEMS in a stack serving multiple affected sources for the purpose of demonstration of continuous compliance, no such allowance is made for the initial performance testing requirement.

    Abstract for [Z140004]

    Q1: Are emergency engines located at commercial sources that are used for telecommunications purposes exempt from the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ?

    A1: Yes. The requirements at 40 CFR part 63.6590(b)(3) state that emergency engines located at area sources that are classified as commercial, institutional or residential emergency stationary RICE are not subject to the requirements at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ.

    Q2: Are emergency engines used by telecommunication facilities that are installed and located on industrial property also exempt?

    A2: The applicability of the RICE NESHAP is dependent on whether the commercial or industrial operation has common control over the emergency engine. If the industrial facility has control, the engine could be subject to the RICE NESHAP.

    Abstract for [1400016]

    Q1: Is Kippur Corporation's (Kippur) dual chamber, commercial incinerator which thermally destroys contraband for U.S. Customs and Border Protection in El Paso, Texas subject to regulation as an “other solid waste incineration” (OSWI) unit under 40 CFR part 60 subparts EEEE and FFFF?

    A1: Yes. Based on the information submitted by Kippur, EPA determines that the contraband incinerator is an OSWI unit subject to either NSPS subpart EEEE or subpart FFFF. In addition, the incinerator would not be subject to subpart EEEE because an air pollution abatement equipment is not considered part of an OSWI unit. Therefore, the increased feed rate caused by the higher air flow volume resulting from the addition of a second baghouse on the OSWI unit does not constitute a modification of the incinerator under NSPS subpart EEEE. Based on this and additional supplemental information Kippur provided, the OSWI Unit is therefore subject to NSPS subpart FFFF since subpart EEEE applicability was not trigger with the OSWI unit changes consistent with 40 CFR 60.2992.

    Q2: Does EPA approve a petition for approval of operating parameter limits (OPLs) in lieu of installing a wet scrubber to comply with emission limitations?

    A2: No. In a separate September 12, 2012 letter, EPA disapproved the petition because specific information was lacking for final approval. Therefore, Kippur must comply with the appropriate NSPS subpart FFFF requirements.

    Abstract for [1400019]

    Q1: The Cornerstone Environmental Group, LLC. on behalf of American Disposal Services of Illinois, which owns the Livingston Landfill, requests a clarification as to whether the Alternative Compliance Timeline (ACT) requests are due 15 days after an initial exceedance is identified through required monitoring activities, pursuant to the requirements in 40 CFR 60.755(a)(3) and (a)(s).

    A1: EPA indicates that 40 CFR 60.755 requires landfill owner/operators to repair the cause of an exceedance within 15 days, or expand the gas collection system within 120 days. In the event that the landfill owner or operator, despite its best efforts, is unable to make the necessary repairs to resolve the exceedance within 15 days, and it believes that an expansion of gas collection is unwarranted, the landfill owner or operator may submit for approval an ACT request for correcting the as soon as possible (i.e., as soon as it knows that it will not be able to correct the exceedance in 15 days and it is unwarranted to expand the gas collection system) to avoid being in violation of the rule and communicate the reasons for the exceedance, results of the investigation, and schedule for corrective action.

    Q2: Are ACT requests necessary if the owner/operator chooses to expand the gas collection system and is unable to complete the expansion project within 120 days?

    A2: Yes. The landfill owner or operator may submit an ACT request as soon as it determines that it cannot meet the 120 day deadline to avoid being in violation of the rule. See above response under A1.

    Q3: What information is included in an ACT request?

    A3: EPA's response describes a number of items that should be included, at a minimum. The request must promptly identify the problem, be very detailed, and contain substantial reasons beyond the control of the facility owner or operator why the exceedances could not and cannot be completed within the prescribed time frame allowed in the rule.

    Q4: If a facility makes repairs to a well to restore the well field to its original designed capacity, or replaces the well in-kind, does that constitute an expansion of the gas collection system (thereby causing the 120-day deadline to be applicable)?

    A4: No. An expansion of the gas collection system consists of an increase beyond the original design capacity.

    Abstract for [A140003]

    Q1: Are bridges considered regulated structures under the asbestos NESHAP?

    A1: Yes. In a response to the California Air Resource Board, EPA indicated that a bridge is a structure within the definition of a facility. As discussed in the October 1990 Background Information Document for Asbestos, it is prudent not to exclude structures such as bridges.

    Q2: Is a thorough inspection of a bridge for the presence of asbestos, including Category I and Category II, required under the asbestos NESHAP?

    A2: Yes. Under 40 CFR 61.145(a), a thorough inspection of any facility is required before demolition or renovation to identify friable asbestos, Category I and Category II nonfriable asbestos-containing material (ACM) and Category I and Category II nonfriable ACM that are not friable at the time of the inspection but will be made friable due to the demolition or renovation.

    Q3: Is bridge concrete Category I, or is it Category II nonfriable ACM?

    A3: Bridge concrete is not listed as Category I nonfriable ACM. According to 40 CFR 61.141, Bridge concrete is considered Category II nonfriable ACM if it contains more than 1 percent asbestos that, when dry, cannot be crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder by hand pressure.

    Q4: Must bridge concrete be sampled for the presence of asbestos before demolition?

    A4: The bridge concrete must be thoroughly inspected. See 40 CFR 61.145(a). Sampling is done to determine whether the material is ACM or not. The amount of ACM that is or will be made friable during the demolition factors into whether asbestos NESHAP requirements apply.

    Q5: If the bridge concrete was never tested for the presence of asbestos before demolition and now the concrete is going to be crushed and recycled, must the concrete be tested for asbestos before crushing and recycling?

    A5: The concrete at a demolition operation regulated by 40 CFR 61.145 must be thoroughly inspected before the demolition operation to determine whether the material is ACM. The recycling could be considered part of the demolition operation and require the owner/operator to sample to determine whether the concrete is ACM. The results will determine whether the concrete can continue to be recycled or must be managed and disposed of as regulated ACM.

    Abstract for [M140006]

    Q: Does K&K Ironworks in Chicago, Illinois remain subject to 40 CFR part 63 subpart MMMM given that they no longer use the quantity of coatings required by 40 CFR 63.3881(b) for an affected source to be covered by Subpart MMMM, and they meet the criteria established at 40 CFR 63.3881(c)(1) to be excluded from coverage of subpart MMMM?

    A: Although K&K Ironworks of Chicago operations no longer fall under the types of activities subject to Subpart MMMM, there may be requirements of subpart MMMM and 40 CFR part 63 subpart A that did not immediately terminate when the company discontinued the use of coatings that contain HAPs. For example, the records retention and recordkeeping requirements at 40 CFR 63.3931(b) and 63.10(b)(3) are continuing obligations, that were triggered when the company used xylene.

    Abstract for [M140008]

    Q: Frontier Refining requested an applicability determination regarding the timing of tank inspections to meet the annual tank inspection requirements under NESHAP subpart G for the Holly Frontier facility in Wyoming. Can the annual inspection requirement be accomplished within an 11-13 month window from the prior inspection?

    A: Yes. If a regulation does not specifically state what is meant by the “once per” (timeframe), the EPA interprets the timeframe to mean at some point within the timeframe and at a reasonable interval between events. See, for example, 40 CFR 63.100(k)(9)(iii). A once per month obligation means sometime within the month, but not the last day of one month and the first day of the next month, because that is not a reasonable time interval. For annual requirements, a reasonable interval between events would be between 11 and 13 months.

    Abstract for [1400021]

    Q: Does EPA agree that Calumet Superior's two steam generating boilers located at its petroleum refinery in Superior, Wisconsin, and which are fuel gas combustion devices (FGCDs) affected facilities under NSPS subpart Ja, do not meet the definition of a process heaters under NSPS subpart Ja, and therefore are not subject to the emission limits, performance testing, monitoring and excess emission reporting requirements for NOx located at 40 CFR 60.102a(g)(2), 60.104a(i), 60.107a(c), 60.107a(d) and 60.102a(i)?

    A: Yes. EPA agrees that Calumet Superior's boilers meet the definition of FGCDs and do not meet the definition of process heaters under NSPS subpart Ja. Therefore, the boilers are not subject to any NOx requirements under NSPS subpart Ja. However, to the extent that the boilers are affected facilities under the Standards of Performance for Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units, NSPS subpart Dc, they may be subject to NOx requirements.

    Abstract for [M140009]

    Q: May Benson Woodworking in Walpole, New Hampshire de-rate its Caterpillar 3306 Generator Set from its current capacity of greater than 300 brake horsepower hour (bhp) to less than 300 bhp by cutting the existing factory governor seal, resetting the loading screws to the lower output specification, and then resealing the governor with wire and a dealer specific lead stamp, to comply with the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ?

    A: No. The de-rate method proposal is not approvable by EPA. The proposed method of de-rating the engine is not permanent in nature.

    Abstract for [M140010]

    Q: Can the following physical changes to Benson Woodworking's Walpole, New Hampshire Caterpillar 3306 Generator Set, including: removal of the current 400 amp circuit breaker and associated frame; destruction of the 400 amp frame; and, fabrication and installation of a new frame to hold a smaller 250 amp circuit that would prevent the engine output from exceeding 299 bhp, result in a de-rating of engine's capacity to less than 300 bhp?

    A: Yes. Based on the physical changes that Benson has proposed, EPA approves the de-rating of the unit to less than 300 bhp given the permanent nature of the physical changes to the unit.

    Abstract for [M140011]

    Q: Does the NSPS for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines, subpart IIII apply to an existing marine propulsion engine manufactured March 22, 1999 (EU ID#4) that the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is planning to relocate as a non-stationary engine at its existing power plant in Emmonak, Alaska?

    A: No. The EU ID#4 engine is not subject to NSPS subpart IIII because it was manufactured prior to April 1, 2006, and commenced construction prior to July 11, 2005. The conversion of an existing non-stationary engine to use as an engine at a stationary source is not “commencement of construction” that would trigger new source status under this rule. However, the EU ID#4 existing engine would be subject to the NESHAP for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE), 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ when it is operated as a stationary source.

    Abstract for [M140012]

    Q1: Did a force majeure event, as defined in 40 CFR part 63 subpart A, occur at the Chena Power Plant in Fairbanks, Alaska?

    A1: Yes. EPA determines that on April 28, 2014, a force majeure event occurred at the Chena Power Plant in Fairbanks, Alaska, when a mechanical failure of one of the facility's turbine generator rendered it inoperable.

    Q2: Is a 60 day extension of the performance test deadline under NESHAP subpart JJJJJJ appropriate?

    A2: Yes. The turbine generator, which is subject to a testing deadline, is needed for representative operation of the boiler when the load from winter district heating is not there to draw steam from the boiler. In 60 days (November 17, 2014) the load from winter district heating will be sufficient. Considering the time estimated to repair the turbine generator, it is reasonable to extend the deadline for the boiler compliance testing by 60 days.

    Abstract for [M140013]

    Q: Can EPA provide further guidance on how to conduct tune-ups under 40 CFR 63.11223(b), which is Condition 4 of the previously EPA approved one-year compliance deadline extension for the Eielson Air Force Base's Central Heat and Power Plant in Alaska? The four existing coal fired boilers subject to the compliance extension are of the spreader stoker/traveling grate design and do not have burners.

    A: Yes. EPA amends the previous approval of the compliance extension to provide further guidance on Condition 4 of the approval, as detailed in the EPA response letter. EPA provides guidance on how to meet the requirements of 40 CFR 63.11223(b) when burners are not present. Some requirements of 40 CFR 63.11223(b) do not apply, while others requirements, such as adjusting the air-to-fuel ratio, and measurement of oxygen and carbon monoxide are still required to be performed.

    Abstract for [M140014]

    Q: Does EPA approve a one-year compliance extension to meet the NESHAP for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boilers, subpart JJJJJJ, for three existing coal-fired boilers (that operate as back-ups) located at the Brigham Young University in Idaho (BYU-Idaho)? The coal-fired boilers will be demolished and replaced with a new energy plant that will be fueled with natural gas.

    A: EPA conditionally approves an extension until December 31, 2014, to operate three coal-fired boilers in their backup capacity without the installation of controls that would otherwise be required to meet the NESHAP subpart JJJJJ. The compliance deadline is extended because BYU-Idaho is constructing a natural gas source of energy generation as a replacement source of energy to meet requirements of the CAA standard. The approval is conditional on BYU-Idaho implementing: (1) interim compliance deadlines for the construction of the natural gas replacement energy; and (2) tune-ups specified in 40 CFR 63.11214 for existing coal-fired boilers with a heat input capacity of less than 10 MM BTU/hr that do not meet the definition of limited-use boiler, or an oxygen trim system that maintains an optimum air-to-fuel ratio.

    Abstract for [Z140007]

    Q: Which area source NESHAP regulation applies to the operations at the BASF Corporation Facility in Lancaster, Texas (Lancaster site)? The NESHAP regulations to evaluate include: NESHAP subpart BBBBBBB applicable to Chemical Preparations Industry area source category; NESHAP subpart VVVVVV applicable to the Chemical Manufacturing Source Category; and NESHAP subpart CCCCCCC applicable to Paints and Allied Products Manufacturing.

    A: EPA finds that the NESHAP subpart BBBBBBB is applicable because the operations at the Lancaster site are mixing-type processes, which are typical of the Chemical Preparations Source Category. EPA understands the Lancaster Site produces architectural coatings, primarily acrylic latex-based stucco that contains aggregate, primarily sand. The Lancaster Site mixes latex dispersions produced off-site with aggregate and other additives to produce acrylic-based stucco.

    Abstract for [A140004]

    Q: Does EPA agree with the City of Sarasota, Florida that the demolition of a single-family residential building acquired by the city is not subject to the asbestos NESHAP subpart M due to the small residence exemption?

    A: Yes. Based on facts presented in the Memorandum of Law from Sarasota and the definition of facility in the asbestos NESHAP, EPA determines the building meets the conditions of a small residential building (a building containing four or fewer dwelling units) and is not subject to the asbestos NESHAP regulation. The house was not used for any institutional, commercial, public, or industrial purpose prior to the demolition. It is not part of an installation, nor part of any public or private project.

    Abstract for [A140005]

    Q: Does EPA approve the Transmission Electron Microscopy test procedure in place of the point counting procedure used to make a determination of the presence of asbestos in bulk materials, as required under the asbestos NESHAP?

    A: In a response to Masek Consulting Services, EPA indicates that the current asbestos regulation requires point counting after evaluating the sample by Polarized Light Microscopy. The owner/operator may choose to use Transmission Electron Microscopy only after analyzing the sample by Polarized Light Microscopy and point counting.

    Abstract for [M140016]

    Q: Does EPA agree that the Boise DeRidder Mill No. l Bark Boiler in DeRidder, Louisiana is a biomass hybrid suspension grate boiler under NESHAP subpart DDDDD?

    A: Yes. EPA agrees that the boiler is subject to NESHAP subpart DDDDD. The Bark Boiler has characteristics that are consistent with the definition of hybrid suspension grate boiler at 40 CFR 63.7575. However, natural gas and tire derived fuel are also present as potential fuels in the boiler. Therefore, the facility must keep records to demonstrate that the annual average moisture content is at or above the 40 percent moisture limit, as required in the rule.

    Abstract for [1400022]

    Q: Does EPA approve the alternative monitoring plan (AMP) for product vapors from marine vessel loading operations which are inherently low in sulfur content, and are combusted in the Marine Vapor Recovery (MVR) Flare No.3, under NSPS 40 CFR 60 subpart J for the Chalmette Refining's Chalmette, Louisiana refinery?

    A: EPA determines that the AMP is no longer necessary since the definition of fuel gas has been modified under the September 12, 2012 amendment to subpart J (77 Federal Register 56463). The marine vessel loading vapor stream does not meet the definition of a fuel gas, as defined at 40 CFR 60.101(d). Therefore, MVR Flare No.3 does not need to meet the continuous monitoring requirements of either 40 CFR 60.105(a)(3) or 60.105(a)(4).

    Abstract for [1400023]

    Q: Can an exemption from monitoring be approved for a fuel gas stream that is low in sulfur content under NSPS subpart J, for the off-gas vent stream from the Gasoline Desulfurization Unit Selective Hydrogenation Unit Surge Drum Vent that is routed to the North Flare at the Marathon Oil facility in Garyville, Louisiana?

    A: Yes. Based on Marathon's description of the process vent streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the exemption. EPA finds that, when controlled as delineated in the response letter, the vent gas stream combusted is inherently low in sulfur, according to 40 CFR 60.105(a)(4)(iv)(D), and does not need to meet the continuous monitoring requirements of 40 CFR 60.105(a)(3) or 60.105(a)(4). EPA included the facility's proposed operating parameter limits, which the facility must continue to monitor, as part of the conditional approval.

    Abstract for [1400024]

    Q: Can an exemption in lieu of Alternative Monitoring Plan be approved for a fuel gas stream that is low in sulfur under NSPS 40 CFR 60 subpart J at the ExxonMobil refinery in Baytown, Texas? The refinery proposes to combust commercial grade natural gas as a supplemental fuel, in combination with refinery fuel gas vent streams.

    A: Yes. Based on ExxonMobil's description of the process vent streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the exemption. EPA finds that the mixture of non-monitored commercial natural gas and refinery fuel vent gas stream combusted is inherently low in sulfur, according to 40 CFR 60.105(a)(4)(iv)(D), when used and controlled as described in the EPA response letter. EPA included the facility's proposed operating parameter limits, which the facility must continue to monitor, as part of the conditional approval. Therefore, the fuel gas combustion devices listed in the request do not need to meet the continuous monitoring requirements of 40 CFR 60.105(a)(3) or 60.105(a)(4).

    Abstract for [1400025]

    Q: Is the propane refrigeration system used at the Enbridge Nine Mile Gas Plant in Dewey County, Oklahoma subject to the requirements of NSPS 40 CFR 60 subpart KKK?

    A: Yes. EPA determines that propane system is subject to NSPS KKK based upon the information the company provided. The propane refrigeration system is a process unit that can also operate independently if supplied with sufficient feed. The propane refrigeration system is “equipment” under 40 CFR 60.631 because it consists of valves, connectors, and compressors in VOC service. These components are in light liquid VOC service because they contain or contact propane, which constitutes at least 97 percent by weight of content of the refrigeration system, and the propane is a liquid within the operating conditions of the refrigeration system.

    Abstract for [1400026]

    Q: Are two natural gas reciprocating compressors which were transferred from a “laydown” yard to the Fayetteville Gathering Hattieville Compressor Station, located in Hattieville, Arkansas, affected facilities subject to the requirements of NSPS subpart OOOO?

    A: No. Relocation, by itself, does not trigger NSPS applicability through modification. Based upon the fact that the company commenced construction of the two compressors on a continuous basis prior to the effective date of NSPS subpart OOOO, nor were they modified, these units are not affected facilities under the subpart. EPA clarified in final rule preamble to NSPS OOOO that relocation does not subject a source to new source standards. Additionally, the General Provisions to Part 60 contain similar language, that relocation or change in ownership, by itself, is not a modification.

    Abstract for [1400027]

    Q1: Does EPA provide final approval of an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for parametric monitoring in lieu of a continuous opacity monitor for a Wet Gas Scrubber (WGS) on a Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU) at Holly Refining & Marketing in Tulsa, Oklahoma (Holly) under NSPS 40 CFR 60, subpart J, and NESHAP 40 CFR 63, subpart UUU, based on submittal of test results?

    A1: Yes. EPA grants final approval of Holly's AMP request. Holly conducted a performance test and submitted additional data pertaining to a prior, conditionally approved AMP. EPA reviewed the performance test results and found the data supportive for establishing final OPLs for the WGS, which included minimum Liquid-to-Gas Ratios, based on 3-hour, hourly rolling averages, for operation of the WGS with one or two nozzles.

    Abstract for [1400028]

    Q: May the Ineos Chocolate Bayou facility in Alvin, Texas, which is subject to both 40 CFR part 60, Standards of Performance for Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Distillation Operations (NSPS subpart NNN) and Reactor Processes (NSPS subpart RRR) use the monitoring and testing provisions in NSPS subpart RRR in lieu of NSPS subpart NNN for the process heaters?

    A: Yes. EPA approves the request for meeting Subpart RRR in lieu of NSPS subpart NNN requirements for testing, monitoring, and recordkeeping for use of process heaters as control devices for compliance with the standards of both subparts. This would require monitoring of small vent and drain valves utilized for maintenance events during maintenance in accordance with NSPS subpart RRR since they act as bypass valves. In addition, the schematic required by 40 CFR 60.705(s) is required with the initial report and must be maintained on site to ensure that the affected vent streams are being routed to appropriate control devices without bypass.

    Abstract for [1400029]

    Q1: Does EPA agree with Kinder Morgan that the Condensate Splitter Flare located at the Galena Park Condensate Processing Facility in Harris County, Texas is subject to NSPS subpart Ja?

    A1: No. EPA is unable to verify applicability of NSPS subpart Ja because sufficient information about the facility or the operations and processes vented to the flare were not provided.

    Q2: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) request for the Condensate Splitter Flare?

    A2: No. Kinder Morgan did not furnish sufficient detail about vent streams routed to the flare, or adequately describe the specific refinery process that would produce low sulfur content vent streams. Assuming the vent streams are fuel gas streams subject to NSPS subpart Ja, we cannot approve any AMP that seeks to circumvent a specific emissions monitoring requirement for affected facility operations. Under NSPS, new facilities must be constructed in such a manner that monitors are installed to demonstrate initial compliance and ensure ongoing compliance until such time that an exemption can be met. Furthermore, applications for exemptions to a rule must provide sufficient data at the time of the request in order to be evaluated for approval.

    Abstract for [1400030]

    Q1: Does EPA approve the HollyFrontier Companies' request for approval of an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring oxygen in the stack, in lieu of parametric monitoring to substitute for a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System, for the hydrocracker reboiler at Navajo Refining's Artesia, New Mexico refinery (Navajo), to comply with the NOX and oxygen standards in NSPS, 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ja?

    A1: Yes. EPA determines that Navajo's AMP that combines monitoring oxygen in the stack along with other specific process monitoring parameters is acceptable based on the limited usage of refinery fuel gas and the information submitted, including the performance test results. Navajo sampled the fuel gas at the reboiler to demonstrate that the stream is 100 percent purchased natural gas. Also, to improve the efficiency of the heater, Navajo installed new burner tips to better combust the purchased natural gas. As a result, NOX and O2 emissions were reduced, as verified by a performance test.

    Abstract for [1400031]

    Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for PSC Industrial to conduct monitoring of H2S emissions at various locations in EPA Region 6, in lieu of installing a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS), when performing tank degassing and other similar operations controlled by portable, temporary thermal oxidizers, at refineries that are subject to NSPS 40 CFR 60 subparts J or Ja?

    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves PSC Industrial's AMP request. Based on the description of the process, the vent gas streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA finds that it is impractical to require monitoring via an H2S CEMS as specified by NSPS subparts J and Ja for the specific portable and temporary combustion device use. EPA included operating parameter limits (OPLs) and data which the refineries must furnish as part of the conditional approval. This conditional approval applies to this company's refineries in EPA Region 6 only. EPA's conditional approval should also be referenced and appropriately incorporated into PSC Industrial's new source review permit in each state where degassing operations at refineries will occur, to ensure federal enforceability.

    Abstract for [1400032]

    Q: Can Samson Exploration, Houston, Texas submit hard copy photographs with the required GIS and date stamp data printed below each photograph in streamlined annual reports required under 40 CFR 60.5420(b)(2) of NSPS subpart OOOO?

    A: Yes. The inclusion of such types of submissions in annual reports is acceptable. There is no regulatory prohibition against submitting hard copies which have the date and GIS coordinates printed beneath each photograph, provided that the proximity of each photograph and its associated data ensures clear correlation. EPA further clarified that, in conjunction with the self-certification statement required under 40 CFR 60.5420(b)(1)(iv), a statement should be included that digital images of the photographs for each well completion are retained, such that the digital image files contain embedded date stamps and geographic coordinate stamps to link the photographs with the specific well completion operations.

    Abstract for [1400033]

    Q: Can EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for Tristar Global Energy Solutions Company (Tristar) to conduct monitoring of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions, in lieu of installing a continuous emission monitoring system, when performing tank degassing and other similar operations controlled by portable, temporary thermal oxidizers, at refineries at various locations that are subject to NSPS subparts J or Ja?

    A: Yes. Based on the description of the process, the vent gas streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the AMP request. EPA included operating parameter limits and data which the refineries must furnish as part of the conditional approval. This conditional approval applies to Tristar's degreasing operations at refineries in EPA Region 6 only.

    Abstract for [1400034]

    Q1: Does EPA agree with Western Farmers Electric Cooperative (WFEC) that excess emission for the Hugo Generating Station, Choctaw County, Oklahoma coal-fired boiler, an “affected facility” under NSPS for Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generators, subpart D, would only be reported for certain periods of operational status such as when the boiler is firing fuel for the purpose of generating electricity?

    A1: No. EPA disagreed that reporting of excess emissions should be limited to certain periods of boiler operational status. EPA reiterated that the NSPS requires reporting of all periods of excess emissions, including those temporary occurrences that may result in a particular emission standard being exceeded. Required recordkeeping and reporting should be viewed, along with O&M and SSM protocols, as a company's substantiation of acting in good faith to demonstrate compliance with emission limitations, standards, and work practice standards at all times. EPA believes that WFEC has misinterpreted certain monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting provisions in the NSPS and MACT standards that a combustion source must meet for continuous compliance demonstration, which we explained in the Regulatory Interpretation enclosure of the EPA response.

    Abstract for [1400035]

    Q: Does EPA approve the alternative monitoring Operating Parameter Limits (OPLs) under NSPS subpart Ec, for a pollution control system on a new medical waste incinerator which consists of a wet gas scrubber (WGS) followed by a carbon adsorber and cartridge filter, located at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMBG) in Galveston, Texas?

    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Hydro-Environmental Technologies petition on behalf UTMBG for an AMP. As part of the conditional approval, performance testing must be conducted to demonstrate compliance and establish OPL values for the WGS, carbon adsorber and cartridge filter. Final approval of the AMP will be based on the OPLs established and other provisions that may be deemed necessary from our evaluation of the test results.

    Abstract for [1400036]

    Q: Will EPA approve the Fuel Analysis Plan for monitoring total sulfur content of fuels in lieu of SO2 emissions monitoring under NSPS subpart Db for Industrial-Commercial Institutional Steam Generating Units for which construction, reconstruction, or modification commenced after June 19, 1984, at the No. 6 Power Boiler in Westvaco, Texas L.P. facility (Westvaco)?

    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Westvaco's Fuel Analysis Plan, as delineated within the response letter. 40 CFR 60.45b(k) allows compliance to be demonstrated by a fuel based compliance alternative. The plan ensures that data will be collected to demonstrate that the average percentage sulfur concentration in the wood fuel, plus three standard deviations, will not result in a combined fuel mixture that will exceed the sulfur emission limit. Westvaco will continue to obtain and maintain fuel receipts for the other combusted fuels.

    Abstract for [1400037]

    Q: Can an exemption from monitoring be approved for a fuel gas stream that is low in sulfur content, under NSPS subpart J, for the off-gas vent stream from the Merox Off-gas Knockout Pot in the Alky Stripper Reboiler Heater, at the Valero Refining Meraux facility in Meraux, Louisiana?

    A: Yes. Based on the description of the process vent streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the exemption in light of changes made to NSPS subpart J on June 24, 2008 (73 Federal Register 35866). EPA finds that, when used and controlled as described in the response letter, the vent gas stream combusted is inherently low in sulfur according to 40 CFR 60.105(a)(4)(iv)(D) and therefore, the fuel gas combustion device does not need to meet the continuous monitoring requirements of 40 CFR 60.105(a)(3) or 60.105(a)(4) for the Merox Off-gas Knockout Pot fuel gas stream. Valero Meraux is required to monitor and control the relevant process parameters, as summarized in the Enclosure, as a condition of this exemption approval.

    Abstract for [1100017]

    Q: Can alternative monitoring be approved in lieu of a Continuous Opacity Monitoring System (COMS) since the moisture in the Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit exhaust from the wet gas scrubber (WGS) will interfere with the ability of the COMS to take accurate opacity readings due to water interference for the Conoco Phillips Sweeny, Texas Refinery?

    A: Yes. EPA approves the alternative monitoring based on information provided by Conoco, including a stack test report and three proposed operating parameters limits (OPLs) for the wet gas scrubber. The OPLs address nozzle pressure, pressure drop, and liquid to gas ratio.

    Dated: April 13, 2015. Lisa Lund, Director, Office of Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09242 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 15, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. Wintrust Financial Corporation, Rosemont, Illinois; to acquire North Bank, Chicago, Illinois.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. First Financial Bankshares, Inc., Abilene, Texas; to merge with FBC Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire First Bank, National Association, both in Conroe, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 15, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09021 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Approval Under Delegated Authority and Submission to OMB AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given of the final approval of proposed information collection by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) under OMB delegated authority, as per OMB Regulations on Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. Copies of the Paperwork Reduction Act Submission, supporting statements and approved collection of information instrument(s) are placed into OMB's public docket files. The Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Federal Reserve Board Acting Clearance Officer—Mark Tokarski—Office of the Chief Data Officer, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551 (202) 452-5241. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may contact (202) 263-4869, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551.

    OMB Desk Officer—Shagufta Ahmed—Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.

    Final approval under OMB delegated authority the extension for three years, with revision, of the following information collection:

    Report title: Information Collection Associated with the Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements of Regulation B (Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA)).

    Agency form number: Regulation B.

    OMB control number: 7100-0201.

    Frequency: Event-generated.

    Reporters: State member banks, branches and agencies of foreign banks (other than federal branches, federal agencies, and insured state branches of foreign banks), commercial lending companies owned or controlled by foreign banks, and organizations operating under section 25 or 25A of the Federal Reserve Act.

    Estimated annual reporting hours: Notifications: 76,536 hours; Furnishing of credit information: 31,890 hours; Record retention, applications, actions, and prescreened solicitations: 8,504 hours; Information for monitoring purposes: 3,189 hours; Rules on providing appraisal reports, providing appraisal reports: 38,268 hours; Self-testing record retention, incentives, 400 hours and self-correction, 400 hours; Rules concerning requests for information, disclosure for optional self-test: 8,400 hours.

    Estimated average hours per response: Notifications: 6 hours; Furnishing of credit information: 2.5 hours; Record retention, applications, actions, and prescreened solicitations: 8 hours; Information for monitoring purposes: 15 minutes; Rules on providing appraisal reports, providing appraisal reports: 3 hours; Self-testing record retention, incentives, 2 hours and self-correction, 8 hours; Rules concerning requests for information, disclosure for optional self-test: 3.5 hours.

    Number of respondents: 1,063.

    General description of report: This information collection is authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1691b, which authorizes the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of ECOA. An institution's recordkeeping and disclosure obligations under Regulation B are mandatory. The Federal Reserve does not collect any information; therefore, no issue of confidentiality normally arises.

    Abstract: ECOA was enacted in 1974 and is implemented by Regulation B. ECOA prohibits discrimination in any aspect of a credit transaction because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract), or other specified bases (receipt of public assistance, or the fact that the applicant has in good faith exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.)). To aid in implementation of this prohibition, the statute and regulation subject creditors to various mandatory disclosure requirements, notification provisions informing applicants of action taken on the credit application, credit history reporting, monitoring rules, and recordkeeping requirements. These requirements are triggered by specific events and disclosures must be provided within the time periods established by the statute and regulation. There are no required reporting forms associated with the CFPB's Regulation B. To ease the burden and cost of compliance (particularly for small entities), Regulation B provides model disclosure forms.

    Current Actions: On January 28, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 4571) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, with revision, of the information collection associated with Regulation B. The comment period for this notice expired on March 30, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments. The revisions will be implemented as proposed.

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

    1. Report title: Information Collection Associated with the Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Disclosure Requirements of Regulation BB (Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)).

    Agency form number: Regulation BB.

    OMB control number: 7100-0197.

    Frequency: Annually.

    Reporters: State member banks (SMBs).

    Estimated annual reporting hours: Recordkeeping requirement, small business and small farm loan register: 16,863 hours; Optional recordkeeping requirements, consumer loan data, 4,238 hours and other loan data, 275 hours; Reporting requirements, assessment area delineation, 164 hours; loan data: Small business and small farm, 616 hours, community development, 1,066 hours, and HMDA out of MSA, 17,963 hours; Optional reporting requirements, data on lending by a consortium or third party, 153 hours; affiliate lending data, 152 hours; request for strategic plan approval, 275 hours; request for designation as a wholesale or limited purpose bank, 4 hours; Disclosure requirement, public file, 8,510 hours.

    Estimated average hours per response: Recordkeeping requirement, small business and small farm loan register: 219 hours; Optional recordkeeping requirements, consumer loan data, 326 hours, and other loan data, 25 hours; Reporting requirements, assessment area delineation, 2 hours; loan data: Small business and small farm, 8 hours, community development, 13 hours, and HMDA out of MSA, 253 hours; Optional reporting requirements, data on lending by a consortium or third party, 17 hours; affiliate lending data, 38 hours; request for strategic plan approval, 275 hours; request for designation as a wholesale or limited purpose bank, 4 hours; Disclosure requirement, public file, 10 hours.

    Number of respondents: Recordkeeping requirement, small business and small farm loan register, 77; Optional recordkeeping requirements, consumer loan data, 13, and other loan data, 11; Reporting requirements, assessment area delineation, 82; loan data: Small business and small farm, 77, community development, 82, and HMDA out of MSA, 71; Optional reporting requirements, data on lending by a consortium or third party, 9; affiliate lending data, 4; request for strategic plan approval, 1; request for designation as a wholesale or limited purpose bank, 1; Disclosure requirement, public file, 851.

    General description of report: This information collection is authorized by section 806 of the CRA, which permits the Board to issue regulations to carry out the purpose of CRA (12 U.S.C. 2905), Section 11 of the Federal Reserve Act (FRA), which permits the Board to require such statements as reports of SMBs as it deems necessary (12 U.S.C. 248(a)(1)), and section 9 of the FRA, which permits the Board to examine SMBs (12 U.S.C. 325). The obligation to comply with the recordkeeping, reporting, and disclosure requirements of Regulation BB is generally mandatory and varies depending on whether the bank is a large bank. Other parts of the collection—specifically, the request for designation as a wholesale or limited purpose bank, the strategic plan, and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with data regarding consumer loans and lending performance, affiliate lending data, data on lending by a consortium or a third party, are required to obtain a benefit. The data that are reported to the Federal Reserve are not considered confidential.

    Abstract: CRA was enacted in 1977 and is implemented by Regulation BB. The CRA directs the federal banking agencies 1 to evaluate financial institutions' records of helping to meet the credit needs of their entire communities, including low- and moderate-income areas consistent with the safe and sound operation of the institutions. The CRA is implemented through regulations issued by the federal banking agencies.2

    1 In addition to the Board, the federal banking agencies currently responsible for CRA rules are the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

    2 The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 transferred from the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) all authorities (including rulemaking) relating to savings associations to the OCC and all authorities (including rulemaking) relating to savings and loan holding companies (SLHCs) to the Board on July 21, 2011.

    In 1995, the federal banking agencies issued substantially identical regulations under CRA to reduce unnecessary compliance burden, promote consistency in CRA assessments, and encourage improved performance.3 As a result, the current recordkeeping, reporting, and disclosure requirements under Regulation BB depend in part on a bank's size, and are discussed more fully below in the description of information collection.

    3 60 FR 22156 (May 4, 1995).

    Under Regulation BB, large banks are defined as those with assets of $1.202 billion or more for the past two consecutive year-ends; all other banks are considered small or intermediate.4 The banking agencies amend the definition of a small bank and an intermediate small bank in their CRA regulations each year when the asset thresholds are adjusted for inflation pursuant to Regulation BB, most recently in December 2013.5

    4 Beginning January 1, 2014, banks and savings associations that, as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.202 billion are small banks or small savings associations. Small banks or small savings associations with assets of at least $300 million as of December 31 of both of the prior two calendar years, and less than $1.202 billion as of December 31 of either of the prior two calendar years, are intermediate small banks or intermediate small savings associations.

    5 78 FR 79283 (December 30, 2013).

    Other than the information collections pursuant to the CRA, the Board has no information collection that supplies data regarding the community reinvestment activities of SMBs.

    Current Actions: On January 28, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 4571) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Recordkeeping, Reporting and Disclosure Requirements in Regulation BB. The comment period for this notice expired on March 30, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments.

    2. Report title: Information Collections Associated with the Recordkeeping and Disclosure requirements of Regulation M (Consumer Leasing).

    Agency form number: Regulation M.

    OMB control number: 7100-0202.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Reporters: Consumer lessors.

    Estimated annual reporting hours: Disclosures: 33 hours; Advertising: 7 hours.

    Estimated average hours per response: Disclosures: 2.08 hours; Advertising: 25 minutes.

    Number of respondents: 4.

    General description of report: This information collection is authorized by sections 105(a) and 187 of TILA (15 U.S.C. 1604(a) and 1667f respectively, which authorize the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to issue regulations to carry out the provisions of the Consumer Leasing Act (CLA). The CFPB's Regulation M, 12 CFR part 1013, implements these statutory provisions. An institution's recordkeeping and disclosure obligations under Regulation M are mandatory. Because the Federal Reserve does not collect any information pursuant to the CFPB's Regulation M, no issue of confidentiality normally arises. Furthermore, the lease information regarding individual leases with consumers is confidential between the institution and the consumer. In the event the Board were to retain regarding consumer leases during the course of an examination, the information regarding the consumer and the lease would be kept confidential pursuant to section (b)(8) of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 522 (b)(8)).

    Abstract: The CLA and Regulation M are intended to provide consumers with meaningful disclosures about the costs and terms of leases for personal property. The disclosures enable consumers to compare the terms for a particular lease with those for other leases and, when appropriate, to compare lease terms with those for credit transactions. The CLA and Regulation M also contain rules about advertising consumer leases and limit the size of balloon payments in consumer lease transactions.

    The CFPB's Regulation M applies to all types of lessors of personal property (except motor vehicle dealers excluded from the Bureau's authority under Dodd-Frank Act section 1029, which are covered by the Board's Regulation M 6 ). The CLA and Regulation M require lessors to disclose to consumers uniformly the costs, liabilities, and terms of consumer lease transactions. Disclosures are provided to consumers before they enter into lease transactions and in advertisements that state the availability of consumer leases on particular terms. The regulation generally applies to consumer leases of personal property in which the contractual obligation does not exceed $53,500 and has a term of more than four months. The CLA does not provide exemptions for small entities.

    6 12 U.S.C. 5519; 12 CFR part 213.

    In April 2011, shortly before primary rule writing authority for the CLA transferred to the CFPB, the Board published a final rule that established a new dollar threshold for lease transactions subject to Regulation M, implementing an amendment to the CLA by the Dodd-Frank Act.7 This amendment increased the dollar threshold for lease contracts subject to the CLA and Regulation M from $25,000 to $50,000. The amendment also required that this threshold be adjusted annually for inflation by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For 2014, the Regulation M threshold is $53,500,8 which will be increased to $54,600 effective January 1, 2015.9

    7 Public Law 111-203, 1100E, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), amending 15 U.S.C. 1667(1). See 76 FR 18349 (Apr. 4, 2011).

    8 78 FR 70193 (Nov. 25, 2013). This threshold adjustment was issued jointly by the Board, for its Regulation M at 12 CFR part 213, and the CFPB, for its Regulation M at 12 CFR 1013.

    9 79 FR 56482 (Sept. 22, 2014).

    Current Actions: On January 28, 2015, the Federal Reserve published a notice in the Federal Register (80 FR 4571) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Board's information collections associated with the Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements of Regulation M. The comment period for this notice expired on March 30, 2015. The Federal Reserve did not receive any comments.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 16, 2015. Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09193 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and section 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than May 5, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. James F. Kemp, Karen Sybil Kemp, Cynthia Susan Kemp, Keith Keller, Marjorie Keller, Stacy Lynn Loth, Kory Allen Keller, Mark Durst, Kay Keller Durst, and Daniel Wesley Kemp, all of Fredericksburg, Texas; Brian Daniel Kemp, San Marcos, Texas; Stephanie Ann Igle, San Angelo, Texas; Kristy Kay LeJeune, College Station, Texas; Kimberly Durst Bonnen, Friendswood, Texas; Kathleen Keller, Hye, Texas; and James L. Hayne, San Antonio, Texas, as trustee of the James L. Hayne, Ranch Trust of 2001 and Roxana C. Hayne, Ranch Trust of 2001; collectively, to retain voting shares of Security Holding Company, and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Security State Bank & Trust, both in Fredericksburg, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 15, 2015.

    Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09020 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the notices must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 15, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. Horizon Bancorp, Michigan City, Indiana; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Peoples Bancorp, and indirectly acquire Peoples Federal Savings Bank of DeKalb County, both in Auburn, Indiana, and thereby engage in operating a savings association, pursuant to section 225.28 (b)(4)(ii).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 15, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09019 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies; Correction

    This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 2015-07792) published on page 18404 of the issue for Monday, April 6, 2015.

    Under the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco heading, the entry for PacWest Bancorp, and Pacific Western Bank, both in Los Angeles, California, is revised to read as follows:

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Gerald C. Tsai, Director, Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579:

    1. PacWest Bancorp, and Pacific Western Bank, both in Los Angeles, California; to merge with Square 1 Financial, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Square 1 Bank, both in Durham, North Carolina.

    In connection with this application, Applicants have also applied to acquire Square 1 Ventures, LLC, Square 1 Venture Management 1, L.P., and Square 1 Ventures 1, L.P., all in Durham, North Carolina, and thereby engage in funds management, investment advisory, and private placement activities, pursuant to sections 225.28(b)(6)(i), (b)(7)(i) and (b)(7)(iii), respectively.

    Comments on this application must be received by May 1, 2015.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 16, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09185 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the notices must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 6, 2015.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309:

    1. The Desjardins Group and Fédération des caisses Desjardins du Québec, both in Levis, Canada; to acquire up to 100 percent of the voting shares of Samson Capital Advisors LLC, New York, New York, and thereby engage in financial and investment advisory activities, pursuant to sections 225.28(b)(6)(i) and (b)(6)(iv); private placement services, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(7)(iii); and investment and trading activities, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(8)(ii)(C).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 16, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09184 Filed 4-20-15; 08:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Financial Stability Oversight Council.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Financial Stability Oversight Council (the “Council”) invites members of the public and affected agencies to comment on continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.1 Section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) 2 provides the Council the authority to determine that a nonbank financial company shall be subject to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board of Governors”) and enhanced prudential standards if the Council determines that material financial stress at the nonbank financial company, or the nature, scope, size, scale, concentration, interconnectedness, or mix of the activities of the nonbank financial company, could pose a threat to financial stability. The Council is soliciting comments concerning its extension of a currently approved collection of information related to its authority to determine that certain nonbank financial companies shall be subject to supervision by the Board of Governors and enhanced prudential standards. The Council will submit the following information collection requests to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, on or after the date of publication of this notice.

    1 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).

    2 12 U.S.C. 5323.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before May 21, 2015 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Mail: Attn: Request for Comments (Financial Stability Oversight Council Proposed Information Collection), Office of the Financial Stability Oversight Council, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20220 or Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for Treasury, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503.

    Electronic Submission: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and the Federal Register document number that appears at the end of this document. Comments received will be made available to the public via regulations.gov without change, and including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information about the filings or procedures should be directed to Executive Director, Financial Stability Oversight Council, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On April 11, 2012, the Council published in the Federal Register a final rule and interpretive guidance (“Rule and Guidance”) that describe the manner in which the Council intends to apply the statutory standards and considerations, and the processes and procedures the Council intends to follow, in making determinations under section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act.3 The Council has made final determinations regarding four nonbank financial companies. The Council uses information collected under its Rule and Guidance to assess whether a nonbank financial company meets the standards for a Council determination under section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The collection of information under 12 CFR 1310.21 affords a nonbank financial company an opportunity to submit materials to contest the Council's consideration of the company for a proposed determination and to contest a proposed determination. The collection of information under 12 CFR 1310.22 provides a nonbank financial company an opportunity to contest the Council's waiver or modification of the notice or other procedural requirements contained in 12 CFR 1310.21 by requesting a hearing. The Council uses information collected under 12 CFR 1310.23 in a reevaluation of its determination regarding a nonbank financial company subject to a Council determination.

    3See 12 CFR part 1310.

    In February 2015, the Council adopted Supplementary Procedures Relating to Nonbank Financial Company Determinations (“Supplementary Procedures”), which supplement the Council's Rule and Guidance and are organized into three categories: the Council's engagement with nonbank financial companies during evaluations for potential determinations; engagement during annual reevaluations of determinations; and transparency to the public.4 The Supplementary Procedures clarify certain aspects of the Council's engagement with nonbank financial companies but do not impose additional burdens on companies.

    4 Supplementary Procedures Relating to Nonbank Financial Company Determinations, Feb. 4, 2015, available at http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/designations/Documents/Supplemental%20Procedures%20Related%20to%20Nonbank%20Financial%20Company%20Determinations%20-%20February%202015.pdf.

    Title: Determinations Regarding Certain Nonbank Financial Companies.

    OMB Control Number: 1505-0244.

    Abstract: The Council uses information collected under 12 CFR 1310.20 to assess whether a nonbank financial company meets the standards for a Council determination under section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The collection of information under 12 CFR 1310.21 affords a nonbank financial company an opportunity to submit materials to contest the Council's consideration of the company for a proposed determination and to contest a proposed determination. The collection of information under 12 CFR 1310.22 provides a nonbank financial company an opportunity to contest the Council's waiver or modification of the notice or other procedural requirements contained in 12 CFR 1310.21 by requesting a hearing. The Council uses information collected under 12 CFR 1310.23 in its reevaluation of a determination regarding a nonbank financial company subject to a Council determination.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Nonbank financial companies.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours for all Collections: 500 hours.

    Request For Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    David G. Clunie, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09145 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0010; Docket 2015-0055; Sequence 1] Submission to OMB for Review; Federal Acquisition Regulation; Progress Payments (SF-1443) AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Regulatory Secretariat will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously information collection requirement concerning progress payments. A notice was published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 6970 on February 9, 2015. No comments were received.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0010, Progress Payments, by any of the following methods:

    • Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB Control number 9000-0010. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0010, Progress Payments”. Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0010, Progress Payments” on your attached document.

    • Fax: 202-501-4067.

    • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0010, Progress Payments.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0010, Progress Payments, in all correspondence related to this collection. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathy Hopkins, Procurement Analyst, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, at 202-969-7226 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    Certain Federal contracts provide for progress payments to be made to the contractor during performance of the contract. Pursuant to FAR clause 52.232-16 “Progress Payments,” contractors are required to request progress payments on Standard Form 1443, “Contractor's Request for Progress Payment,” or an agency approved electronic equivalent. Additionally, contractors may be required to submit reports, certificates, financial statements, and other pertinent information, reasonably requested by the Contracting Officer. The contractual requirement for submission of reports, certificates, financial statements and other pertinent information is necessary for protection of the Government against financial loss through the making of progress payments.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 25,161.

    Responses per Respondent: 32.

    Annual Responses: 805,152.

    Hours per Response: .42.

    Total Burden Hours: 338,164.

    Time required to read and prepare information is estimated at 25.2 minutes (less than one-half hour) per completion. This downward change is attributable to productivity gains (based on data from Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1990-2013) realized through technology. The anticipated number of respondents has been reduced (from 27,000 to 25,161), as well, and is proportional to the lower number of Federal contracts overall.

    C. Public Comments

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

    D. Obtaining Copies Of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0010, Progress Payments, in all correspondence.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Edward Loeb, Acting Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09240 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-MV-2015-01; Docket No. 2015-0002; Sequence No. 8] Public Availability of General Services Administration FY 2014 Service Contract Inventory AGENCY:

    General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public availability of FY 2014 Service Contract Inventories.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with The Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, GSA is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of the FY 2014 Service Contract Inventories.

    DATES:

    April 21, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions regarding the Service Contract Inventory should be directed to Mr. Paul F. Boyle in the Office of Acquisition Policy at 202-501-0324 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with section 743 of Division C of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 111-117), GSA is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of the FY 2014 Service Contract Inventories. These inventories provide information on service contract actions over $25,000 that were made in FY 2014. The information is organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on December 19, 2011 by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP's guidance is available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/memo/service-contract-inventory-guidance.

    The GSA has posted its inventory and a summary of the inventory on the GSA.gov homepage at the following link: http://www.gsa.gov/gsasci.

    Dated: April 16, 2015. Jeffrey A. Koses, Senior Procurement Executive, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09230 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-61-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-15-15KX] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. To request more information on the below proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call 404-639-7570 or send comments to LeRoy Richardson, 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D74, Atlanta, GA 30333 or send an email to [email protected]

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    Assessing Community-Based Organizations' Partnerships with Schools for the Prevention of HIV/STDs—New—Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH), National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    HIV infections remain high among young men who have sex with men (YMSM). The estimated number of new HIV infections increased between 2008 and 2010 both overall and among MSM ages 13 to 24. Furthermore, sexual risk behaviors associated with HIV, other sexually transmitted disease (STD), and pregnancy often emerge in adolescence. For example, 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) data revealed 47.4% of U.S. high school students reported having had sex, and among those who had sex in the previous three months, 39.8% reported having not used a condom during last sexual intercourse. In addition, 2001-2009 YRBSS data revealed high school students identifying as gay, lesbian, and bisexual and those reporting sexual contact with both males and females were more likely to engage in sexual risk-taking behaviors than heterosexual students.

    Given the disproportionate risk for HIV among YMSM ages 13-24, it is important to find ways to reach the younger youth (i.e., ages 13-19) in this range to decrease sexual risk behaviors and increase health-promoting behaviors such as routine HIV testing. Schools provide one opportunity for this. Because schools enroll more than 22 million teens (ages 14-19) and often have existing health and social services infrastructure, schools and their staff members are well-positioned to connect youth to a wide range of needed services, including housing assistance, support groups, and sexual health services such as HIV testing. As a result, CDC's DASH has focused a number of HIV and STD prevention efforts on strategies that can be implemented in or centered on schools.

    However, conducting HIV and STD prevention work (particularly work that is designed to specifically meet the needs of YMSM) can be challenging. School is not always a welcoming environment for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth. Harassment, bullying, and verbal and physical assault are often reported, and such unsupportive environments and victimization among LGBTQ youth are associated with a variety of negative outcomes, including truancy, substance use, poor mental health, HIV and STD risk, and even suicide. Schools build partnerships with community-based organizations to increase access to needed services of LGBTQ youth.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) requests a 3-year OMB approval to conduct a new information collection entitled, “Assessing Community-Based Organizations' Partnerships with Schools for the Prevention of HIV/STDs.” The information collection will allow CDC to conduct assessment of selected staff from community-based organizations (CBOs) and health and/or wellness centers (HWCs), including school-based health centers, at participating schools or to which YMSM from participating schools are referred. This is part of the HIV and STD prevention efforts that are taking place in conjunction with local education agencies (LEAs) funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) under strategy 4 (School-Centered HIV/STD Prevention for Young Men Who Have Sex with Men) of PS13-1308: Promoting Adolescent Health through School-Based HIV/STD Prevention and School-Based Surveillance. This information collection will provide data and reports for the three funded LEAs, and will allow each LEA to identify areas of the partnerships with CBOs and HWCs that are working well and other areas that will need additional improvement. In addition, the findings will allow CDC to determine the potential impact of currently recommended strategies and make changes to those recommendations if necessary.

    This information collection system involves administration of a web-based questionnaire to no more than 60 total staff members who work for up to 60 CBOs and HWCs that are participating in the HIV/STD prevention project with the three LEAs (Broward County Public Schools in Broward County, Florida; Los Angeles Unified School District in Los Angeles, California; and San Francisco Unified School District in San Francisco, California) funded by CDC cooperative agreement PS13-1308. These LEAs represent all funded LEAs under Strategy 4 of PS13-1308. The questionnaire will include questions on the following topics: Services offered by the organization and the organization's relationships with the school district and participating schools in the LEA.

    The Web-based instrument will be administered in 2015 and again in 2016 and 2018. These data collection points coincide with the initiation of project activities, the mid-way point, and endpoint of the PS13-1308 cooperative agreement. Although some respondents may participate in the data collection in multiple years, this is not a longitudinal design and individual staff member responses will not be tracked across the years. No personally identifiable information will be collected and data will only be reported in the aggregate to protect the CBOs and HWCs being represented.

    All respondents will receive informed consent forms prior to participation in the information collection. The consent form explains the study and also explains that participants may choose not to complete the Web-based questionnaire with no penalty and no impact on their job or relationship with the LEA. Participation is completely voluntary.

    For the Web-based questionnaire, the estimated burden per response is about 60 minutes (1 hour). This estimate of burden is an average and takes into account that the length of the questionnaire for each respondent will vary slightly due to the skip patterns that may occur with certain responses, variations in the reading speed of respondents, and variations in the time required to collect the information needed to complete the questionnaire.

    The estimated annualized burden of this data collection is 60 hours. There are no costs to respondents other than their time.

    Estimated Annualized Burden to Respondents Respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • CBO staff CBO Assessment Questionnaire 30 1 1 HWC staff HWC Assessment Questionnaire 30 1 1
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09086 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-15-15DH] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected]. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    Division of Community Health (DCH) Awardee Training Needs Assessment—New—National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established the Division of Community Health (DCH) to support multi-sector, community-based programs that promote healthy living. To support these efforts, DCH announced two new cooperative agreement programs in 2014, as authorized by the Public Health Service Act. Both programs will apply public health strategies to reduce tobacco use and exposure, improve nutrition, increase physical activity, and improve access to opportunities for chronic disease prevention, risk reduction, and management.

    The Partnerships to Improve Community Health (PICH) program (Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) DP14-1417) will promote the use of evidence- and practice-based strategies to create or strengthen healthy environments that make it easier for people to make healthy choices and take charge of their health. The 39 PICH awardees include both state and local governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations. Awardees will work through multi-sector community coalitions of businesses, schools, nonprofit organizations, and other community organizations. Projects will serve three types of geographic areas: Large cities and urban counties, small cities and counties, and American Indian tribes.

    The new Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health (REACH) cooperative agreement (FOA DP14-1419PPHF14) builds on previous REACH program activities that began in 1999 with a focus on racial and ethnic communities experiencing health disparities. The 49 new REACH awardees include local governmental agencies, community-based nongovernmental organizations, tribes and tribal organizations, Urban Indian Health Programs, and tribal and intertribal consortia. Of these awardees, 17 are receiving funds for basic implementation activities, and 32 are receiving funds to immediately expand their scope of work to improve health and reduce health disparities. REACH is financed in part by the Prevention and Public Health Fund of the Affordable Care Act.

    CDC proposes to collect information needed to assess and prioritize the training needs of PICH and REACH awardees and key collaborators. A DCH Training Needs Assessment survey will be conducted at two points in time: once near the beginning of the project period (approximately third quarter of 2015) and again in the second year of the project period (last quarter of 2016). The first administration of the survey will provide an initial assessment of awardee needs at program start-up. The second administration of the needs assessment will identify any new or modified training needs that arise as awardees progress in their cooperative agreement activities. Questions within the needs assessment focus on awardee preferences for training modalities as well as facilitators and barriers to training access.

    Respondents will be staff members and coalition members associated with the 88 DCH awardees. Information will be requested from four individuals affiliated with each award: The principal investigator or program manager, the lead evaluation staff member, the lead media/communications staff member, and a coalition member. The maximum number of respondents is 352 (88 awardees × 4 respondents/awardee). Because the REACH and PICH awards aim to promote collaborative, multi-sector efforts, respondents will be associated with both private sector entities and state, local, and tribal government entities.

    The same survey instrument will be administered to all respondents, however the estimated burden per response varies according to the respondent's project role and responsibilities. Information will be collected using a Web-based platform. Data collection and management will be conducted by a contractor on behalf of CDC. A telephone interview option is available for respondents who prefer this mode of participation.

    Findings will enable DCH to develop appropriate training activities that best support awardees' community efforts to fulfill their funded objectives.

    OMB approval is requested for two years. Participation is voluntary and there are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 237.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of
  • respondent
  • Number of respondents Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Private Sector Respondents Associated with PICH or REACH Awards: Principal Investigator 24 1 50/60 Program Manager 23 1 50/60 Evaluation Lead 47 1 30/60 Media/Communication Lead 47 1 20/60 Coalition Member 88 1 1 State/Local/Tribal Government Sector Respondents Associated with PICH or REACH Awards: Principal Investigator 21 1 50/60 Program Manager 20 1 50/60 Evaluation Lead 41 1 30/60 Media/Communication Lead 41 1 20/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09085 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces a meeting for the initial review of applications in response to Special Interest Project (SIP) 15-004, Utilizing a Targeted Media Campaign and Community Health Workers to Increase Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Among Muslim Women.

    Time and Date: 11:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., May 14, 2015 (Closed).

    Place: Teleconference.

    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.

    Matters for Discussion: The meeting will include the initial review, discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to “Utilizing a Targeted Media Campaign and Community Health Workers to Increase Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Among Muslim Women, SIP 15-004.”

    Contact Person for More Information: Brenda Colley Gilbert, Ph.D., M.S.P.H., Director, Extramural Research Program Operations and Services, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE., Mailstop F-80, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, Telephone: (770) 488-6295, [email protected]

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09084 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-15-15ZT; Docket No. CDC-2015-0023] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on the proposed information collection request for the Performance Measurement and Program Evaluation of the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network (ADDM). CDC seeks to collect performance monitoring and program evaluation data from all sites participating in the ADDM network.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2015-0023 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    Please note:

    All public comment should be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking portal (Regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    Performance Measurement and Program Evaluation of the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network (ADDM)—New—National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is a new Information Collection Request.

    Background and Brief Description

    In January 2015, CDC launched a new phase of funding for its autism spectrum disorder (ASD) surveillance program through a new cooperative agreement: “Enhancing Public Health Surveillance of Autism Spectrum Disorder and Other Developmental Disabilities through the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network” under the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) DD15-1501. Through this cooperative agreement, funding is provided to enhance tracking at eight existing sites and to launch two new sites. Awards were made to state/local health departments and/or their designated representatives, including Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Johns Hopkins University, Rutgers University, University of Arizona, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Minnesota, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Vanderbilt University, and Washington University in St. Louis. Four sites received funding to carry out Component A, which focuses on surveillance of ASD and either cerebral palsy or intellectual disability among 8-year-olds. Six sites received funding to carry out both Component A as well as Component B, which focuses on surveillance of ASD among 4-year-olds. In addition to the sites funded under the cooperative agreement, CDC also administers a site in Atlanta, Georgia, commonly known as the Metropolitan Atlanta Developmental Disabilities Surveillance Program (MADDSP).

    CDC requests OMB approval to collect performance monitoring and program evaluation information from all sites participating in the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network (including the site administered by CDC). Over the course of the four-year funding cycle, each site will submit a Checklist, Worksheets, and Performance Measures every six month and two-year intervals. The Checklist, Worksheets, and Performance Measures will be submitted to CDC by completing a Microsoft Excel-based data collection tool and uploading the information to a secure, password-protected FTP site. By developing a user-friendly data collection tool in Microsoft Excel, CDC anticipates that the reporting and tracking burden for awardees will be reduced due to: (1) awardees' familiarity with the software, which reduces training burden; and (2) the compatibility of the templates with other record keeping processes that are already in place for many awardees. CDC staff and contractors will be responsible for converting each awardee's submissions into a secure Microsoft Access-based system for reporting and analysis. CDC anticipates that respondent burden will be slightly higher at the initial six-month submission and will also be slightly higher for sites completing Component A&B compared to just Component A.

    The information to be collected will help CDC and awardees assure compliance with cooperative agreement requirements, support program evaluation efforts, and obtain information needed to respond to inquiries about program activities and program impact from Congress and other stakeholders.

    OMB approval is requested for three years. Participation is required as a condition of cooperative agreement funding. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated burden hours are 125.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Component A only (initial six-month submission) Checklist 5 1 3/60 1 Worksheets 5 1 1.5 8 Performance Measures 5 1 30/60 3 Component A&B (initial six-month submission) Checklist 6 1 3/60 1 Worksheets 6 1 2 12 Performance Measures 6 1 4/60 4 Component A only (subsequent six-month and two-year submissions) Checklist 5 5 3/60 1 Worksheets 5 5 1 25 Performance Measures 5 5 18/60 8 Component A&B (subsequent six-month and two-year submissions) Checklist 6 5 3/60 2 Worksheets 6 5 1.5 45 Performance Measures 6 5 30/60 15
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09087 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review

    The meeting announced below concerns Effectiveness of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program Designed specifically for Young Males, DP15-007, initial review.

    SUMMARY:

    This document corrects a notice that was published in the Federal Register on April 14, 2015 Volume 80, Number 71, pages 19989. The title of the Special Emphasis Panel should read as above and time and date should read as follows:

    TIME AND DATE:

    9:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., April 7-8, 2015 (Closed).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    M. Chris Langub, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE., Mailstop F46, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, Telephone: (770) 488-3585, [email protected]

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09083 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-15-0696; Docket No. CDC-2015-0022] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on the information collection request entitled National HIV Prevention Program Monitoring and Evaluation (NHM&E). CDC is requesting a 3-year approval for revision to the previously approved project to continue collecting standardized HIV prevention program evaluation data from health departments and community-based organizations (CBOs) who receive federal funds for HIV prevention activities.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2015-0022 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    Please note:

    All public comment should be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking portal (Regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    National HIV Prevention Program Monitoring and Evaluation (NHM&E) (OMB 0920-0696, Expiration 03/31/2016)—Revision—National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    CDC is requesting a 3-year approval for revision to the previously approved project. The purpose of this revision is to continue collecting standardized HIV prevention program evaluation data from health departments and community-based organizations (CBOs) who receive federal funds for HIV prevention activities. Grantees have the option of key-entering or uploading data to a CDC-provided web-based software application (EvaluationWeb®).

    This revision includes changes to the data variables to adjust to the different monitoring and evaluation needs of new funding announcements without a change in burden.

    The evaluation and reporting process is necessary to ensure that CDC receives standardized, accurate, thorough evaluation data from both health department and CBO grantees. For these reasons, CDC developed standardized NHM&E variables through extensive consultation with representatives from health departments, CBOs, and national partners (e.g., The National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors, Urban Coalition of HIV/AIDS Prevention Services, and National Minority AIDS Council).

    CDC requires CBOs and health departments who receive federal funds for HIV prevention to report non-identifying, client-level and aggregate-level, standardized evaluation data to: (1) Accurately determine the extent to which HIV prevention efforts are carried out, what types of agencies are providing services, what resources are allocated to those services, to whom services are being provided, and how these efforts have contributed to a reduction in HIV transmission; (2) improve ease of reporting to better meet these data needs; and (3) be accountable to stakeholders by informing them of HIV prevention activities and use of funds in HIV prevention nationwide.

    CDC HIV prevention program grantees will collect, enter or upload, and report agency-identifying information, budget data, intervention information, and client demographics and behavioral risk characteristics with an estimate of 200,846 burden hours. Data collection will include searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining data, document compilation, review of data, and data entry or upload into the web-based system.

    There are no additional costs to respondents other than their time.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Health jurisdiction Health Department Reporting 69 2 1,377 190,026 Community-Based Organization Community-Based Organization Reporting 200 2 40.5 16,200 Total 206,226
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09088 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-15-0314] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG)-(0920-0314, Expiration 04/30/2015—Revision—National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Section 306 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 242k), as amended, authorizes that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting through NCHS, shall collect statistics on “family formation, growth, and dissolution,” as well as “determinants of health” and “utilization of health care” in the United States. This three-year clearance request includes the data collection in 2015-2018 for the continuous NSFG.

    The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) was conducted periodically between 1973 and 2002, and continuously since 2006, by the National Center for Health Statistics, CDC. Each year, about 15,000 households are screened, with about 5,000 participants interviewed annually. Participation in the NSFG is completely voluntary and confidential. Interviews average 60 minutes for males and 80 minutes for females. The response rate since 2011 has been about 73 percent. The NSFG program produces descriptive statistics which measure factors associated with birth and pregnancy rates, including contraception, infertility, marriage, divorce, and sexual activity, in the U.S. population 15-49; and behaviors that affect the risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STD), including HIV, and the medical care associated with contraception, infertility, and pregnancy and childbirth.

    NSFG data users include the DHHS programs that fund it, including CDC/NCHS and nine others (The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NIH/NICHD); the Office of Population Affairs (DHHS/OPA); the Children's Bureau within the Administration for Children and Families (DHHS/ACF/CB); the ACF's Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (DHHS/ACF/OPRE); the CDC's Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention (CDC/DHAP); the CDC's Division of STD Prevention (CDC/DSTDP); the CDC's Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (CDC/DCPC); the CDC's Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (CDC/DBDDD); and the CDC's Division of Reproductive Health (CDC/DRH). The NSFG is also used by state and local governments; private research and action organizations focused on men's and women's health, child well-being, and marriage and the family; academic researchers in the social and public health sciences; journalists, and many others.

    No questionnaire changes are requested in the first 6 months of this clearance; limited changes including (1) the expansion of the age range from 15-44 years of age to 15-49, (2) some revision of the female and male questionnaires to incorporate new and modified items related to contraceptive use, reproductive health, preventive service screening/counseling, sexual orientation, health insurance, cigarette smoking, cancer risk, military service and sheltered homelessness, and (3) the request to add or modify a small number of questions in 2017 using a non-substantive change request, to be responsive to emerging public policy issues. There is no cost to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 7,318.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • responses
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hrs)
  • Individual Screener Interview 15,000 1 3/60 Individual Female Interview 2,750 1 90/60 Individual Male Interview 2,350 1 60/60 Individual Screener Verification 1,500 1 2/60 Individual Main Verification 510 1 5/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09191 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families [CFDA Number: 93.508] Announcing the Award of Six Single-Source Expansion Supplement Grants Under the Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (Tribal MIECHV) Program AGENCY:

    Office of Child Care, ACF, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of the award of six single-source program expansion supplement grants to Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (Tribal MIECHV) grantees.

    SUMMARY:

    The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Child Care (OCC), Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (Tribal MIECHV) Program, announces the award of single-source program expansion supplement grants to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Pablo, MT, Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians in Siletz, OR, Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan in Sault Ste. Marie, MI, Native American Health Center, Inc. in Oakland, CA, Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa in Bayfield, WI, and Riverside-San Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc. in Banning, CA.

    The Fiscal Year 2015 single-source program expansion supplement grants will support the grantees' project activities as they continue to implement their Tribal MIECHV programs and will allow for opportunities for enhanced, or expanded, service delivery.

    DATES:

    The period of support is July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016 for the Native American Health Center, Inc. and the Riverside-San Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc., and, September 30, 2015 through September 29, 2016 for Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, the Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan, and the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rachel Schumacher, Director, Office of Child Care, 901 D Street SW., Washington, DC 20447. Telephone: (202) 401-6984; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Tribal Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program, funded from a 3 percent set-aside to the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program, is designed to strengthen tribal capacity to support and promote the health and well-being of American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) families; expand the evidence base around home visiting in tribal communities; and support and strengthen cooperation and linkages between programs that service AIAN children and their families. Funds under the Tribal MIECHV Program support Indian tribes, consortia of tribes, tribal organizations, and urban Indian organizations to provide high-quality, culturally relevant, voluntary, evidence-based home visiting services to families in at-risk communities; conduct a needs and readiness assessment of the at-risk community; engage in collaborative planning and capacity building efforts to address identified needs; establish, measure, and report on progress toward meeting benchmark performance measures for participating children and families; and conduct rigorous local evaluations to answer questions of importance to tribal communities and examine the effectiveness of home visiting programs with AIAN populations.

    A single-source supplemental grant of $45,000 was awarded to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Pablo, MT, to support the hire of an additional home visitor. A single-source supplemental grant of $25,000 was awarded to Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians in Siletz, OR, to support their goal of providing needed services to families with children aged 3 to 5 years old. A single-source supplemental grant of $120,000 was awarded to Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan in Sault Ste. Marie, MI, to support appropriate reflective supervision for its home visitors and to expand services at a high performing site where there is a waiting list. A single-source supplemental grant of $50,000 was awarded to the Native American Health Center, Inc. in Oakland, CA, to provide enhanced mental health support to high-risk families and home visitors. A single-source supplemental grant of $50,000 was awarded to the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa in Bayfield, WI, to support provision of reflective supervision for program staff, including the development of culturally appropriate strategies, and to support enhanced dissemination of information about the community's home visiting program and its early childhood system (e.g., digital storytelling). A single-source supplemental grant of $45,000 was awarded to Riverside-San Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc. in Banning, CA, to support the hire of an additional home visitor.

    Statutory Authority:

    Section 511(h)(2)(A) of Title V of the Social Security Act, as added by Section 2951 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. 111-148, and amended by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, Pub. L. 113-93.

    Christopher Beach, Senior Grants Policy Specialist, Division of Grants Policy, Office of Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09074 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-43-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families [OMB No.: 0970-0365] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Proposed Projects:

    Title: Performance Measures for Community-Centered Healthy Marriage, Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood and Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry grant programs.

    Description: The Office of Family Assistance (OFA), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), intends to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to extend OMB Form 0970-0365 for the collection of performance measures from grantees for the Community-Centered Healthy Marriage, Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood and Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry discretionary grant programs. ACF offered a one year extension to all grants in an effort to increase the consistency and stability in program implementation, particularly in view of grantee progress toward achieving program goals. The performance measure data obtained from the grantees will be used by OFA to continue reporting on the overall performance of these grant programs.

    Data will be collected from all 60 Community-Centered Healthy Marriage, 54 Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood and 5 Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry grantees in the OFA programs. Grantees will report on program and participant outcomes in such areas as participants' improvement in knowledge skills, attitudes, and behaviors related to healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood. Grantees will be asked to input data for selected outcomes for activities funded under the grants. Grantees will extract data from program records and will report the data twice yearly through an on-line data collection tool. Training and assistance will be provided to grantees to support this data collection process.

    Respondents: Office of Family Assistance Funded Community-Centered Healthy Marriage, Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood and Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry Grantees.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total annual burden hours
    Performance measure reporting form (for private sector affected public) 110 2 0.8 176 Performance measure reporting form (for State, local, and tribal government affected public) 9 2 0.8 14

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 190.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Fax: 202-395-7285, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09189 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Office of Refugee Resettlement Individual Development Accounts (ORR-IDA) Program.

    OMB No.: New Collection.

    Description: Description: The Office of Refugee Resettlement seeks OMB approval to develop three data collection tools for use in the ORR IDA Program.

    The ORR IDA Program represents an anti-poverty strategy built on asset accumulation for low-income refugee individuals and families with the goal of promoting refugee economic independence.

    IDAs are leveraged or matched, savings accounts. In the ORR Refugee IDA program, IDAs are matched with federal funds that have been allocated as “match funds” from at least 65 percent of the annual federal grant award. IDAs are established in insured accounts in qualified financial institutions. The funds are intended for the Asset Goals specified in this announcement. Although the refugee participant maintains control of all funds that the participant deposits in the IDA, including all interest that may accrue on the funds, the participant must sign a Savings Plan Agreement which specifies that the funds in the account will be used only for the participant's qualified Asset Goal(s) or for an emergency withdrawal.

    The objectives of this program are to:

    1. Establish IDAs for eligible participants;

    2. Encourage regular saving habits among refugees;

    3. Promote their participation in the financial institutions of this country;

    4. Promote refugee acquisition of assets to build individual, family, and community resources;

    5. Increase refugee knowledge of financial and monetary topics including developing a household budget;

    6. Assist refugees in advancing their education;

    7. Increase home ownership among refugees; and

    8. Assist refugees in gaining access to capital.

    The tools will collect information from grantees that will help ORR determine whether they are meeting the objectives of the program. Data to be collected will only include specialized, and relevant information to the program such as, number of people enrolled, amount in dollar allocated for matching IDA savings, number and value of assets purchased, confirmation of refugee status, and types and quantity of training provided. Tools will be used for semi-annual reports as well as for monitoring to ensure progress towards success, and appropriate use of federal funds.

    Respondents: Office of Refugee Resettlement Individual Development Accounts Program grantees.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    Program Status Report 22 2 1 44 Community Impact Report 22 2 1 44 Demographic 22 2 1 44

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 132 hours.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09192 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0001] Request for Nominations on the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any industry organizations interested in participating in the selection of a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee for the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Allergenic Products Advisory Committee. A nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated by an organization to serve as a nonvoting industry representative. Nominations will be accepted for current or upcoming vacancies effective with this notice.

    DATES:

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry interests must send a letter stating that interest to the FDA by May 21, 2015, (see sections I and II for further details). Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA by May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    All statements of interest from interested industry organizations interested in participating in the selection process of nonvoting industry representative nomination should be sent to Janie Kim (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). All nominations for nonvoting industry representatives may be submitted electronically by accessing the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm or by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Information about becoming a member of an FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Janie Kim, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-9016, FAX: 301-595-1307, email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Agency intends to add a nonvoting industry representative to the following advisory committee:

    I. Allergenic Products Advisory Committee

    The Committee reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and adequacy of labeling of marketed and investigational allergenic biological products or materials that are administered to humans for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of allergies and allergic disease, and makes appropriate recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs of its findings regarding the affirmation or revocation of biological product licenses, on the safety, effectiveness, and labeling of the products, on clinical and laboratory studies of such products, on amendments or revisions to regulations governing the manufacture, testing and licensing of allergenic biological products, and on the quality and relevance of FDA's research programs which provide the scientific support for regulating these agents.

    II. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send a letter to each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching a complete list of all such organizations; and a list of all nominees along with their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is the responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry interests for the committee. The interested organizations are not bound by the list of nominees in selecting a candidate. However, if no individual is selected within 60 days, the Commissioner will select the nonvoting member to represent industry interests.

    III. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self-nominate and/or an organization may nominate one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry representative. Contact information, current curriculum vitae, and the name of the committee of interest should be sent to the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal (see ADDRESSES) within 30 days of publication of this document (see DATES). FDA will forward all nominations to the organizations expressing interest in participating in the selection process for the committee. (Persons who nominate themselves as nonvoting industry representatives will not participate in the selection process).

    FDA seeks to include the views of women, and men, members of all racial and ethnic groups and individuals with and without disabilities on its advisory committees and, therefore encourages nominations of appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.

    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09082 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0386] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments and Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco Products AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the proposed extension of an existing collection of information pertaining to registration and product listing for owners and operators of domestic tobacco product establishments and listing of ingredients in tobacco products.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit electronic comments on the collection of information to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments and Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco Products (OMB Control Number 0910-0650)—Extension)

    On June 22, 2009, the President signed the Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-31) into law. The Tobacco Control Act amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 301) by, among other things, adding a chapter granting FDA important authority to regulate the manufacture, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health generally and to reduce tobacco use by minors.

    Section 905(b) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387e(b)), as amended by the Tobacco Control Act, requires that every person who owns or operates any establishment in any State engaged in the manufacture, preparation, compounding, or processing of a tobacco product or tobacco products register with FDA the name, places of business, and all establishments owned or operated by that person. Every person must register by December 31 of each year. Section 905(c) of the FD&C Act requires that first-time persons engaging in the manufacture, preparation, compounding, or processing of a tobacco product or tobacco products shall register with the Secretary the name, places of business, and all such establishments of that person. Section 905(d) states that persons required to register under section 905(b) or 905(c) of the FD&C Act shall register any additional establishment that they own or operate in any state which begins the manufacture, preparation, compounding, or processing of a tobacco product or tobacco products. Section 905(h) of the FD&C Act addresses foreign establishment registration requirements, which will go into effect when regulations are promulgated by the Secretary. Section 905(i)(1) of the FD&C Act, as amended by the Tobacco Control Act, requires that all registrants shall, at the time of registration under any such subsection, file with FDA a list of all tobacco products which are being manufactured, prepared, compounded, or processed by that person for commercial distribution, along with certain accompanying consumer information, such as all labeling and a representative sampling of advertisements. Section 904(a)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387d(a)(1)), as amended by the Tobacco Control Act, requires each tobacco product manufacturer or importer, or agent thereof, to submit a listing of all ingredients, including tobacco, substances, compounds, and additives that are added by the manufacturer to the tobacco, paper, filter, or other part of each tobacco product by brand or by quantity in each brand and sub-brand. Since the Tobacco Control Act was enacted on June 22, 2009, the information required under section 904(a)(1) of the FD&C Act must be submitted to FDA by December 22, 2009, and include the ingredients added as of the date of submission. Section 904(c) of the FD&C Act also requires submission of information whenever additives, or the quantities of additives, are changed.

    FDA issued guidance documents on both: (1) “Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments” and (2) “Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco Products” to assist persons making such submissions to FDA under the Tobacco Control Act. While electronic submission of registration and product listing information and ingredient listing information are not required, FDA is strongly encouraging electronic submission to facilitate efficiency and timeliness of data management and collection. To that end, FDA designed electronic submission applications to streamline the data entry process for registration and product listing and for ingredient listing. These tools allow for importation of large quantities of structured data, attachment of files (e.g., in PDFs and certain media files), and automatic acknowledgement of FDA's receipt of submissions.

    FDA also developed paper forms (Form FDA 3741—Registration and Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments, and Form FDA 3742—Listing of Ingredients in Tobacco Products) as an alternative submission tool. Both the electronic submission application and the paper forms can be accessed at http://www.fda.gov/tobacco. FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden Activity Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours Total operating and maintenance costs
    Form FDA 3741: Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Establishments (Electronic and Paper Submission)/Section 905(b), 905(c), 905(d) 905(h), or 905(i) of the FD&C Act 125 1.6 200 3.75 750 $0.98 Form FDA 3742: Listing of Ingredients (Electronic and Paper Submissions)/Section 904(a)(1) or 904(c) of the FD&C Act 125 1.6 200 3 600 0.98 Obtaining a DUNS Number (10% of Total Respondents) 8 1 8 .5 (30 minutes) 4 Total 1,354 1.96

    Since this collection of information was last approved by OMB on October 15, 2012, its burden has remained the same at 1,354 reporting hours. This burden estimate was determined as a result of FDA experience over the past 3 years in the regulation of tobacco products and is based on the actual number of establishment registration and product listings and product ingredient submissions received during this time period. FDA estimates that the submission of registration information as required by section 905 of the FD&C Act will remain at 3.75 hours per establishment and, based on the actual number of registration information submitted in the past 3 years and its experience, the Agency estimates that approximately 200 registrations will be submitted from 125 tobacco product establishments annually, for a total of 750 reporting burden hours. FDA estimates that the submission of ingredient listing information as required by section 904 of the FD&C Act will remain at 3 hours per tobacco product and, based on the actual number of product ingredient listings submitted over the past 3 years and its experience, the Agency estimates that approximately 200 ingredient listings will be submitted from 125 tobacco establishments, for a total of 600 reporting burden hours.

    FDA also estimates that obtaining a Dun and Bradstreet (DUNS) number will take 0.5 hours, and that 8 respondents (1 percent (1.25) of establishments required to register under section 905 and 5 percent (6.25) of submitters required to list ingredients under section 904) will not already have a DUNS number. The total burden is estimated to be 4 hours. Total burden hours for this collection, therefore is 1,354 hours.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09092 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0882] Generic Drug User Fees; Public Meeting; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting on the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2012 (GDUFA). The legislative authority for GDUFA expires at the end of September 2017. At that time, new legislation will be required for FDA to continue to collect generic drug user fees for future fiscal years. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the regulated industry on GDUFA reauthorization; we publish a notice in the Federal Register requesting public input on the reauthorization, hold a public meeting at which the public may present its views on the reauthorization, including specific suggestions for changes to the goals referred to in the Generic Drug User Fee Act Program Performance Goals and Procedures (i.e., the Commitment Letter), provide a period of 30 days after the public meeting to obtain written comments from the public, and publish the comments on FDA's Web site. FDA invites public comment on the GDUFA program and suggestions regarding the features FDA should propose for the next GDUFA program.

    DATES:

    The public meeting will be held on June 15, 2015, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The public meeting may be extended or may end early depending on the level of public participation.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meeting will be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1, where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, refer to http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Connie Wisner, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 75, Rm. 1718, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-7946, [email protected]; or Kimberly Giordano, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 75, Rm. 1611, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-1071, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On July 9, 2012, the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, which included GDUFA (Pub. L. 112-144, title III), was signed into law by the President. GDUFA authorizes FDA to collect fees from drug companies that submit marketing applications for certain generic human drug applications, certain drug master files, and certain facilities. Designed to speed access to safe and effective generic drugs to the public, GDUFA requires that generic drug manufacturers pay user fees to finance critical and measurable generic drug program enhancements. GDUFA also requires that generic drug facilities around the world provide identification information annually to FDA.

    Additional information concerning GDUFA, including the text of the law, the Commitment Letter, key Federal Register documents, GDUFA-related guidances, performance reports, and financial reports may be found on the FDA Web site at http://www.fda.gov/gdufa.

    II. Purpose of Public Meeting

    FDA is announcing a public meeting on GDUFA. The authority for GDUFA expires at the end of September 2017. Without new legislation, FDA will no longer be able to collect user fees to fund the human generic drug review process. Section 744(C)(d)(2) (21 U.S.C. 379j-43(d)(2)) of the FD&C Act requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the regulated industry on GDUFA reauthorization, we do the following: (1) Publish a notice in the Federal Register requesting public input on the reauthorization, (2) hold a public meeting at which the public may present its views on the reauthorization, including specific suggestions for changes to the goals referred to in the Commitment Letter, (3) provide a period of 30 days after the public meeting to obtain written comments from the public, and (4) publish the comments on the FDA Web site. This notice, the public meeting, the 30-day comment period after the meeting, and the posting of the comments on the FDA Web site will satisfy these requirements. The purpose of the public meeting is to receive public input on the reauthorization of GDUFA, including specific suggestions for changes to the goals referred to in the Commitment Letter. FDA is interested in responses to the following two general questions and welcomes any other relevant information the public would like to share:

    • What is your assessment of the overall performance of the GDUFA program to date?

    • What aspects of GDUFA should be retained, changed, or discontinued to further strengthen and improve the program?

    In general, the meeting format will include presentations by FDA, scientific and academic experts, health care professionals, representatives of patient and consumer advocacy groups, the generic drug industry, and the general public. The amount of time available for public testimony will be determined by the number of persons who register to present at the meeting. A draft agenda and other background information for the public meeting will be posted at http://www.fda.gov/gdufa by June 8, 2015.

    III. Meeting Attendance and Participation

    FDA is seeking participation (i.e., attendance and oral presentations) at the public meeting by all interested parties, including but not limited to scientific and academic experts, health care professionals, representatives of patient and consumer advocacy groups, the generic drug industry, and the general public. If you wish to attend the meeting, please email your registration information to [email protected] by June 1, 2015. Your email should contain complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email address, and telephone number. Registration is free and is on a first-come, first-served basis. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited. Registrants will receive confirmation once they have been accepted. If registration becomes full prior to the meeting, FDA will place a notice on http://www.fda.gov/gdufa. Onsite registration on the day of the meeting will be based on space availability.

    If you wish to present at the meeting, please include your presentation materials along with your registration information to [email protected] by June 1, 2015. Early requests for oral presentations are recommended due to possible space and time limitations. FDA will accommodate as many requests for oral presentations as possible and will do so on a first-come, first-served basis. The time allotted for presentations may depend on the number of persons who wish to speak. Those requesting to present will receive confirmation once they have been accepted. If presentations exceed time and space limitations prior to the meeting, FDA will place a notice on http://www.fda.gov/gdufa. Onsite requests for oral presentations on the day of the meeting will be based on time and space availability. If the entire meeting time is not needed, FDA may end the public meeting early.

    If you need special accommodations because of a disability, please contact Connie Wisner or Kimberly Giordano (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) by June 8, 2015.

    For those unable to attend in person, FDA will provide a live Adobe Connect Webcast of the meeting. In order to connect to the Webcast, you must have Adobe Connect. To join the meeting via the Adobe Connect Webcast, please go to: https://collaboration.fda.gov/gdufaii.

    IV. Comments

    Regardless of participation at the public meeting, interested persons may submit either electronic or written comments regarding this document. To ensure consideration, all comments should be received by July 15, 2015. Submission of comments prior to the meeting is strongly encouraged.

    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. Identify all comments with the docket number found in the brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    V. Transcripts

    Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov and http://www.fda.gov/gdufa. It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (see section IV). A transcript also will be available in either hard copy or on CD-ROM upon submission of a Freedom of Information request. Send written requests to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09091 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-D-0975] Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data From Studies Conducted Outside the United States; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of the draft guidance entitled “Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data from Studies Conducted Outside the United States; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” This draft guidance articulates FDA's current policy of accepting scientifically valid clinical data obtained from foreign clinical studies in support of premarket submissions for devices. The guidance describes special considerations that apply when using such data, including applicability to populations within the United States and study design issues and provides recommendations to assist sponsors in ensuring their data are adequate under applicable FDA standards to support approval or clearance of the device in the United States. This guidance is not intended to announce new policy, but to describe FDA's existing approach to this topic. This draft guidance is not final nor is it in effect at this time.

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by July 20, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for download from the Internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written requests for a single hard copy of the draft guidance document entitled “Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data from Studies Conducted Outside the United States; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff” to the Office of the Center Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002 or the Office of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request.

    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Aaliyah Eaves-Leaños, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5420, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-2948. For questions regarding this document concerning devices regulated by CBER, contact Stephen Ripley, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    On July 9, 2012, the President signed into law the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), Public Law 112-144 (2012), adding a new provision, section 569B, to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) codifying FDA's longstanding policy of accepting adequate, ethically-derived, scientifically valid data without regard to where a clinical study is conducted. Sponsors may choose to conduct multinational clinical studies under a variety of scenarios. FDA acknowledges, however, that certain challenges exist in using data derived from studies of devices from sites from outside the United States (OUS) to support an FDA marketing decision. These challenges may include differences between the OUS and U.S. clinical conditions, regulatory requirements (including human subject protections), and/or study populations that may be sufficient to affect the adequacy of the data for use in establishing the safety and/or effectiveness of the studied device. This guidance focuses on considerations sponsors of device submissions should take into account when initiating, or relying on previously collected data from, an OUS clinical study to support an Investigational Device Exemption, Premarket Notification (510(k)), De Novo Petition, Humanitarian Device Exemption, or Premarket Approval Application. This guidance also notes other important considerations to take into account when initiating or relying on OUS data. FDA believes that promoting greater clarity concerning FDA's use of foreign study data will minimize the possibility for additional or duplicative U.S. studies, further efforts to harmonize global clinical trial standards, and promote public health and innovation.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on acceptance of clinical data from foreign studies conducted OUS. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statute and regulations.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the Internet. A search capability for all Centers for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Acceptance of Medical Device Clinical Data from Studies Conducted Outside the United States; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff” may send an email request to [email protected] to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number 1741 to identify the guidance you are requesting.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to currently approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 50 and 56 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0755; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 601 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338; the collections of information in 21 CFR parts 801 and 809 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 812 has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0078; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0231; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subpart H have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0332; and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 820 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0073.

    V. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09176 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following National Advisory body scheduled to meet during the month of May 2015.

    The National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services will convene its seventy seventh meeting in the time and place specified below:

    Name: National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services.

    Dates and Time: May 27, 2015, 8:45 a.m.—5:00 p.m.; May 28, 2015, 8:30 a.m.—5:15 p.m.; May 29, 2015, 8:30 a.m.—11:00 a.m.

    Place: Natural Bridge State Park, 2135 Natural Bridge Rd, Slade, KY 40376, (606) 663-2214.

    Status: The meeting will be open to the public.

    Purpose: The National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services provides counsel and recommendations to the Secretary with respect to the delivery, research, development, and administration of health and human services in rural areas.

    Agenda: Wednesday morning, at 8:45 a.m., the meeting will be called to order by the Chairperson of the Committee: The Honorable Ronnie Musgrove. The Committee will examine the issue of an increasing difference between life expectancy among the urban and rural populations of the United States. The day will conclude with a period of public comment at approximately 4:45 p.m.

    Thursday morning at approximately 8:30 a.m., the Committee will break into Subcommittees and depart for site visits. Subcommittees will visit the Center of Excellence in Rural Health in Hazard, Kentucky, and the Marcum & Wallace Memorial Hospital in Irvine, Kentucky. The day will conclude at the Natural Bridge State Park with a period of public comment at approximately 5:00 p.m.

    Friday morning at 8:30 a.m., the Committee will meet to summarize key findings and develop a work plan for the next quarter and the following meeting.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Hirsch, MSLS, Executive Secretary, National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Parklawn Building, 17W29-C, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone (301) 443-0835, Fax (301) 443-2803.

    Persons interested in attending any portion of the meeting should contact Catherine Fontenot at the Federal Office of Rural Health Policy (FORHP) via telephone at (301) 945-0897 or by email at [email protected]. The Committee meeting agenda will be posted on the Committee's Web site at http://www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/rural/.

    Jackie Painter, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09080 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), notice is hereby given of the following meeting:

    Name: National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps (NAC).

    Date and Time: May 6, 2015 from 2:00 p.m.-3:30 p.m. (EST).

    Place: Conference Call Format.

    Status: The meeting will be open to the public.

    Purpose: The NAC provides advice to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), with respect to their responsibilities for designating areas of the United States with critical health professional shortages (i.e., Health Professional Shortage Area) and assigning health care personnel to improve the delivery of health services in these areas.

    Agenda: The members of the NAC will discuss: (a) The activities and goals for fiscal year 2016 for the National Health Service Corps; (b) their vision and approaches for future NAC meetings; and (c) planning for an in-person meeting. The official agenda will be available 2 days prior to the meeting on the HRSA Web site at: http://nhsc.hrsa.gov/corpsexperience/aboutus/nationaladvisorycouncil/. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    Public Comment: Requests to make oral comments or provide written comments to the NAC should be sent to CAPT Shari Campbell, Designated Federal Official, using the address and phone number below. Individuals who plan to participate on the conference call should notify CAPT Campbell at least 3 days prior to the meeting, using the address and phone number below. Members of the public will have the opportunity to provide comments. Interested parties should refer to the meeting, in the subject line, as the HRSA National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps. The conference call-in number is: 888-566-5974. The passcode is: 4439136.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anyone requesting information regarding the NAC should contact CAPT Shari Campbell, Designated Federal Official, Bureau of Health Workforce, HRSA, in one of three ways: (1) Send a request to the following address: CAPT Shari Campbell, Designated Federal Official, Bureau of Health Workforce, HRSA, Parklawn Building, Room 8C-26, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857; (2) call (301) 594-4251; or (3) send an email to [email protected]

    Jackie Painter, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09078 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) has submitted an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. Comments submitted during the first public review of this ICR will be provided to OMB. OMB will accept further comments from the public during the review and approval period.

    DATES:

    Comments on this ICR should be received no later than May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, including the Information Collection Request Title, to the desk officer for HRSA, either by email to [email protected] or by fax to 202-395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request a copy of the clearance requests submitted to OMB for review, email the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer at [email protected] or call (301) 443-1984.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Information Collection Request Title: Enrollment and Re-Certification of Entities in the 340B Drug Pricing Program and Collection of Manufacturer Data to Verify 340B Drug Pricing Program Ceiling Price Calculations.

    OMB No. 0915-0327—Revision

    Abstract: Section 602 of Public Law 102-585, the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, enacted as Section 340B of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act; “Limitation on Prices of Drugs Purchased by Covered Entities”), provides that a manufacturer who sells covered outpatient drugs to eligible entities must sign a Pharmaceutical Pricing Agreement (PPA) with the Secretary of Health and Human Services in which the manufacturer agrees to charge a price for covered outpatient drugs that will not exceed an amount determined under a statutory formula (“ceiling price”).

    A manufacturer subject to a PPA must offer all covered outpatient drugs at no more than the ceiling price to a covered entity listed in the 340B Program database. Manufacturers rely on the information in the 340B database to determine if a covered entity is participating in the 340B Program or for any notifications of changes to eligibility that may occur within a quarter. By signing the PPA, the manufacturer agrees to comply with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, including any changes that occur after execution of the PPA.

    Covered entities which choose to participate in the 340B Program must comply with the requirements of Section 340B(a)(5) of the PHS Act. Section 340B(a)(5)(A) prohibits a covered entity from accepting a discount for a drug that would also generate a Medicaid rebate. Further, Section 340B(a)(5)(B) prohibits a covered entity from reselling or otherwise transferring a discounted drug to a person who is not a patient of the entity.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Section 340B(d)(1)(B)(i) of the PHS Act requires the development of a system to enable the Secretary to verify the accuracy of ceiling prices calculated by manufacturers under subsection (a)(1) and charged to covered entities, which shall include the following:

    (I) Developing and publishing through an appropriate policy or regulatory issuance, precisely defined standards and methodology for the calculation of ceiling prices under such subsection.

    (II) Comparing regularly the ceiling prices calculated by the Secretary with the quarterly pricing data that is reported by manufacturers to the Secretary.

    (III) Performing spot checks of sales transactions by covered entities.

    (IV) Inquiring into the cause of any pricing discrepancies that may be identified and either taking, or requiring manufacturers to take, such corrective action as is appropriate in response to such price discrepancies.

    HRSA's Office of Pharmacy Affairs (OPA) has previously obtained approval for information collections in support of 340B covered entity recertification and registration, as well as registration of contract pharmacy arrangements and the PPA itself. OPA is requesting comments on an additional information collection in response to the above pricing verification requirements, as well as the routine renewal of approval for the existing information collections. The previously approved collections are substantially unchanged, except that HRSA has transitioned completely to online versus hardcopy forms.

    Pricing data submission, validation and dissemination: In order to implement Section 340B(d)(1)(B)(i)(II), HRSA has already developed a system to calculate 340B ceiling prices prospectively from data obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services as well as OPA-identified commercial databases. However, in order to conduct the comparison required under the statute, manufacturers must submit the quarterly pricing data as required by section 340B(d)(1)(B)(i)(II).

    HRSA is developing a mechanism for secure manufacturer submissions. This notice proposes collecting Average Manufacturer Price, Unit Rebate Amount, Package Sizes, National Drug Code (NDC), period of sale (year and quarter), and manufacturer-determined 340B ceiling price for each NDC produced by a manufacturer subject to a PPA. Once any discrepancies between the manufacturer and OPA-calculated prices have been resolved, the validated prices will be made available to registered covered entities via a secure Internet-accessible platform as required by Section 340B(d)(1)(B)(iii).

    Accurate and timely pricing data submissions are critical to successful implementation of the 340B Program, ensuring that covered entities have confidence that the amounts being charged are in accordance with statutorily-defined ceiling prices. The burden imposed on manufacturers by this requirement is low because the information requested is readily available.

    Likely Respondents: Drug Manufacturers.

    Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.

    Total Estimated Annualized Burden—Hours Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Total
  • responses
  • Hours per
  • respondent
  • Total burden hours
    Hospital Enrollment, Additions & Recertifications 340B Program Registrations & Certifications for Hospitals 194 1 194 2 388 Certifications to Enroll Hospital Outpatient Facilities 697 8 5,576 0.5 2,788 Hospital Annual Recertifications 2,134 6 12,804 0.25 3,201 Registrations and Recertifications for Entities Other Than Hospitals 340B Registrations for Community Health Centers 427 3 1,281 1 1,281 340B Registrations for STD/TB Clinics 647 1 647 1 647 340B Registrations for Various Other Eligible Entity Types 405 1 405 1 405 Community Health Center Annual Recertifications 1,204 5 6,020 0.25 1,505 STD & TB Annual Recertifications 3,123 1 3,123 0.25 780.75 Annual Recertification for entities other than Hospitals, Community Health Centers, and STD/TB Clinics 4,899 1 4,899 0.25 1,224.75 Contracted Pharmacy Services Registration & Recertifications Contracted Pharmacy Services Registration 1,758 5 8,790 1 8,790 Other Information Collections Submission of Administrative Changes for any Covered Entity 9,396 1 9,396 0.5 4,698 Submission of Administrative Changes for any Manufacturer 350 1 350 0.5 175 Manufacturer Data Required to Verify 340B Ceiling Price Calculations 600 4 2,400 0.5 1,200 Pharmaceutical Pricing Agreement 200 1 200 1 200 Total 26,034 27,283.5
    Jackie Painter, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09079 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Request for Comments on Deliberation and Bioethics Education AGENCY:

    Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues is requesting public comment on deliberation and bioethics education.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, comments must be received by July 20, 2015. Comments received after this date will be considered only as time permits.

    ADDRESSES:

    Individuals, groups, and organizations interested in commenting on this topic may submit comments by email to [email protected] or by mail to the following address: Public Commentary, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, 1425 New York Ave. NW., Suite C-100, Washington, DC 20005.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Hillary Wicai Viers, Communications Director, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. Telephone: 202-233-3960. Email: [email protected] Additional information may be obtained at http://www.bioethics.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November 24, 2009, the President established the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (Bioethics Commission) to advise him on bioethical issues generated by novel and emerging research in biomedicine and related areas of science and technology. The Commission is charged with identifying and promoting policies and practices that ensure ethically responsible conduct of scientific research and health care delivery. Undertaking these duties, the Commission seeks to identify and examine specific bioethical, legal, and social issues related to potential scientific and technological advances; examine diverse perspectives and possibilities for international collaboration on these issues; and recommend legal, regulatory, or policy actions as appropriate.

    The Bioethics Commission is considering two overarching themes of its work, deliberation and education, focusing on their symbiotic relationship as twin pillars of public bioethics. Democratic deliberation has been a guiding ethical principle in the Commission's work, informing both its processes and its recommendations. The Commission also is committed to supporting bioethics education at all levels and across disciplines, through its own pedagogical materials and its recommendations for improving and integrating ethics education in a range of settings. This new project will explore the relationship between deliberation and bioethics education and the importance of public engagement in the bioethics conversation. For example, the Commission's deliberations not only advise the U.S. federal government, but also play a vital role in civic education. Bioethics education fosters the scientific and ethical literacy that supports public deliberation about science, medicine, public health, and bioethics, and helps to prepare students for their role as citizens in understanding different perspectives on complex issues that are often the subject of public policy debates.

    At its meeting on November 6, 2014, the Commission heard from scholars in education, medical ethics, and political philosophy, and began its consideration of the relationship between deliberation and bioethics education and its own role in promoting both of these to advance public understanding of and engagement with bioethical debates. For example, in its most recent report, Ethics and Ebola: Public Health Planning and Response, the Commission made recommendations regarding the importance of public education and deliberation in preparing for public health emergencies. The ethical challenges that emerged in the U.S. response to the ongoing Ebola epidemic in western Africa underscore the need for appropriate forums for public engagement and debate on the ethical dimensions of public health decision making.

    The Commission is interested in receiving comments from individuals, groups, and professional communities regarding deliberation and education in bioethics. The Commission is particularly interested in receiving public commentary regarding:

    • The role of deliberation and deliberative methods to engage the public and inform debate in bioethics;

    • Approaches to integrating public dialogue into the bioethics conversation;

    • Bioethics education as a forum for fostering deliberative skills and preparing students to participate in public dialogue in bioethics;

    • Goals of bioethics education (e.g., empirical training, normative foundations, clinical ethics), and the competencies and skills bioethics education seeks to foster;

    • Methods and goals of designing bioethics education and training programs at different levels (e.g., undergraduate foci, master's degree programs, terminal degree programs, and professional certification);

    • Potential training in bioethics across the lifespan at different educational levels and settings (e.g., primary/secondary education, community education, continuing professional education), and the role of education in laying the foundation for constructive public deliberation and debate in bioethics;

    • The appropriate role of professional standards for bioethicists, including core competencies for bioethicists, and potential accreditation of bioethics training or education programs;

    • Integrating bioethics education across different professional contexts, and establishing “dual competency” through reciprocal training in bioethics and a home or primary discipline (e.g., engineering and bioethics, medicine and bioethics, law and bioethics).

    To this end, the Commission is inviting interested parties to provide input and advice through written comments. Comments will be publicly available, including any personally identifiable or confidential business information that they contain. Trade secrets should not be submitted.

    Dated: April 13, 2015. Lisa M. Lee, Executive Director, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09172 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4154-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics: Meeting; Privacy, Security & Confidentiality Subcommittee

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces the following advisory committee meeting.

    Name: National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS) Subcommittee on Privacy, Confidentiality & Security.

    Time And Date: May 6, 2015 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. EST, May 7, 2015 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. EST.

    Place: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 3311 Toledo Road, Auditorium B and C, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, (301) 458-4125.

    Status: Open.

    Purpose: Section 1179 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) creates an exemption from compliance with HIPAA and accompanying rules when a financial institution is “engaged in authorizing, processing, clearing, settling, billing, transferring or collecting payments.” The purpose of this meeting is to learn how banking and other financial service businesses are using personal health data as their services evolve in support of the health industry.

    The objectives of this hearing are as follows:

    Increase awareness of current and anticipated financial services involving personal health data, understand section 1179 in light of these practices, and identify areas where outreach, education, technical assistance, or guidance may be useful.

    Contact Person For More Information: Debbie M. Jackson, Acting Executive Secretary, NCVHS, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 2339, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone (301) 458-4614 or Maya Bernstein, ASPE/OSDP, Room 436E, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201, Phone: (202) 690-5896. Program information as well as summaries of meetings and a roster of committee members are available on the NCVHS home page of the HHS Web site: http://www.ncvhs.hhs.gov/, where further information including an agenda will be posted when available.

    Should you require reasonable accommodation, please contact the CDC Office of Equal Employment Opportunity on 770-488-3204 as soon as possible.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. James Scanlon, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Science and Data Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation .
    [FR Doc. 2015-09187 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4151-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Assessing an Online Process To Study the Prevalence of Drugged Driving in the U.S.: Development of the Drugged Driving Reporting System (NIDA) SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2014, page 69864 and allowed 60 days for public comment. No public comments were received. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the National Institutes of Health, may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Direct Comments to OMB: Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the: Office of Management and Budget, Office of Regulatory Affairs, [email protected] or by fax to 202-395-6974, Attention: NIH Desk Officer.

    Comments Due Date: Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30-days of the date of this publication.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, contact the NIDA Contract Officer's Representative (COR) Harold Perl, Ph.D., Chief, Prevention Research Branch, Division of Epidemiology, Services & Prevention Research, NIDA, 6001 Executive Blvd., Rockville, MD 20852 or call this non-toll-free number (301) 443-6504 or email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    Proposed Collection: Assessing an Online Process to Study the Prevalence of Drugged Driving in the U.S: Development of the Drugged Driving Reporting System, 0925-New, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The study seeks to provide an improved understanding of the prevalence of drugged driving among adult drivers in the U.S and will assess the effectiveness of the online survey implementation process. The primary objectives of the study are to: (a) To provide comprehensive data on drugged driving; (b) determine if the Drugged Driving Survey Instrument (DDS) is an effective and accurate measure of drugged driving among licensed U.S. Drivers aged 18 and older. and, (c) to assess the effectiveness of the survey implementation process, including various levels of incentives for participation to determine the appropriate/optimal incentive amount needed to obtain the desired number of total survey respondents within the timeframe within which survey data will be collected. The findings will provide valuable information concerning various aspects of substance use and driving behavior, including: (1) Demographic information about drivers who do and do not drive while impaired by medication and/or drugs (e.g. age, zip code, type of driver's license); (2) which drugs/medications are most likely to be used while driving; (3) drivers' beliefs and attitudes toward drugged driving.

    OMB approval is requested for 2 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total annualized estimated burden hours are 750.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Type of respondent Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • Drugged Driving Survey Adults 3,750 1 12/60 750
    Dated: April 14, 2015. Genevieve deAlmeida, Project Clearance Liaison, National Institute on Drug Abuse.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09089 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, Child Health and the Environment Review Committee.

    Date: May 12-14, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Crystal City Marriott at Reagan National Airport, 1999 Jefferson David Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: Linda K Bass, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research and Training, Nat'l Institute Environmental Health Sciences, P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, (919) 541-1307.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, Cell Differentiation Assays.

    Date: May 15, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Sheraton Chapel Hill, One Europa Drive, Chapel Hill, NC 27517.

    Contact Person: Sally Eckert-Tilotta, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Nat. Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Office of Program Operations, Scientific Review Branch, P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, (919) 541-1446 [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.115, Biometry and Risk Estimation—Health Risks from Environmental Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health and Safety Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances—Basic Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower Development in the Environmental Health Sciences; 93.113, Biological Response to Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research and Testing, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Carolyn Baum, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09061 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) (NCI) SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited on one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    To Submit Comments and for Further Information: To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Kelly Yu, Ph.D., Division of Cancer Prevention, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 5E230, Rockville, MD 20850 or call non-toll-free number 240-276-7041 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    Comment Due Date: Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    Proposed Collection: Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO), 0925-0407, Extension, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: This is a request for a revision of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO). This trial was designed to determine if cancer screening for prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer can reduce mortality from these cancers which caused an estimated 253,320 deaths in the U.S. in 2014. The design is a two-armed randomized trial of men and women aged 55 to 74 at entry. OMB first approved this study in 1993 and has approved it every 3 years since then. Recruitment was completed in 2001, baseline cancer screening was completed in 2006, and data collection continues on the current cohort of 77,281 participants who are actively being followed. The additional follow-up will provide data that will clarify further the long term effects of the screening on cancer incidence and mortality for the four targeted cancers. Further, demographic and risk factor information may be used to analyze the differential effectiveness of cancer screening in high versus low risk individuals.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 26,320.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Type of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average time per response (minutes/hour) Annual burden hours
    Annual Study Update(ASU) Form Participants who complete the ASU 77,281 1 5/60 6,440 ASU Telephone Script Non Responders to the ASU 3,091 1 5/60 258 Authorization to Release Medical Records Participants who report new cancers 2,700 1 3/60 135 Health Status Questionnaire (Female) (HSQ) Female participants who complete the HSQ 960 1 5/60 87 Health Status Questionnaire (Male) (HSQ) Male participants who complete the HSQ 1,040 1 5/60 80 Medication Use Questionnaire (MUQ) Participants who complete the MUQ 77,281 1 15/60 19,320
    Dated: April 7, 2015. Karla Bailey, NCI Project Clearance Liaison, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09090 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Age-Related Hearing Loss.

    Date: May 20, 2015.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Elaine Lewis, Ph.D., Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2C212, MSC-9205, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7707, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Alzheimer Pathogenesis.

    Date: June 18, 2015.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jeannette L. Johnson, Ph.D., National Institutes on Aging, National Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7705, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09062 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Library of Medicine Special Emphasis Panel; Scholarly Works G13.

    Date: June 26, 2015.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Library of Medicine, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 301, Bethesda, MD 20817, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Zoe E. Huang, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Extramural Programs, National Library of Medicine, NIH, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 301, Bethesda, MD 20892-7968, 301-594-4937, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.879, Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of the Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09056 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Functions and Development of the Mirror Neuron System.

    Date: April 30, 2015.

    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Marita R. Hopmann, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 435-6911, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09057 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Immuno Therapeutics.

    Date: April 14, 2015.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Careen K Tang-Toth, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6214, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-3504, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09059 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Mentored Training in Comparative Medicine.

    Date: April 30, 2015.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Raj K. Krishnaraju, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6190, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1047, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Neurophysiology.

    Date: April 30, 2015.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Mary Custer, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4148, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1164, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09060 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Dental and Craniofacial Research Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Dental and Craniofacial Research Council.

    Date: May 20, 2015.

    Open: 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: Report to the Director, NIDCR.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31C, Conference Room 10, 31 Center Drive, 6th floor, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 1:30 p.m. to Adjournment.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31C, Conference Room 10, 31 Center Drive, 6th floor, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Alicia J. Dombroski, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, Natl Inst of Dental and Craniofacial Research, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Room 660, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-4805, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/about, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Disorders Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 14, 2015. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09063 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Medical Rehabilitation Research Resource.

    Date: June 18-19, 2015.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Washington Embassy Row, 2015 Massachusetts Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Contact Person: Joanna Kubler-Kielb, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 435-6916, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: April 15, 2015. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09058 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010] Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Committee Management; Notice of Open Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy (Board) will meet via teleconference on May 7, 2015. The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The meeting will take place on Thursday, May 7, from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Please note that the meeting may close early if the Board has completed its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    Members of the public who wish to participate in the teleconference should contact Ruth MacPhail as listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by close of business May 5, 2015, to obtain the call-in number and access code. For information on services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance, contact Ruth MacPhail as soon as possible.

    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment on the issues to be considered by the Board as listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. Comments must be submitted in writing no later than May 5, 2015, and must be identified by Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010 and may be submitted by one of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number in the subject line of the message.

    Mail/Hand Delivery: Ruth MacPhail, 16825 South Seton Avenue, Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and the Docket ID for this action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received by the National Fire Academy Board of Visitors, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on “Advanced Search,” then enter “FEMA-2008-0010” in the “By Docket ID” box, then select “FEMA” under “By Agency,” and then click “Search.” Prior to the meeting, meeting materials will be posted at http://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/about/bov.shtm by April 29, 2015.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alternate Designated Federal Officer: Denis G. Onieal, telephone (301) 447-1117, email [email protected]

    Logistical Information: Ruth MacPhail, telephone (301) 447-1117, fax (301) 447-1173, and email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy (Board) will meet via teleconference on Thursday, May 7, 2015. The meeting will be open to the public. Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.

    Purpose of the Board

    The purpose of the Board is to review annually the programs of the National Fire Academy (NFA) and advise the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the United States Fire Administrator, on the operation of the NFA and any improvements therein that the Board deems appropriate. In carrying out its responsibilities, the Board examines NFA programs to determine whether these programs further the basic missions that are approved by the Administrator of FEMA, examines the physical plant of the NFA to determine the adequacy of the NFA's facilities, and examines the funding levels for NFA programs. The Board submits a written annual report through the United States Fire Administrator to the Administrator of FEMA. The report provides detailed comments and recommendations regarding the operation of the NFA.

    Agenda

    1. The Board will receive updates on U.S. Fire Administration data, research, and response support initiatives.

    2. The Board will discuss deferred maintenance and capital improvements on the National Emergency Training Center campus and Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request/Budget Planning.

    3. The Board will review and give feedback on NFA program activities, including:

    • The Managing Officer Program, a new multiyear curriculum that introduced emerging emergency services leaders to personal and professional skills in change management, risk reduction, and adaptive leadership; a progress report on this new program will be discussed;

    • Adoption of the Fire and Emergency Services Higher Education Model by Foreign Countries;

    • Training, Resource and Data Exchange (TRADE) policy discussion;

    • Review of Professional Development Crosswalk, national standards for Fire Officer competencies and their interrelationships with State, National and Academic programs;

    • Volunteer Incentive Program (VIP) policy change discussion;

    • Off-Campus delivery program changes;

    • Status of staff vacancies and challenges;

    • Contract instructor issues and challenges;

    • Incremental versus radical course material policy discussion;

    • Status of Mediated Online courses;

    • Curriculum and Instruction program activities;

    • Interagency Agreement with the Department of Transportation with update on Traffic Incident Management Course;

    • Policy and program change discussion regarding consolidation of Management and Leadership Curricula;

    • Status of the National Professional Development Symposium which brings national training and education audiences together for their annual conference and support initiatives, scheduled to be held June 10-12, 2015;

    • Fire and Emergency Services Higher Education (FESHE) Recognition Program Update;

    • Program Decision Option budget requests to Department of Homeland Security.

    There will be a 10-minute comment period after each agenda item; each speaker will be given no more than 2 minutes to speak. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last call for comments. Contact Ruth MacPhail to register as a speaker.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Denis G. Onieal, Superintendent, National Fire Academy, United States Fire Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09259 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-45-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2015-0011; OMB No. 1660-NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request, Integrated Public Alert and Warning Systems (IPAWS) Memorandum of Agreement Applications AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a new information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the Integrated Public Alert and Warning Systems (IPAWS) Memorandum of Agreement Applications.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before June 22, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use only one of the following means to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID FEMA-2015-0011. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-3100.

    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to (703) 483-2999.

    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Hans N. Yu, Project Manager, FEMA, National Continuity Programs, Protection & National Preparedness, (202) 646-3910 for additional information. You may contact the Records Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of information at facsimile number (202) 212-4701 or email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Presidential Executive Order 13407 establishes the policy for an effective, reliable, integrated, flexible, and comprehensive system to alert and warn the American people in situations of war, terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other hazards to public safety and wellbeing. The Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) is the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) response to the Executive Order. The Stafford Act (U.S.C. Title 42, Chapter 68, Subchapter II) requires that FEMA make IPAWS available to Federal, State, and local agencies for the purpose of providing warning to governmental authorities and the civilian population in areas endangered by disasters. The information collected is used by FEMA to create a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that regulates the management, operations, and security of the information technology system connection between a Federal, State, territorial, tribal or local alerting authority and IPAWS-OPEN (Open Platform for Emergency Notifications).

    Collection of Information

    Title: Integrated Public Alert and Warning Systems (IPAWS) Memorandum of Agreement Applications.

    Type of Information Collection: New information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-NEW.

    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 007-0-25, IPAWS Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Application; FEMA Form 007-0-26, Memorandum of Agreement Application for (Tribal Governments).

    Abstract: A Federal, State, territorial, tribal, or local alerting authority that applies for authorization to use IPAWS is designated as a Collaborative Operating Group or “COG” by the IPAWS Program Management Office (PMO). Access to IPAWS is free; however, to send a message using IPAWS, an organization must procure its own IPAWS compatible software. To become a COG, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) governing system security must be executed between the sponsoring organization and FEMA.

    Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 160.

    Number of Responses: 160.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 160 hours.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs Type of respondent Form name/form number Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total number of responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual burden
  • (in hours)
  • Average
  • hourly wage rate
  • Total annual respondent cost
    State, Local or Tribal Government IPAWS Memorandum of Agreement Application/
  • FEMA Form 007-0-25
  • 150 1 150 1 150 $38.30 $5,745.00
    State, Local or Tribal Government IPAWS Memorandum of Agreement Application for Tribal Governments/
  • FEMA Form 007-0-26
  • 10 1 10 1 10 38.30 383.00
    Total 160 160 160 6,128.00 Note: The “Avg. Hourly Wage Rate” for each respondent includes a 1.4 multiplier to reflect a fully-loaded wage rate.

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the hour burden is $6,128.00. There are no annual costs to respondents' operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is $74,343.00.

    Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) 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; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: April 13, 2015. Janice Waller, Acting Director, Records Management Division, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mission Support.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09252 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-AB-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID: FEMA-2015-0005; OMB No. 1660-0038] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Write Your Own (WYO) Company Participation Criteria; New Applicant AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection instruments FEMA will use.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection should be made to Director, Records Management Division, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100, facsimile number (202) 646-3347, or email address [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Changes Since Publication of the 60 Day Federal Register Notice: The abstract has been updated to remove a reference public risk sharing organization because the authority for allowing such entities to enter the WYO program has sunsetted. The abstract has also been revised for clarity. The burden hours have been updated to reflect the one-time test of the insurance company's ability to use the NFIP Transaction Record Reporting and Processing Plan (TRRP) System.

    Collection of Information

    Title: Write Your Own (WYO) Company Participation Criteria; New Applicant.

    Type of information collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-0038.

    Form Titles and Numbers: None.

    Abstract: New insurance companies that seek to participate in the WYO program, as well as former WYO companies seeking to return, must meet standards for WYO Financial Control Plan (approved under OMB Control# 1660-0020). Private Insurance Companies wishing to enter or reenter the WYO program must demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements laid out in 44 CFR 62.24. The information allows FEMA to determine the applicant's capability of meeting program goals for, among other things, the marketing and administering of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) flood insurance policies, and to meet the financial control and reporting requirements of the NFIP.

    Affected Public: Business of other for-profit.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 5.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 45 hours.

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the hour burden is $2,892.60. There are no annual costs to respondents' operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is $5,409.18.

    Dated: April 13, 2015. Janice Waller, Acting Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09255 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0017] Agency Information Collection Activities: Application for Advance Permission To Enter as Nonimmigrant Pursuant to Section 212(d)(3)(A)(ii) of the INA, Section 212(d)(13) of the INA, or Section 212(d)(14) of the INA, Form I-192, Form I-192; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2014, at 79 FR 75579, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS did receive 1 comment in connection with the 60-day notice.

    DATES:

    The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until May 21, 2015. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer via email at [email protected] Comments may also be submitted via fax at (202) 395-5806. All submissions received must include the agency name and the OMB Control Number 1615-0017.

    You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make. For additional information please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFOMRATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Laura Dawkins, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, Telephone number 202-272-8377 (comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2008-0009 in the search box. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

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

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of this Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant Pursuant to Section 212(d)(3)(A)(ii) of the INA, Section 212(d)(13) of the INA, or Section 212(d)(14) of the INA, Form I-192.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: I-192; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. This form is provided by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) as a means for certain inadmissible nonimmigrant aliens to apply for permission to enter the United States.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-192 is 10,448 and the estimated hour burden per response is .5 hours.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 5,224 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: There is no estimated annual cost burden associated with this collection of information.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Laura Dawkins, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09171 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0053] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service, Form N-426; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    DHS, USCIS will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2014, at 79 FR 75578, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS did not receive any comments in connection with the 60-day notice.

    DATES:

    The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until May 21, 2015. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer via email at [email protected] Comments may also be submitted via fax at (202) 395-5806. All submissions received must include the agency name and the OMB Control Number 1615-0053.

    You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make. For additional information please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Laura Dawkins, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, Telephone number 202-272-8377 (comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2007-0016 in the search box. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

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

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection Request: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: N-426; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. USCIS uses the information collected through Form N-426 to request a verification of the military or naval service claim by an applicant filing for naturalization on the basis of honorable service in the U.S. armed forces.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection N-426 is 10,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.17 hours.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 3,330 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual cost burden associated with this collection is $245,000.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Laura Dawkins, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09157 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5831-N-20] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Family Unification Program AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email at Colette [email protected] or telephone 202-402-3400. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. This is not a toll-free number. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on February 6, 2015 at 80 FR 6739.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Family Unification Program.

    OMB Approval Number: 2577-0259.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Numbers: HUD-52515; HUD-50058; HUD-2993; HUD- 96011; HUD-2990; HUD-2991; and HUD-2880; SF-424; SF-LLL.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The Family Unification Program (FUP) is a program, authorized under section 8(x) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437(X), that provides housing choice vouchers to PHAs to assist families for whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in the imminent placement of the family's child or children in out-of-home care; or the delay in the discharge of the child, or children, to the family from out-of-home care. Youths at least 18 years old and not more than 21 years old (have not reached 22nd birthday) who left foster care at age 16 or older and who do not have adequate housing are also eligible to receive housing assistance under the FUP. As required by statute, a FUP voucher issued to such a youth may only be used to provide housing assistance for the youth for a maximum of 18 months. Vouchers awarded under FUP are administered by PHAs under HUD's regulations for the Housing Choice Voucher program (24 CFR part 982).

    Respondents: Public Housing Agencies.

    Description of information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency
  • of response
  • Responses per annum Burden hour per response Annual burden hours Hourly cost per response Annual cost
    SF424 (0348-0043) Application for Federal Assistance 265 Annual 1 1 265 $35.00 $9,275 SF LLL (0348-0046) Lobbying Form 10 Annual 1 1 10 35.00 350 HUD-96011 (2535-0118) 3rd Party Documentation Facsimile Transmittal 265 Annual 1 1 265 35.00 9,275 HUD -2993 Acknowledgement of Application Receipt (2577-0259) 13 Annual 1 1 13 35.00 455 Logic Model-HUD-96010 (2535-0114) 265 Annual 1 1 0 35.00 0 PCWA Statement of Need (maximum of 5 pages) 265 Annual 1 2 596 35.00 20,860 Memorandum of Understanding between PHA and PCWA 265 Annual 1 6 1590 35.00 55,650 Rating Criteria 1: Area-Wide Housing Opportunities. Narratives (up to 20 pages). Logic Model (HUD-96010) 265 Annual 1 3 795 35.00 27,825 Rating Criteria 2: PCWA Commitments. Narratives (up to 10 pages). Other Documentation 265 Annual 1 1 331 35.00 11,585 Rating Criteria 3: Self-Sufficiency Programs. Narrative: (up to 6 pages) Documentation: Excerpt from Administrative Plan or policies manual for FSS program operations Certification: FUP recipients enrolled in FSS 265 Annual 1 1 133 35.00 4,655 Rating Criteria 4: Local Coordination Letter of Support 265 Annual 1 1 265 35.00 9,275 PCWA Contractor Documentation 265 Annual 1 1 265 35.00 9,275 HUD2990, Certification of Consistency with the RC/EZ/EC-IIs Strategic Plan 265 Annual 1 1 0 35.00 0 Funding Application HUD-52515 (2577-0169). Includes leasing schedule 265 Annual 1 1 265 35.00 9,275 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Statement (addendum) 265 Annual 1 1 265 35.00 9,275 HUD2880, Applicant/Recipient Disclosure/Update Report (2510-0011) 265 Annual 1 1 0 35.00 0 HUD2991, Certification of Consistency with the Consolidated Plan 265 Annual 1 1 0 35.00 0 Subtotal (Application) 265 Annual 1 25 5058 35 177,030 Family Report HUD-50058 (2577-0083) 242 Annual 75 1 363 35.00 12,705 Baseline adjustment 10 Annual 1 1 5 35.00 175 Program and Accounting Recordkeeping 242 Annual 1 5 1210 35.00 42,350 Subtotal (Reporting/Recordkeeping) 11 1578 35 55230 Total 265 Annual 1 36 6636 35.00 232,260
    Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: April 15, 2015. Colette Pollard, Department Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-09256 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5831-N-19] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Procedures for Appealing Rent Adjustments AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: May 21, 2015.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; email at Colette [email protected] or telephone 202-402-3400. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. This is not a toll-free number. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the information collection described in section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on January 7, 2015 at 80 FR 901.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Procedure for Appealing Section 8 Rent Adjustments.

    OMB Approval Number: 2502-0446.

    Type of Request: Extension without change of currently approved collection.

    Form Numbers: Owners will submit rent appeal on owner's letterhead providing a written explanation for the appeal.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Title II, section 221, of the National Housing Act requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to establish rents for certain subsidized rental projects. Under this leg