Federal Register Vol. 81, No.1,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 1 (January 4, 2016)

Page Range1-144
FR Document

81_FR_1
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 129 - In the Matter of China Domestica Bio-Technology Holdings, Inc., Order of Suspension of TradingPDF
81 FR 116 - In the Matter of USA Graphite, Inc., Order of Suspension of TradingPDF
81 FR 98 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 98 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 91 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
81 FR 84 - Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities ProgramPDF
81 FR 85 - Membership of the Performance Review BoardPDF
81 FR 103 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 113 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 109 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 110 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 105 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 108 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 11 - Safety Zone; Intracoastal Waterway; Lake Charles, LAPDF
81 FR 10 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Three Mile Slough, Rio Vista, CAPDF
81 FR 2 - Amendment To Clarify When Component Part Testing Can Be Used and Which Textile Products Have Been Determined Not To Exceed the Allowable Lead Content Limits; Delay of Effective Date and Reopening of Comment PeriodPDF
81 FR 82 - Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MontanaPDF
81 FR 82 - Notice of Intent to Prepare a Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Conduct Scoping Meeting for the Corte Madera Creek Flood Control Project General Reevaluation Report and Integrated EIS/EIR, County of Marin, CAPDF
81 FR 140 - Thirty-Eighth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (224) Airport Security Access Control SystemsPDF
81 FR 138 - Fifteenth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (209) ATCRBS/Mode S Transponder MOPS (Joint With EUROCAE WG-49, EUROCAE WG-51 Subgroup 1, and RTCA SC-186 Working Group 3)PDF
81 FR 140 - Twenty-Fifth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (214) Standards for Air Traffic Data Communication Services (Joint With EUROCAE WG-78)PDF
81 FR 139 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Specific Release FormPDF
81 FR 138 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Suspected Unapproved Parts NotificationPDF
81 FR 139 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Airport Grant ProgramPDF
81 FR 63 - Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From Pakistan: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in Countervailing Duty InvestigationPDF
81 FR 67 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative ReviewPDF
81 FR 74 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset ReviewsPDF
81 FR 144 - Commission on CarePDF
81 FR 96 - Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public InterestPDF
81 FR 81 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 82 - Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 144 - MyVA Federal Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 41 - Extension of the Workers' Compensation Offset From Age 65 to Full Retirement Age-Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) ActPDF
81 FR 87 - Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards; Supplemental Notice of Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical ConferencePDF
81 FR 89 - ISO New England Inc. Participating Transmission Owners Administrative Committee: Emera Maine; Town of Braintree Electric Light Department; NSTAR Electric Company; Chicopee Electric Light Department; Central Maine Power Company; Maine Electric Power Company (MEPCO); Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative & Connecticut Transmission Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative; The City of Holyoke Gas and Electric Department; New Hampshire Transmission, LLC; Green Mountain Power Corporation; Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company; New England Power Company, d/b/a National Grid; New Hampshire Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Eversource Energy Service Company as agent for: The Connecticut Light and Power Company, Western Massachusetts Electric Company, and Public Service Company of New Hampshire; Town of Hudson Light and Power Department; Town of Middleborough Gas & Electric Department; Town of Norwood Municipal Light Department; Town of Reading Municipal Light Department; Town of Wallingford (CT) Electric Division; Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant; The United Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company; Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. and Vermont Transco, LLC; Vermont Public Power Supply Authority; Shrewsbury Electric and Cable OperationsPDF
81 FR 90 - National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Prior Notice Request Under Blanket AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 85 - UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Sunbury Pipeline ProjectPDF
81 FR 89 - East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Loudon Expansion ProjectPDF
81 FR 86 - Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionPDF
81 FR 118 - In the Matter of Changda International Holdings, Inc.: Order of Suspension of TradingPDF
81 FR 135 - In the Matter of Zhong Wen International Holding Co., Ltd.; Order of Suspension of TradingPDF
81 FR 61 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request-Regional Office Administered Program (ROAP) Child Nutrition Payment Center (for the National School Lunch, School Breakfast, and Special Milk Programs)PDF
81 FR 5 - Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard ComponentsPDF
81 FR 101 - Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLCPDF
81 FR 98 - Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming AmendmentPDF
81 FR 143 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Information Collection Extension With Revision; Comment Request; Bank Secrecy Act/Money Laundering Risk AssessmentPDF
81 FR 141 - Agency Request for Approval of a New Information Collection: Recruitment and Debriefing of Human Subjects for Head-Up Displays and Distraction PotentialPDF
81 FR 91 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 8 - Certifications and Exemptions Under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972PDF
81 FR 42 - Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff; Filing of Food Additive PetitionPDF
81 FR 115 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 115 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 94 - Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 116 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 114 - Product Change-Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 114 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 115 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 115 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 116 - Product Change-Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 96 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
81 FR 1 - Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations; Technical AmendmentPDF
81 FR 104 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 102 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 112 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 135 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Modify the Options Clearing Corporation's Margin Methodology by Incorporating Variations in Implied VolatilityPDF
81 FR 116 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NASDAQ OMX PHLX Fee Schedule To Increase the Options Surcharge Fee for MNX and NDXPDF
81 FR 131 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the Professional Subscriber Fee for Non-Display Usage via Direct AccessPDF
81 FR 119 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of EDGX Exchange, Inc.PDF
81 FR 129 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of EDGA Exchange, Inc.PDF
81 FR 120 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule 14.11(i), Managed Fund Shares, To List and Trade the Shares of the Elkhorn S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Commodity ETF of Elkhorn ETF TrustPDF
81 FR 3 - Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer ManualPDF
81 FR 106 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 107 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 114 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 111 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 95 - Center for Scientific Review: Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 93 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 142 - Union Pacific Railroad Company-Abandonment Exemption-in McLennan County, TXPDF
81 FR 92 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 30 - Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft EnginesPDF
81 FR 27 - Airworthiness Directives; Technify Motors GmbH Reciprocating EnginesPDF
81 FR 81 - Science Advisory BoardPDF
81 FR 22 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
81 FR 34 - Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 38 - Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 24 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 28 - Airworthiness Directives; Dassault AviationPDF
81 FR 32 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 63 - Foreign-Trade Zone 78-Nashville, Tennessee; Application for Expansion of Subzone 78A, Nissan North America, Inc., Smyrna, TennesseePDF
81 FR 75 - Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
81 FR 78 - Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the Republic of Korea: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
81 FR 72 - Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Negative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
81 FR 13 - Announcement of Final Regulatory Determinations for Contaminants on the Third Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate ListPDF
81 FR 69 - Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
81 FR 63 - Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final DeterminationPDF
81 FR 47 - Confidential Business InformationPDF
81 FR 62 - Klamath National Forest, California; Craggy Vegetation Management ProjectPDF
81 FR 44 - Electronic and Information TechnologyPDF
81 FR 19 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna FisheriesPDF

Issue

81 1 Monday, January 4, 2016 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Food and Nutrition Service

See

Forest Service

Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 91-92 2015-33092 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 92-93 2015-32965 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93-94 2015-32969 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Three Mile Slough, Rio Vista, CA, 10-11 2015-33070 Safety Zones: Intracoastal Waterway; Lake Charles, LA, 11-13 2015-33072 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Bank Secrecy Act/Money Laundering Risk Assessment, 143-144 2015-33023 Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission RULES When Component Part Testing Can Be Used and Which Textile Products Have Been Determined Not to Exceed the Allowable Lead Content Limits: Amendment; Delay of Effective Date; and Reopening of Comment Period, 2-3 2015-33068 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

See

Navy Department

Education Department Education Department NOTICES Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program, 84-85 2015-33091 Membership of the Performance Review Board, 85 2015-33088 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Corte Madera Creek Flood Control Project General Reevaluation Report and Integrated EIS/EIR, County of Marin, CA, 82 2015-33065 Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MT, 82-84 2015-33066 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Final Regulatory Determinations: Contaminants on the Third Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List, 13-19 2015-32760 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations; Technical Amendment, 1-2 2015-32998 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 22-24 2015-32906 Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes, 32-34 2015-32888 Dassault Aviation, 28-30 2015-32891 Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes, 34-41 2015-32904 2015-32905 Technify Motors GmbH Reciprocating Engines, 27-28 2015-32962 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 24-27 2015-32903 Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft Engines, 30-32 2015-32963 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Airport Grant Program, 139-140 2015-33058 Specific Release Form, 139 2015-33060 Suspected Unapproved Parts Notification, 138 2015-33059 Meetings: RTCA Special Committee (209) ATCRBS/Mode S Transponder MOPS (Joint with EUROCAE WG-49, EUROCAE WG-51 Subgroup 1, and RTCA SC-186 Working Group 3), 138-139 2015-33063 RTCA Special Committee (214) Standards for Air Traffic Data Communication Services (Joint with EUROCAE WG-78), 140 2015-33061 RTCA Special Committee (224) Airport Security Access Control Systems, 140 2015-33064 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 86-87 2015-33030 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC, Proposed Loudon Expansion Project, 89-90 2015-33031 UGI Sunbury, LLC, Proposed Sunbury Pipeline Project, 85-86 2015-33032 Investigations and Refund Effective Dates: ISO New England Inc. Participating Transmission Owners Administrative Committee, 89 2015-33034 Meetings: Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards; Supplemental Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical Conference, 87-88 2015-33035 Requests under Blanket Authorizations: National Fuel Gas Supply Corp., 90-91 2015-33033 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 91 2015-33017 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard Components, 5-8 2015-33026 PROPOSED RULES Filings of Food Additive Petitions: Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff, 42-44 2015-33011 NOTICES Draft Guidance for Industry and Staff: Unique Device Identification, Convenience Kits; Availability, 94-95 2015-33008 Food and Nutrition Food and Nutrition Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Regional Office Administered Program Child Nutrition Payment Center for the National School Lunch, School Breakfast, and Special Milk Programs, 61-62 2015-33027 Foreign Claims Foreign Claims Settlement Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 98 2015-33105 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Application for Expansion of Subzones: Foreign-Trade Zone 78—Nashville, TN; Nissan North America, Inc., 63 2015-32780 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Craggy Vegetation Management Project, Klamath National Forest, CA, 62-63 2015-32522 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

Interior Interior Department See

National Park Service

See

Reclamation Bureau

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews, 74-75 2015-33054 Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from Pakistan, 63 2015-33057 Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 67-69 2015-33055 Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, 63-67 2015-32758 Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, 69-72 2015-32759 Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan, 72-74 2015-32761 Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, 75-78 2015-32763 Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea, 78-81 2015-32762 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same, 96-98 2015-33050 Justice Department Justice Department See

Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Confidential Business Information, 47-60 2015-32585 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Recruitment and Debriefing of Human Subjects for Head-Up Displays and Distraction Potential, 141-142 2015-33022 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 95-96 2015-32974 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries, 19-21 2015-32288 NOTICES Meetings: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 82 2015-33045 Pacific Fishery Management Council, 81-82 2015-33046 Science Advisory Board, 81 2015-32928 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places: Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 96 2015-32999 Navy Navy Department RULES International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea; Certifications and Exemptions, 8-10 2015-33012 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Construction Permit Applications: Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC, 101-102 2015-33025 Direct Transfers of Licenses; Applications: Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3, 98-101 2015-33024 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 98 2015-33130 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 102-114 2015-32975 2015-32976 2015-32977 2015-32978 2015-32979 2015-32980 2015-32981 2015-32982 2015-32983 2015-32984 2015-32992 2015-32993 2015-32994 2015-32995 2015-32996 2015-32997 2015-33076 2015-33077 2015-33078 2015-33079 2015-33080 2015-33081 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 114-116 2015-33001 2015-33003 2015-33005 Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 114-115 2015-33002 2015-33004 Priority Mail Express Negotiated Service Agreement, 115 2015-33010 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 115-116 2015-33000 2015-33006 2015-33007 2015-33009 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MT, 82-84 2015-33066 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual, 3-5 2015-32985 NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BATS Exchange, Inc., 120-129 2015-32986 EDGA Exchange, Inc., 129-131 2015-32987 EDGX Exchange, Inc., 119-120 2015-32988 NASDAQ OMX PHLX, LLC, 116-118 2015-32990 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 131-135 2015-32989 Options Clearing Corp., 135-138 2015-32991 Suspension of Trading Orders: Zhong Wen International Holding Co., Ltd., 135 2015-33028 Trading Suspension Orders: Changda International Holdings, Inc., 118 2015-33029 China Domestica Bio-technology Holdings, Inc., 129 2015-33139 USA Graphite, Inc., 116 2015-33138 Social Social Security Administration PROPOSED RULES Achieving a Better Life Experience Act: Workers' Compensation Offset from Age 65 to Full Retirement Age, 41-42 2015-33036 State Department State Department PROPOSED RULES Electronic and Information Technology, 44-47 2015-32485 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Abandonment Exemptions: Union Pacific Railroad Co., McLennan County, TX, 142-143 2015-32968 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Surface Transportation Board

Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Meetings: Commission on Care, 144 2015-33051 MyVA Federal Advisory Committee, 144 2015-33040 Reader Aids

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

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

81 1 Monday, January 4, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 61, 121, and 135 [Docket No. FAA-2010-0100; Amdt. Nos. 61-130C, 121-365B, 135-127B] RIN 2120-AJ67 Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations; Technical Amendment AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; technical amendment.

SUMMARY:

The FAA is correcting a final rule published on July 15, 2013. In that rule, the FAA amended its regulations to create new certification and qualification requirements for pilots in air carrier operations. The FAA unintentionally required without notice and comment that if a certificate holder conducting part 135 operations who has voluntarily chosen and been authorized to comply with the part 121 training and qualification requirements, a pilot serving as a second in command in part 135 for that certificate holder is required to have an airline transport pilot certificate and an aircraft type rating. This document corrects those errors and makes several additional miscellaneous corrections to part 61 and a cross-reference error in part 121.

DATES:

Effective: January 4, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara Adams, Air Transportation Division, AFS-200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8166; email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 15, 2013, the FAA published a final rule entitled, “Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations” (78 FR 42324). In that final rule, which became effective July 15, 2013, the FAA revised the pilot certificate requirements for a second in command (SIC) in part 121 operations. Section 121.436(b) requires the SIC to hold an ATP certificate and an aircraft type rating for the airplane flown.

The FAA intended these certification requirements to apply only to pilots serving in part 121 operations. Existing § 135.3(c) states, however, that if authorized by the Administrator upon application, each certificate holder that conducts operations under part 135 to which § 135.3(b) does not apply,1 may comply with the applicable sections of subparts N and O of part 121 instead of the requirements of subparts E, G, and H of part 135.2

1 Section 135.3(b) states that each certificate holder that conducts commuter operations under part 135 with airplanes in which two pilots are required by the aircraft type certificate must comply with subparts N and O of part 121 instead of the requirements of subparts E, G, and H of part 135.

2 The regulation contains a provision that allows the certificate holder to comply with the operating experience requirements of § 135.244 instead of the requirements of § 121.434.

Each certificate holder conducting part 135 operations who has voluntarily chosen and been authorized to comply with the part 121 training and qualification requirements, is required to comply with Subparts N and O of part 121. Because the certification requirements in § 121.436 are located in subpart O of part 121, an SIC in those operations is now required by reference to hold an ATP certificate and an aircraft type rating. The FAA did not discuss this issue in the preamble to the final rule nor did the FAA intend to impose this requirement on certificate holders conducting part 135 operations who have voluntarily chosen and been authorized to comply with the part 121 training and qualification requirements.

Technical Amendment

Because the FAA did not intend to impose additional requirements on SICs serving in part 135 operations in which the certificate holder has voluntarily chosen and been authorized to comply with the part 121 training and qualification requirements, the FAA is revising § 135.3(c) to clarify that an SIC in those part 135 operations does not need to comply with § 121.436(b) but may continue to hold a commercial pilot certificate with an instrument rating.

The FAA is also making three minor corrections that have been identified since publication of the final rule. In § 61.155(d), the FAA is making it clear that the training required by § 61.156 is only required for those pilots seeking an ATP certificate in the airplane category with a multiengine class rating. In § 61.165(f)(2), the FAA is clarifying that a knowledge test applicable to multiengine airplanes is required only if the pilot does not have valid ATP airplane knowledge test results that were taken prior to August 1, 2014. This correction is necessary to be consistent with the eligibility requirements in § 61.153, which is referenced in § 61.165(f)(1). The FAA notes that until July 31, 2016, pilots will be able to use the same ATP-airplane knowledge test with passing results taken prior to August 1, 2014, for both the ATP airplane single-engine class rating and multiengine class rating practical tests. In § 61.167(a)(2), the FAA is correcting the inadvertent exclusion of helicopter pilots that hold an ATP certificate in the rotorcraft category from the privilege of instructing.

Finally, the FAA is correcting a cross-reference error. In § 121.431, the FAA is correcting the cross-reference in paragraph (a)(1) to reflect § 135.244 rather than § 135.344.

Because these amendments clarify existing requirements and result in no substantive change, the FAA finds that the notice and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary. For the same reason, the FAA finds good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the amendments effective in less than 30 days.

List of Subjects 14 CFR Part 61

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 121

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

14 CFR Part 135

Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

Correcting Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration is amending chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND INSTRUCTORS 1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-44711, 44729, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.

2. In § 61.155, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:
§ 61.155 Aeronautical knowledge.

(d) An applicant who successfully completes the knowledge test for an airline transport pilot certificate prior to August 1, 2014, must successfully complete the practical test within 24 months from the month in which the knowledge test was successfully completed. An applicant who passes the knowledge test prior to August 1, 2014, but fails to successfully complete the airplane category with a multiengine class rating practical test within 24 months must complete the airline transport pilot certification training program specified in § 61.156 and retake the knowledge test prior to applying for the airplane category with a multiengine class rating practical test.

3. In § 61.165, revise paragraph (f)(2) to read as follows:
§ 61.165 Additional aircraft category and class ratings.

(f) * * *

(2) After July 31, 2014, pass a required knowledge test on the aeronautical knowledge areas of § 61.155(c), as applicable to multiengine airplanes; unless a pilot can present valid airline transport pilot knowledge test results from a test taken prior to August 1, 2014.

4. In § 61.167, revise paragraph (a)(2) introductory text to read as follows:
§ 61.167 Airline transport pilot privileges and limitations.

(a) * * *

(2) A person who holds an airline transport pilot certificate and has met the aeronautical experience requirements of § 61.159 or § 61.161, and the age requirements of § 61.153(a)(1) of this part may instruct—

PART 121—OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 7. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 40119, 41706, 44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44729, 44732, 46105; Pub. L. 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 note).

8. In § 121.431, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
§ 121.431 Applicability.

(a) * * *

(1) Prescribes crewmember qualifications for all certificate holders except where otherwise specified. The qualification requirements of this subpart also apply to each certificate holder that conducts commuter operations under part 135 of this chapter with airplanes for which two pilots are required by the aircraft type certification rules of this chapter. The Administrator may authorize any other certificate holder that conducts operations under part 135 of this chapter to comply with the training and qualification requirements of this subpart instead of subparts E, G, and H of part 135 of this chapter, except that these certificate holders may choose to comply with the operating experience requirements of § 135.244 of this chapter, instead of the requirements of § 121.434. Notwithstanding the requirements of this subpart, a pilot serving under part 135 of this chapter as second in command may meet the requirements of § 135.245 instead of the requirements of § 121.436; and

PART 135—OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 9. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 44730, 45101-45105; Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 44730).

10. In § 135.3, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 135.3 Rules applicable to operations subject to this part.

(c) If authorized by the Administrator upon application, each certificate holder that conducts operations under this part to which paragraph (b) of this section does not apply, may comply with the applicable sections of subparts N and O of part 121 instead of the requirements of subparts E, G, and H of this part, except that those authorized certificate holders may choose to comply with the operating experience requirements of § 135.244, instead of the requirements of § 121.434 of this chapter. Notwithstanding the requirements of this paragraph, a pilot serving under this part as second in command may meet the requirements of § 135.245 instead of the requirements of § 121.436.

Issued in Washington, DC under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a) and Secs. 216-217, Public Law 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 on December 23, 2015. Lirio Liu, Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015-32998 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Parts 1109 and 1500 [Docket No. CPSC-2011-0081] Amendment To Clarify When Component Part Testing Can Be Used and Which Textile Products Have Been Determined Not To Exceed the Allowable Lead Content Limits; Delay of Effective Date and Reopening of Comment Period AGENCY:

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION:

Direct final rule; delay of effective date and reopening of comment period.

SUMMARY:

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (“Commission” or “CPSC”) published a direct final rule (“DFR”) and notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPR”) in the same issue of the Federal Register on October 14, 2015, clarifying when component part testing can be used and clarifying which textile products have been determined not to exceed the allowable lead content limits. Because the comment period deadline for the DFR was stated incorrectly on regulations.gov, the Commission is reopening the comment period to accept comments submitted by January 13, 2016, and is delaying the effective date of the DFR to February 12, 2016.

DATES:

The effective date of the direct final rule published on October 14, 2015, at 80 FR 61729, which was delayed from December 14, 2015, until January 13, 2016 by a document published on November 19, 2015 at 80 FR 72342, November 19, 2015, is further delayed from January 13, 2016, until February 12, 2016. The rule will be effective unless we receive a significant adverse comment. If we receive a significant adverse comment, we will publish notification in the Federal Register withdrawing this direct final rule before its effective date. The comment date is extended to January 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2011-0081, by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submissions

Submit electronic comments in the following way:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept comments submitted by electronic mail (email), except through: http://www.regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.

Written Submissions

Submit written submissions in the following way:

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier, preferably in five copies, to: Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted without change, including any personal identifiers, contact information, or other personal information provided, to: http://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information, trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information electronically. Such information should be submitted in writing.

Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to: http://www.regulations.gov and insert the Docket No. CPSC-2011-0081 into the “Search” box and follow the prompts.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kristina Hatlelid, Ph.D., M.P.H., Directorate for Health Sciences, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850; (301) 987-2558; email; [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On October 14, 2015, the Commission published a DFR and an NPR in the Federal Register, clarifying when component part testing can be used and clarifying which textile products have been determined not to exceed the allowable lead content limits. (DFR, 80 FR 61729 and NPR, 80 FR 61773). In response to a request for additional time to comment, the Commission published a document extending the comment period until December 14, 2015, and providing that unless the Commission receives a significant adverse comment by December 14, 2015, the rule would become effective on January 13, 2016. 80 FR 72342. The comment period for the DFR was stated incorrectly on regulations.gov as January 13, 2016. Therefore, the Commission is publishing this document to reopen the comment period to allow for submission of comments until January 13, 2016, and delaying the effective date, accordingly, to February 12, 2016.

Dated: December 29, 2015. Todd A. Stevenson, Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-33068 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 232 [Release Nos. 33-9987; 34-76619; 39-2508; IC-31932] Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual AGENCY:

Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) is adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (EDGAR) Filer Manual and related rules to reflect updates to the EDGAR system. The updates are being made to add the submission form types X-17A-5 and X-17A-5/A for broker-dealer annual reports in electronic format; add the new submission form types C, C-W, C-U, C-U-W, C/A, C/A-W, C-AR, C-AR-W, C-AR/A, C-AR/A-W, C-TR and C-TR-W pursuant to Regulation Crowdfunding; add the new submission form types N-MFP1 and N-MFP1/A for money market mutual funds; disseminate raw and rendered eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) submissions; and update Item 1 of the Regulation A submission form types 1-A, 1-A/A, 1-A POS, DOA, and DOS/A to accept negative values in the “Total Assets,” “Total Stockholders' Equity,” and “Total Liabilities and Equity” fields. The EDGAR system is scheduled to be upgraded to support this functionality on December 14, 2015. On January 25, 2016, EDGAR will be updated to add new “Funding Portal” applicant type for filers to select when completing the process to apply for EDGAR access (New) on the EDGAR Filer Management Web site; and add the new submission form types CFPORTAL, CFPORTAL/A and CFPORTAL-W pursuant to Regulation Crowdfunding.

DATES:

Effective January 4, 2016. The incorporation by reference of the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 4, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

In the Division of Trading and Markets, for questions concerning Form X-17A-5 and Form Funding Portal, contact Kathy Bateman at (202) 551-4345; in the Division of Corporation Finance, for questions concerning Form C and related forms, contact Heather Mackintosh at (202) 551-8111; in the Division of Investment Management, for questions concerning Form N-MFP1, contact Heather Fernandez at 202-551-6708; and in the Division of Economic and Risk Analysis, for questions concerning eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) disseminations, contact Walter Hamscher at (202) 551-5397.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I and Volume II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system.1 It also describes the requirements for filing using EDGARLink Online and the Online Forms/XML Web site.

1 We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993, with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April 1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the Filer Manual on September 15, 2015. See Release No. 34-75918 (October 2, 2015) [80 FR 59578].

The revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volume I entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 24 (December 2015), and Volume II entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 35 (December 2015). The updated manual will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations.

The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format.2 Filers may consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for electronic submission.3

2See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).

3See Release No. 34-75918 in which we implemented EDGAR Release 15.3. For additional history of Filer Manual rules, please see the cites therein.

The EDGAR system will be upgraded to Release 15.4 on December 14, 2015 and will introduce the following changes:

Broker-dealers will now be able to submit Form X-17A-5 Part III in electronic format using the following submission form types:

• X-17A-5—Annual Reports • X-17A-5/A—Amendment to Annual Reports

These submission form types can be accessed by clicking the “File X-17A-5 Part III” link on the EDGAR Filing Web site. Additionally, filers may construct XML submissions for X-17A-5 and X-17A-5/A by following the “EDGAR Form X-17A-5 XML Technical Specification” document located on the SEC's Public Web site (http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml). Form X-17A-5 Part III will continue to be accepted in paper format.

Submission form types X-17A-5 and X-17A-5/A will include the “Request Confidentiality” check box to allow applicants to request confidential treatment for each attached document that is not required to be made public. EDGAR will not disseminate any attached documents that are designated as confidential.

Pursuant to Regulation Crowdfunding, EDGAR will be updated to include the following new submission form types:

• C: Offering Statement • C-W: Offering Statement Withdrawal • C-U: Progress Update • C-U-W: Progress Update Withdrawal • C/A: Amendment to Offering Statement • C/A-W: Amendment to Offering Statement Withdrawal • C-AR: Annual Report • C-AR-W: Annual Report Withdrawal • C-AR/A: Amendment to Annual Report • C-AR/A-W: Amendment to Annual Report Withdrawal • C-TR: Termination of Reporting • C-TR-W: Termination of Reporting Withdrawal

Issuers can access these submission form types from the “Regulation Crowdfunding” link on the EDGAR Filing Web site. Additionally, issuers may construct XML submissions for these submission form types by following the “EDGAR Form C XML Technical Specification” document located on the SEC's Public Web site (http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml). See Release No. 33-9974 for the effective date.

In connection with amendments to the rules governing money market mutual funds (or “money market funds”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940 the following changes will be made:

• EDGAR will be updated to include two new submission types—N-MFP1 and N-MFP1/A—to incorporate the amendments to Form N-MFP adopted by the Commission on July 23, 2014.4

4See Money Market Fund Reform; Amendments to Form PF, Release 33-9616 (July 23, 2014).

These two new submission types will be accepted from the EDGAR Filing Web site via filer-constructed XML submissions, as described in the Form N-MFP1 XML Technical Specification available on the SEC's Public Web site (http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml). EDGAR will only accept TEST submissions for submission form types N-MFP1 and N-MFP1/A until April 14, 2016. Beginning on April 14, 2016, submission form types N-MFP1 and N-MFP1/A will be accepted as LIVE submissions. After that date, filers will be prevented from submitting existing submission form type N-MFP. In addition, EDGAR will be updated to automatically disseminate money market fund information upon acceptance of the N-MFP1 and N-MFP1/A submissions.5

5See Release 33-9616 for additional information.

EDGAR will be updated to disseminate raw and rendered XBRL documents. The rendered eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) documents will be displayed as human-readable documents.

Finally, EDGAR will be updated to accept negative values in the “Total Assets,” “Total Stockholders' Equity,” and “Total Liabilities and Equity” fields in Item 1 of the submission form types 1-A, 1-A/A, 1-A POS, DOS and DOS/A.

On January 25, 2016, EDGAR Release 16.0.1 will introduce the following changes:

• Filers will now be able to select the new “Funding Portal” Applicant Type when completing the process to apply for EDGAR access (New) on the EDGAR Filer Management Web site.

• Pursuant to Regulation Crowdfunding, Funding Portals will be able to register with the Commission, amend their registration and withdraw their registration, using the following new submission form types:

○ CFPORTAL—Form Funding Portal: Initial application of funding portal.

○ CFPORTAL/A—Form Funding Portal/A: Amendment to registration, including a successor registration.

○ CFPORTAL-W—Form Funding Portal-W: Withdrawal of the funding portal's registration.

These submission form types can be accessed by clicking the “Regulation Crowdfunding” link on the EDGAR Filing Web site. Additionally, filers may construct XML submissions for CFPORTAL, CFPORTAL/A, and CFPORTAL-W by following the “EDGAR Form CFPORTAL XML Technical Specification” document located on the SEC's Public Web site (http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml).6

6See Crowdfunding, Release 33-9974 (80 FR 71387, November 16, 2015) for the effective dates for Regulation Crowdfunding.

Along with the adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of today's revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

The updated EDGAR Filer Manual will be available for Web site viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml. You may also obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.

Since the Filer Manual and the corresponding rule changes relate solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).7 It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 8 do not apply.

7 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

8 5 U.S.C. 601-612.

The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule amendments is January 4, 2016. In accordance with the APA,9 we find that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to Release 15.4 is scheduled to become available on December 14, 2015, and the system upgrade to Release 16.0.1 is scheduled to become available on January 25, 2016. The Commission believes that establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with these system upgrades.

9 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

Statutory Basis

We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,10 Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,11 Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,12 and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.13

10 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).

11 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, and 78ll.

12 15 U.S.C. 77sss.

13 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232

Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendment

In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 232—REGULATION S-T—GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS 1. The authority citation for Part 232 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3, 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c), 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350.

2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:
§ 232.301 EDGAR Filer Manual.

Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets out the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 24 (December 2015). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 35 (December 2015). Additional provisions applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume III: “N-SAR Supplement,” Version 5 (September 2015). All of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available for Web site viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. You can also inspect the document at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Dated: December 11, 2015.

By the Commission.

Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32985 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 176 [Docket No. FDA-2015-F-0714] Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard Components AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is amending the food additive regulations to no longer provide for the use of three specific perfluoroalkyl ethyl containing food-contact substances (FCSs) as oil and water repellants for paper and paperboard for use in contact with aqueous and fatty foods because new data are available as to the toxicity of substances structurally similar to these compounds that demonstrate there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm from the food-contact use of these FCSs. This action is in response to a petition filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Food Safety, the Breast Cancer Fund, the Center for Environmental Health, Clean Water Action, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Children's Environmental Health Network, Environmental Working Group, and Improving Kids' Environment.

DATES:

This rule is effective January 4, 2016. Submit either electronic or written objections and requests for a hearing by February 3, 2016. See section VIII for further information on the filing of objections.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit objections and requests for a hearing as follows:

Electronic Submissions

Submit electronic objections in the following way:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Objections submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your objection will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your objection does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your objection, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

• If you want to submit an objection with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the objection as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

Written/Paper Submissions

Submit written/paper submissions in the following way:

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

• For written/paper objections submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your objection, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2015-F-0714 for “Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard Components.” Received objections will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

• Confidential Submissions—To submit an objection with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your objections only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paul Honigfort, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-275), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 240-402-1206.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In a notice published in the Federal Register on March 16, 2015 (80 FR 13508), we announced that we filed a food additive petition (FAP 4B4809) submitted by the Natural Resources Defense Council, 1152 15th St. NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005; the Center for Food Safety, 303 Sacramento St., Second Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111; Clean Water Action, 1444 Eye St. NW., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005; the Center for Science in the Public Interest, 1220 L St. NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005; Children's Environmental Health Network, 110 Maryland Ave. NE., Suite 404, Washington, DC 20002; the Breast Cancer Fund, 1388 Sutter St., Suite 400, San Francisco, CA 94109-5400; the Center for Environmental Health, 2201 Broadway, Suite 302, Oakland, CA 94612; Environmental Working Group, 1436 U St. NW., Suite 100, Washington, DC 20009; and Improving Kids' Environment, 1915 West 18th St., Indianapolis, IN 46202.

The petition proposed to amend § 176.170 (21 CFR 176.170) to no longer provide for the use of three perfluoroalkyl ethyl containing FCSs as oil and water repellants for paper and paperboard for use in contact with aqueous and fatty foods. The three FCSs which are the subjects of this petition are as follows:

1. Diethanolamine salts of mono- and bis (1H,1H,2H,2H perfluoroalkyl) phosphates where the alkyl group is even-numbered in the range C8-C18 and the salts have a fluorine content of 52.4 percent to 54.4 percent as determined on a solids basis;

2. Pentanoic acid, 4,4-bis [(gamma-omega-perfluoro-C8-20-alkyl)thio] derivatives, compounds with diethanolamine (CAS Reg. No. 71608-61-2); and

3. Perfluoroalkyl substituted phosphate ester acids, ammonium salts formed by the reaction of 2,2-bis[([gamma], [omega]-perfluoro C4-20 alkylthio) methyl]-1,3-propanediol, polyphosphoric acid and ammonium hydroxide.

II. Evaluation of Safety

The three subject FCSs are regulated as food additives under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act). Section 409 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 348) sets forth the statutory requirements for food additives. Section 201(s) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) includes substances intended for use in producing, manufacturing, packing, processing, preparing, treating, packaging, transporting, or holding food among the substances defined as food additives, provided the intended use results or may reasonably be expected to result in it becoming a component of food and those uses were not sanctioned prior to 1958 or are not generally recognized as safe among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate its safety.

Under section 402(a)(2)(c)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2)(c)(1)), food shall be deemed to be adulterated if it is or if it bears or contains any food additive that is unsafe within the meaning of section 409 of the FD&C Act. A food additive shall be deemed to be unsafe under section 409 of the FD&C Act, in relevant part, unless its use conforms to a food additive regulation or an effective food contact notification. Section 409(i) of the FD&C Act states that the procedure for amending or repealing a regulation shall conform to the procedure for the promulgation of such regulations. FDA's regulations specific to the administrative actions for food additives provide that the Commissioner, either on his own initiative or on the petition of any interested person, may propose the issuance of a regulation amending or repealing a regulation pertaining to a food additive (§ 171.130(a) (21 CFR 171.130(a)). These regulations further provide that any such petition must include an assertion of facts, supported by data, showing that new information exists with respect to the food additive or that new uses have been developed or old uses abandoned, that new data are available as to toxicity of the chemical, or that experience with the existing regulation or exemption may justify its amendment or appeal. New data must be furnished in the form specified in § 171.1 (21 CFR 171.1) and 21 CFR 171.100 for submitting petitions (see § 171.130(b)). Under these regulations, a petitioner may propose that we amend a food additive regulation if the petitioner can demonstrate that new data are available as to the toxicity of the food additive that may justify amendment of the food additive regulation.

Under section 409(c)(3) of the FD&C Act we will not establish a regulation for the use of a food additive if a fair evaluation of the data fails to establish that the proposed use of the food additive, under the conditions of use to be specified in the regulation, will be safe. Our regulations, at 21 CFR 170.3(h)(i), define safety as “a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use.” In order for FDA to grant a petition that seeks an amendment to a food additive regulation based upon new data concerning the toxicity of the food additive, such data must be adequate for FDA to conclude that there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm for the intended use of the substance.

The petition asserts that publically available information on long-chain perfluorinated compounds as a chemical class, which has become available after the food contact use of the three FCSs was approved, demonstrates that there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm from the food contact use of the three FCSs as listed in § 176.170.

All three of the FCSs subject to the petition contain extended alkyl chains where all of the hydrogens are replaced by fluorine (hence the FCSs are “perfluorinated”). The toxicological profile of extended perfluorinated alkyl chains varies with chain length: On a general basis, those with extended perfluorinated alkyl chains greater than or equal to eight carbons in length demonstrate biopersistence in chronic feeding studies, while those with extended perfluorinated alkyl chains less than eight carbons in length do not (Ref. 1). Biopersistence is defined as persistence and accumulation of a material in a biological tissue due to preferential deposition of the material in the tissue combined with resistance of the material to removal from the tissue by natural clearance mechanisms (Ref. 2). As such, compounds containing extended perfluorinated alkyl chains are often classified as long- (i.e., ≥ eight carbons in length) or short-chain perfluorinated compounds, with implications for toxicology analysis including consideration of biopersistence. All three of the FCSs contain extended perfluorinated alkyl chains ≥ eight carbons in length and as such are long-chain perfluorinated compounds (PFCs).

The petition cites a 2010 FDA comprehensive review memorandum on the available literature for long-chain PFCs (Ref. 3). This memorandum noted that available data on long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols, both of which are subsets of long-chain PFCs, demonstrate reproductive and developmental toxicity in animal models. The FDA memorandum determined that, based on structural similarity to long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols, and in the absence of contradictory data, data demonstrating reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols was applicable to long-chain PFCs on a general basis. The petition asserts that, as the three subject FCSs are long-chain PFCs, the concern for reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain PFCs as determined in FDA's 2010 comprehensive review memorandum is applicable to these three FCSs. The petition also provides the results of an updated comprehensive literature search, which the petition asserts reinforces the concern for reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain PFCs. The petition also asserts that the updated literature search did not discover any information which would contradict FDA's 2010 determination that data demonstrating reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols was applicable to long-chain PFCs on a general basis.

Upon review of the available information, FDA has confirmed our 2010 determination that data demonstrating reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols are applicable to long-chain PFCs on a general basis (Ref. 4). FDA's updated review noted that there are no available toxicological studies conducted with the three FCSs that address the endpoints of reproductive or developmental toxicity. As all three FCSs are long-chain PFCs, and in the absence of data specific to the three FCSs to address these endpoints, FDA utilized the available data demonstrating reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols to assess the safety of the approved food-contact use of the FCSs. FDA's updated review noted deficiencies in the available information used to determine migration of the FCSs into food as a result of their approved food-contact use (Ref. 5). For this reason FDA was unable to calculate consumer exposure to the FCSs in a manner which would allow a quantitative assessment of the safety of that exposure in the context of the available data demonstrating reproductive and developmental toxicity for long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols. However, FDA's review noted that available data demonstrate that long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and fluorotelomer alcohols biopersist in animals and that this biopersistence also occurs in humans (Ref. 4). Although available migration information does not allow a quantitative assessment of the safety of exposure to these FCSs, the reproductive and development toxicity of the three FCSs can be qualitatively assessed in the context of biopersistence and the expectation that chronic dietary exposure to these FCSs would result in a systemic exposure to the FCSs or their metabolic by-products at levels higher than their daily dietary exposure (Ref. 4).

III. Comments on the Filing Notice

We received very few comments on the petition. These comments stated that the use of the three FCSs as listed in § 176.170 has been abandoned.

The basis for the action requested in the petition is that new data are available as to the toxicity of substances structurally similar to the subject FCSs that justify amending § 176.170. The petition is not based on abandonment of the approved food contact use of these three FCSs. We have made a determination that the information provided in the petition and other publicly available relevant data demonstrates that there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm for the food contact use of the three FCS.

IV. Conclusion

We reviewed the data and information in the petition and other available relevant material to evaluate whether new data are available as to the toxicity of the subject FCSs that justify amendment of § 176.170. As a result of this review, we concluded that data for subsets of long-chain PFCs (demonstrating biopersistence and reproductive and developmental toxicity) are applicable to long-chain PFCs on a general basis and that this data raises significant questions as to the safety of the authorized uses of the three FCSs subject to the petition (Ref. 4). We also concluded that there is a lack of data specific to the three subject FCSs subject to the petition to address these questions (Ref. 4). For these reasons, in the absence of data specific to the three FCSs to address reproductive and developmental toxicity, adequate migration data to determine dietary exposure to the FCSs from the food-contact use, and sufficient data to account for a consumer's systemic exposure resulting from chronic dietary exposure to these FCSs, we conclude that there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm for the food contact use of these FCSs. Therefore, we are amending part 176 as set forth in this document. Upon the effective date (see DATES), these food additive uses are no longer authorized.

V. Public Disclosure

In accordance with § 171.1(h), the petition and the documents that we considered and relied upon in reaching our decision to approve the petition will be made available for public disclosure (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). As provided in § 171.1(h), we will delete from the documents any materials that are not available for public disclosure.

VI. Environmental Impact

We have considered the environmental effects of this rule. As stated in the March 16, 2015, Federal Register notice of petition for FAP 4B4809 (80 FR 13508), we have determined, under 21 CFR 25.15(c), that this action “is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment” such that neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required, as set forth in 21 CFR 25.32(m). We have not received any new information or comments that would affect our previous determination.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This final rule contains no collection of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.

VIII. Objections

If you will be adversely affected by one or more provisions of this regulation, you may file with the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written objections. You must separately number each objection, and within each numbered objection you must specify, with particularity, the provision(s) to which you object and the grounds for your objection. Within each numbered objection, you must specifically state whether you are requesting a hearing on the particular provision that you specify in that numbered objection. If you do not request a hearing for any particular objection, you waive the right to a hearing on that objection. If you request a hearing, your objection must include a detailed description and analysis of the specific factual information you intend to present in support of the objection in the event that a hearing is held. If you do not include such a description and analysis for any particular objection, you waive the right to a hearing on the objection.

Any objections received in response to the regulation 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. We will publish notice of the objections that we have received or lack thereof in the Federal Register.

IX. References

The following references have been placed on display in the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and are available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; they are also available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified the Web site addresses, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but Web sites are subject to change over time.

1. Rice, P.A. “C6-Perfluorinated Compounds: The New Greaseproofing Agents in Food Packaging,” Current Environmental Health Reports, 2:1, pp. 33-40, 2015.

2. International Agency for Research on Cancer, http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol81/mono81-8.pdf.

3. FDA Memorandum from P. Rice to P. Honigfort, September 30, 2010.

4. FDA Memorandum from P. Rice to P. Honigfort, July 27, 2015.

5. FDA Memorandum from J. Cooper to P. Honigfort, July 23, 2015.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 176

Food additives, Food packaging.

Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and re-delegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 176 is amended as follows:

PART 176—INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: PAPER AND PAPERBOARD COMPONENTS 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 176 continues to read as follows: Authority:

21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 346, 348, 379e.

§ 176.170 [Amended]
2. Amend § 176.170 in the table in paragraph (a)(5) by removing the entries for “Diethanolamine salts of mono- and bis,” “Pentanoic acid,” and “Perfluoroalkyl substituted phosphate ester acids.”
Dated: December 29, 2015. Susan Bernard, Director, Office of Regulations, Policy and Social Sciences, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 2015-33026 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy 32 CFR Part 706 Certifications and Exemptions Under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Department of the Navy (DoN) is amending its certifications and exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, as amended (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (DAJAG)(Admiralty and Maritime Law) has determined that USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.

DATES:

This rule is effective January 4, 2016 and is applicable beginning November 18, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Commander Theron R. Korsak, (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave. SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066, telephone 202-685-5040.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 1605, the DoN amends 32 CFR part 706.

This amendment provides notice that the DAJAG (Admiralty and Maritime Law), under authority delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following specific provisions of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special function as a naval ship: Annex I paragraph 2 (a)(i), pertaining to the location of the forward masthead light at a height not less than 6 meters above the hull; Annex I, paragraph 2(g) pertaining to the placement of sidelights above the hull of the vessel; Annex I, paragraph 2(i)(iii), pertaining to the equally spaced vertical separation of three task lights; and Annex I, paragraph 2(k) as described in Rule 30 (a)(i), pertaining to the vertical separation between anchor lights, and the location of the forward anchor light at a height of not less than 6 meters above the hull; Annex I, paragraph 3(a), pertaining to the location of the forward masthead light in the forward quarter of the ship, and the horizontal distance between the forward and after masthead lights; Annex I, paragraph 3(c), pertaining to the task lights placed at a horizontal distance of not less than 2 meters from the fore and aft centerline of the vessel. The DAJAG (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has also certified that the lights involved are located in closest possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements.

Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR parts 296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its military functions.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 706

Marine safety, Navigation (water), Vessels.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the DoN amends part 706 of title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 706—CERTIFICATIONS AND EXEMPTIONS UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS FOR PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA, 1972 1. The authority citation for part 706 continues to read as follows: Authority:

33 U.S.C. 1605.

2. Section 706.2 is amended by: a. In Table One, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000); b. In Table Three, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000); c. In Table Four, under paragraph 15, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000); d. In Table Four, under paragraph 19, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000); e. In Table Four, under paragraph 22, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000); and f. In Table Five, adding, in alpha numerical order, by vessel number, an entry for USS ZUMWALT (DDG 1000).
§ 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of the Navy Under Executive Order 11964 and 33 U.S.C. 1605. Table One Vessel Number Distance in meters of forward masthead light below minimum required height § 2(a)(i) Annex 1 *         *         *         *         *         *         * USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 2.55 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Table Three Vessel Number Masthead lights arc of visibility; rule 21(a) Side lights arc of visibility; rule 21(b) Stern light arc of visibility; rule 21(c) Side lights
  • distance
  • inboard of ship's sides in
  • meters 3(b) annex 1
  • Stern light, distance
  • forward of stern in
  • meters;
  • rule 21(c)
  • Forward
  • anchor light, height above hull in meters; 2(K) annex 1
  • Anchor lights
  • relationship
  • of aft light to
  • forward light
  • in meters 2(K) annex 1
  • USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 5.3 2.99 below. *         *         *         *         *         *         *

    15. * * *

    Table Four Vessel Number Horizontal distance from the fore and aft centerline of the vessel in the athwartship direction *         *         *         *         *         *         * USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 FWD Lower: 1 0.31 meters.
  • FWD Middle: 1 0.31 meters.
  • FWD Upper: 1 0.29 meters.
  • AFT Lower: 1 1.04 meters.
  • AFT Middle: 1 1.05 meters.
  • AFT Upper: 1 1.06 meters.
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 On DDG 1000, the ship does not have a traditional mast. To achieve the effect of a “single, all-around light,” multiple sets of task lights are embedded into each of the four faces of the ship's superstructure. Except when viewing the ship from dead ahead, dead astern or broadside, two deckhouse surfaces are visible; consequently, two sets of task lights are visible simultaneously. Because the deckhouse surfaces are sloped, unless the lights are viewed dead-on, the three task lights do not present as being in a vertical line.

    19. * * *

    Vessel Number Distance in meters of sidelights above maximum allowed height USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 2.55 PORT.
  • 2.52 STBD.
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         *

    22. * * *

    Vessel Number Vertical Separation of the task light array is not equally spaced, the separation between the middle and lower task light exceed the
  • separation between the upper and middle light by
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 FWD: 0.01 meter.
  • AFT: 0.178 meter.
  • PORT: 0.64 meter.
  • STBD: 0.01 meter.
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    Table Five Vessel Number Masthead lights not over all other lights and obstructions. annex I, sec. 2(f) Forward masthead light not in forward quarter of ship. annex I, sec. 3(a) After masthead light less than 1/2 ship's length aft of forward masthead light. annex I, sec.3(a) Percentage horizontal
  • separation
  • attained
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * USS ZUMWALT DDG 1000 X X X 76.94 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    Approved: November 18, 2015. A.B. Fischer, Captain, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate, General (Admiralty and Maritime Law). Dated: December 10, 2015. N.A. Hagerty-Ford, Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33012 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2015-1098] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Three Mile Slough, Rio Vista, CA 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 Highway 160 drawbridge across Three Mile Slough, mile 0.1, at Rio Vista, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the bridge owner to make necessary bridge maintenance repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to be secured in the closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on January 5, 2016 to 11:59 p.m. on April 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2015-1098], 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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510-437-3516, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The California Department of Transportation has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Highway 160 drawbridge, mile 0.1, over Three Mile Slough, at Rio Vista, CA. The drawbridge navigation span provides 12 feet vertical clearance above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the draw opens on signal. Navigation on the waterway is commercial, search and rescue, law enforcement, and recreational.

    The drawbridge will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 12:01 a.m. on January 5, 2016 to 11:59 p.m. on April 10, 2016, to allow the bridge owner to perform sand blasting and painting rehabilitation. A containment scaffolding system will be installed below low steel of the entire length of the bridge structure, reducing vertical clearance for navigation by not more than 4 feet, and will be lighted at night with red lights. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.

    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies. The confluence of the San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers can be used as an alternate route for vessels unable to pass through the bridge in the closed position. The Coast Guard will also inform waterway users through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact 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: December 15, 2015. D.H. Sulouff, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33070 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG 2015-1086] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Intracoastal Waterway; Lake Charles, LA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for all waters of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) extending 100-yards east and west of ICW Mile Marker 244.5 located at position 30°03′38″ N. 093°22′19″ W. (NAD 83) in Lake Charles, Louisiana. This safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from hazards created by high power electrical line installation operations via helicopter over the Intracoastal Waterway. Entry of vessels or persons into this safety zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 7 a.m. on January 4, 2016 through 6 p.m. on January 14, 2016. This rule will be enforced when personnel and equipment are on scene and conducting working on electrical lines.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2015-1086 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email MST1 Walt Goggans, Marine Safety Unit Lake Charles, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 337-491-7883, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L. Public Law § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because immediate action is needed to protect vessels and mariners from the hazards associated with electrical line installation operations over the Intracoastal Waterway. The Coast Guard was not notified of the impending electrical line installation by ENTERGY until approximately three weeks prior to the date of the planned installation. After review of the details, the Coast Guard determined action is needed to protect vessels and mariners from the potential hazards created by the electrical line installation. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this safety zone by January 4, 2016.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard received less than 30-day's notice that ENTERGY set the electrical line installation date for January 4, 2016 through January 14, 2016. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with electrical line installation operations over the Intracoastal Waterway. The Coast Guard will notify the public and maritime community that the safety zone will be in effect and of its enforcement periods via broadcast notices to mariners (BNM) and will be published in the Local Notice to Mariners (LNM).

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port, Port Arthur (COTP) has determined that the hazards associated with high power line installations beginning January 4, 2016 through January 14, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within a 100-yard radius of helicopter cable installation operations. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while high power cable installation operations occur.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7 a.m. on January 4, 2016 through 6 p.m. on January 14, 2016. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters, shoreline to shoreline, extending 100-yards to either side of helicopter high power cable installation operations and machinery being used by personnel to install the high power cables. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters while the electrical lines are being installed. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zone. This rule will only be enforced for short periods when the channel is obstructed or cable installation operations over Intracoastal Waterway pose hazards to mariners. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessel to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on vessel owners or operators.

    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 section.

    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.

    C. 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).

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.

    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. 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 (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 safety zone lasting less than 10 days that will prohibit entry within 100-yards of vessels and machinery being used for high power cable installation. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and 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.T08-1086 to read as follows:
    § 165.T08-1086 Safety Zone; Intracoastal Waterway; Lake Charles, LA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all waters of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) extending 100-yards east and west of ICW Mile Marker 244.5 located at position 30°03′38″ N. 093°22′19″ W., Lake Charles, Louisiana. The coordinates are based on (NAD 83).

    (b) Effective periods. This rule is effective from 7 a.m. on January 4, 2016 through 6 p.m. on January 14, 2016. This rule will be enforced when personnel and equipment are on scene and conducting working on electrical lines.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited to all vessels except those vessels specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur or a designated representative.

    (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through must request permission from the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur, or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or 16, or by telephone at (337) 912-0073.

    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the lawful orders or directions given to them by the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur or the Captain of the Port's designated representative. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.

    (d) Information broadcasts. The Coast Guard will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement periods for the safety zone as well as any changes in the schedule.

    Dated: December 15, 2015. R.S. Ogrydziak, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Port Arthur, Texas.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33072 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 141 [EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0155; FRL-9940-64-OW] Announcement of Final Regulatory Determinations for Contaminants on the Third Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final regulatory determinations.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing final regulatory determinations not to issue national primary drinking water regulations for four of the 116 contaminants listed on the Third Contaminant Candidate List. The Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended in 1996, requires the EPA to make regulatory determinations every five years on at least five unregulated contaminants. A regulatory determination is a decision about whether or not to begin the process to propose and promulgate a national primary drinking water regulation for an unregulated contaminant. On October 20, 2014, the agency published its preliminary determinations not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos, terbufos sulfone and begin the process to regulate strontium. The agency requested public comment on the determinations, process, rationale and supporting technical information. The agency received comments from 14 individuals or organizations on the preliminary regulatory determinations. After careful review and consideration of the public comments, the agency is making a final determination not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone. The agency, however, is delaying the final regulatory determination on strontium in order to consider additional data and decide whether there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction by regulating strontium in drinking water.

    DATES:

    In accordance with 40 CFR 23.7 for purposes of judicial review, the regulatory determinations in this document are issued as of January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Zeno Bain, Standards and Risk Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Office of Water (Mailcode 4607M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-5970; email address: [email protected] For general information, contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, telephone number: (800) 426-4791. The Safe Drinking Water Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., eastern time.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    These final regulatory determinations will not impose any requirements on anyone. Instead, this action notifies interested parties of the EPA's final regulatory determinations for four contaminants and provides a summary of the major comments received on the October 20, 2014, preliminary determinations (USEPA, 2014c).

    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0155. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Water Docket Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.

    Electronic Access: You may access this Federal Register document electronically from the Government Printing Office under the “Federal Register” listings at http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR.

    Abbreviations Used in This Document CCL Contaminant Candidate List CCL 3 Third Contaminant Candidate List CFR Code of Federal Regulations EPA Environmental Protection Agency FR Federal Register HRL Health Reference Level MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal MRL Minimum Reporting Limit NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulation PWS Public Water System RD Regulatory Determination RD 3 Third Regulatory Determination RSC Relative Source Contribution SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act STORET Storage and Retrieval Data System UCMR Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation UCMR 1 First Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation UCMR 2 Second Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation UCMR 3 Third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation USDA United States Department of Agriculture USGS United States Geological Survey μg/L micrograms per Liter Table of Contents I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information? II. Purpose and Background A. What is the purpose of this action? B. What are the statutory requirements for the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and regulatory determinations? C. What contaminants did the EPA consider for regulations? III. What process did the EPA use to make the regulatory determinations? IV. Summary of the EPA's Findings on the Four Contaminants With Final Regulatory Determinations A. Dimethoate 1. Description 2. Agency Findings B. 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 1. Description 2. Agency Findings C. Terbufos and Terbufos Sulfone 1. Description 2. Agency Findings D. Public Comments on Four Contaminants With Final Regulatory Determinations V. Summary of Public Comments on Strontium and the Agency's Responses A. Background on Strontium and the EPA's Preliminary Determination B. What comments did the EPA receive on strontium? VI. Next Steps VII. References II. Purpose and Background A. What is the purpose of this action?

    The purpose of this action is to present a summary of the EPA's findings related to the final regulatory determinations for four contaminants listed on the Third Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 3) (USEPA, 2009). The four contaminants include: Dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone. Today's action briefly summarizes the statutory requirements for targeting drinking water contaminants for regulatory determination, provides an overview of the contaminants the agency considered for regulation and describes the approach used to make the final regulatory determinations. In addition, today's action summarizes the public comments received on the agency's preliminary determinations and the agency's responses to those comments, including the status of the EPA's evaluation of strontium.

    B. What are the statutory requirements for the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and regulatory determinations?

    The specific statutory requirements for the CCL and regulatory determinations can be found in the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), section 1412(b)(1). The 1996 SDWA Amendments require the EPA to publish the CCL every five years. The CCL is a list of contaminants that are not subject to any proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs), are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems (PWSs) and may require regulation under SDWA. The 1996 SDWA Amendments also direct the agency to determine whether to regulate at least five contaminants from the CCL every five years. SDWA requires the agency to publish a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) 1 and promulgate an NPDWR 2 for a contaminant if the Administrator determines that:

    1 The MCLG is the “maximum level of a contaminant in drinking water at which no known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of persons would occur, and which allows an adequate margin of safety. Maximum contaminant level goals are nonenforceable health goals” (40 CFR 141.2).

    2 An NPDWR is a legally enforceable standard that applies to public water systems. An NPDWR sets a legal limit (called a maximum contaminant level or MCL) or specifies a certain treatment technique for public water systems for a specific contaminant or group of contaminants.

    (a) The contaminant may have an adverse effect on the health of persons;

    (b) The contaminant is known to occur or there is a substantial likelihood that the contaminant will occur in public water systems with a frequency and at levels of public health concern; and

    (c) In the sole judgment of the Administrator, regulation of such contaminant presents a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public water systems.

    If the agency determines that all three of these statutory criteria are met, it makes a determination that a national primary drinking water regulation is needed. In that case, the agency has 24 months to publish a proposed MCLG and NPDWR. After the proposal, the agency has 18 months to publish a final MCLG and promulgate a final NPDWR (SDWA section 1412(b)(1)(E)).3

    3 The statute authorizes up to a nine-month extension of this promulgation date.

    C. What contaminants did the EPA consider for regulation?

    On October 20, 2014, the EPA published preliminary regulatory determinations for five contaminants on the third Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 3) that had sufficient information to support a regulatory determination (USEPA, 2014c). The five contaminants are 1,3-dinitrobenzene, dimethoate, terbufos, terbufos sulfone and strontium. The agency is making final regulatory determinations not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone. The agency is not making a final regulatory determination for strontium at this time. The agency's decision to delay a final determination for strontium is based on public comments received and the plan to further evaluate scientific information that became available after publication of the preliminary regulatory determinations. The agency is currently conducting additional scientific analyses to determine if there is a need to develop a national drinking water regulation for strontium. For more information about the comments the agency received on strontium and the analyses that are underway, see section V.A of this notice.

    Information on the five contaminants can be found in the Regulatory Determinations 3 Support Document (USEPA, 2014b). More information is available at the Water Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0155) and also on EPA's Regulatory Determination 3 Web site at http://www2.epa.gov/ccl/regulatory-determination-3.

    III. What process did the EPA use to make the regulatory determinations?

    This section gives a summary of the regulatory determination process the agency followed to identify and evaluate contaminants for the Third Regulatory Determination. For more detailed information on the process and the analyses performed, please refer to the “Protocol for the Regulatory Determination 3” document (USEPA, 2014a) and the Federal Register notice for the Preliminary Regulatory Determinations for Contaminants on CCL 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    The CCL 3 identified 116 contaminants that are currently not subject to any proposed or promulgated national drinking water regulation, are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems, and may require regulation under SDWA (USEPA, 2009). Since some of the CCL 3 contaminants do not have adequate health and/or occurrence data to evaluate against the three statutory criteria (see section II.B of this notice), the agency used a three-phase process to identify which of the contaminants are candidates for regulatory determinations. Priority was given to identifying contaminants known to occur or with substantial likelihood to occur at frequencies and levels of public health concern.

    The three phases of the Third Regulatory Determination process are (1) the Data Availability Phase, (2) the Data Evaluation Phase and (3) the Regulatory Determination Assessment Phase. The overall process is displayed in Exhibit 1.

    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ER04JA16.000 BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

    The purpose of the first phase, the Data Availability Phase, is to determine if the agency “may have” sufficient data to characterize the potential health effects and known or likely occurrence in drinking water. Although contaminants must have sufficient data to evaluate the statutory criteria in Phase 3, the agency does not want to rule out any contaminants too early in the process; therefore, if sufficient health and occurrence data are likely available, the contaminants are considered in the Data Evaluation Phase, the second phase of the regulatory determination process. From the 116 CCL 3 contaminants, the agency identified 37 contaminants (35 CCL 3 contaminants and two non-CCL 3 contaminants 4 ) to further evaluate in the second phase.

    4 The non-CCL 3 contaminants, N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine (NDBA) and N-Nitrosomethylethylamine (NMEA), were included because they are part of a larger group (nitrosamines) that also includes a number of CCL 3 contaminants.

    During the second phase, the agency further evaluates each contaminant on the short list to identify those that have sufficient data (or are expected to have sufficient data within the timeframe allotted for the second phase) for the EPA to assess the three statutory criteria. As part of the second phase, the agency specifically focuses its efforts on identifying those contaminants or contaminant groups that are occurring or have substantial likelihood to occur at levels and frequencies of public health concern, based on the best available peer reviewed data. If the agency finds that sufficient data are not available or not likely to be available to evaluate the three statutory criteria during the first and second phases, then the contaminant is not considered a candidate for making a regulatory determination.

    If sufficient data are available for a contaminant to characterize the potential health effects and known or likely occurrence in drinking water, the contaminant is evaluated against the three statutory criteria in the Regulatory Determination Assessment Phase, which is the third phase of the process. Of the 37 contaminants that were evaluated under Phase 2, 12 were designated for further evaluation in Phase 3.

    Of the 12 contaminants that were evaluated in Phase 3, the agency did not make preliminary regulatory determinations for seven contaminants. The seven contaminants include chlorate and six nitrosamines. Chlorate and the six nitrosamines are disinfection byproducts, and the agency is further evaluating these contaminants as part of the regulatory review of existing Microbial and Disinfection Byproduct regulations, as announced in the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 Federal Register notice published on October 20, 2014 (USEPA, 2014c).

    After evaluating the five remaining CCL 3 contaminants (dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos, terbufos sulfone and strontium) against the three statutory criteria and considering other relevant information (such as level and frequency of occurrence, population exposed and information on sensitive populations and lifestages), the agency made preliminary regulatory determinations to regulate strontium and to not regulate the remaining four contaminants. These preliminary determinations, with their supporting analyses and documentation, were published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2014, for public comment (USEPA, 2014c).

    The EPA received comments from 14 organizations and individuals on the October 20, 2014, Federal Register notice. These 14 organizations and individuals include four environmental organizations, six industry groups, one state association and three anonymous individuals. The agency prepared a Response to Comments document for this action that is available in the Public Docket at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0155. Comments on specific contaminants, and the EPA's responses, are briefly summarized in the sections below.

    IV. Summary of the EPA's Findings on the Four Contaminants With Final Regulatory Determinations

    After considering the public comments, the EPA is making final regulatory determinations not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone.

    This notice provides a brief description of the agency findings on these contaminants. Details on the background, health and occurrence information and analyses used to evaluate and make final determinations for these contaminants can be found in the Regulatory Determinations 3 Support Document (USEPA, 2015b) and the Federal Register notice for the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    For each contaminant, the agency evaluated the available human and toxicological data, derived a health reference level (HRL),5 evaluated the potential and/or likely occurrence and examined the likely exposed population for the contaminant in public water systems. The agency also considered whether information was available on sensitive populations. The agency used the findings from these evaluations to determine whether the three SDWA statutory criteria are satisfied. Table 1 gives a summary of the health and occurrence information for the four contaminants with final determinations under RD 3.

    5 HRLs are risk derived concentrations against which to evaluate the occurrence data to determine if contaminants may occur at levels of public health concern. They are not the level of a contaminant in drinking water that must not be exceeded to protect any particular population (i.e., an HRL is not an MCL).

    Table 1—Summary of the Health and Occurrence Information and the Final Determinations for Four of the Contaminants Considered for RD 3 RD 3
  • contaminants
  • Health reference level (HRL)
  • (μg/L)
  • Occurrence findings from primary data sources Primary
  • database
  • PWSs with at least 1 detection ≥1/2 HRL Population served by PWSs with at least 1
  • detection ≥1/2 HRL
  • PWSs with at least 1 detection ≥HRL Population served by PWSs with at least 1
  • detection ≥HRL
  • Final
  • determination
  • Dimethoate 15.4 UCMR 2 0% (0 of 4140) 0% (0 of 229M) 0% (0 of 4140) 0% (0 of 229M) Do not regulate. 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 0.7 UCMR 2 0% (0 of 4139) 0% (0 of 229M) 0% (0 of 4139) 0% (0 of 229M) Do not regulate. Terbufos 0.35 UCMR 1 0% (0 of 295) 0% (0 of 41M) 0% (0 of 295) 0% (0 of 41M). Do not regulate Terbufos sulfone 0.35 UCMR 2 0.02% (1 of 4140) 0.01% (44.6K of 229M) 0.02% (1 of 4140) 0.01% (44.6K of 229M) Do not regulate.
    A. Dimethoate 1. Description

    Dimethoate is an organophosphate pesticide, commonly used as an insecticide on field crops (e.g., wheat, alfalfa, corn and cotton), orchard crops, vegetable crops and in forestry. Synonyms for dimethoate include dimethogen, dimeton, dimevur and cygon (HSDB, 2010; USEPA, 2007). Dimethoate is considered highly mobile and relatively non-persistent in the environment (USEPA, 2007).

    2. Agency Findings

    The agency is making a determination not to regulate dimethoate with an NPDWR. It does not occur at levels and frequencies of public health concern. As a result, the agency finds that an NPDWR does not present a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction.

    The primary data for dimethoate are the 2008-2010 nationally representative drinking water monitoring data, generated through the EPA's Second Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR 2). Dimethoate was not detected in any of the 32,150 UCMR 2 samples collected by 4,140 PWSs (serving ~230 million people) at levels greater than the 1/2 HRL (7.7 μg/L), the HRL (15.4 μg/L), or the minimum reporting level (MRL) (0.7 μg/L) (USEPA, 2015c). Based on the results of the UCMR 2 samples, the estimated population exposed to dimethoate at levels of public health concern is 0%.

    Other supplementary sources of finished water data from the State of California, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) indicate that the occurrence of dimethoate in PWSs is likely to be low to non-existent. Dimethoate occurrence data for ambient water from the USGS and the Storage and Retrieval (STORET) Data System are consistent with those for finished water. These data sources are discussed in the October 2014 Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    B. 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 1. Description

    1,3-Dinitrobenzene is a nitro aromatic compound that is used as an industrial chemical and formed as a by-product in the manufacture of munitions, as well as in the production of other substances (HSDB, 2009). There are no known natural sources of 1,3-dinitrobenzene. 1,3-Dinitrobenzene appears to be moderately persistent in environmental media and moderately mobile in soil and water, although in soils with high clay content it will be less mobile (USEPA, 2015b).

    2. Agency Findings

    The agency is making a determination not to regulate 1,3-dinitrobenzene with an NPDWR. It does not occur at levels and frequencies of public health concern. As a result, the agency finds that an NPDWR does not present a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction.

    The primary data for 1,3-dinitrobenzene are the 2008-2010 nationally representative drinking water monitoring data generated through the EPA's UCMR 2 (USEPA, 2015c). UCMR 2 is the only dataset with finished water data for this contaminant. UCMR 2 collected 32,152 samples from 4,139 PWSs for 1,3-dinitrobenzene and it was not detected above the MRL (0.8 μg/L), which is only slightly higher than the HRL (0.7 μg/L). Based on the results of the UCMR 2 samples, the estimated population exposed to 1,3-dinitrobenzene at or above the MRL is 0%.

    Findings from the available ambient water data for 1,3-dinitrobenzene are consistent with the results in finished water. Ambient water data in STORET included no measured results above 0.33 μg/L in 143 samples from 70 sites (USEPA, 2012). It should be noted that some occurrence above the HRL may have gone undetected since reporting levels are not documented. These data sources are discussed in the October 2014 Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    C. Terbufos and Terbufos Sulfone 1. Description

    Terbufos is a phosphorodithioate pesticide (i.e., an organophosphate) used as an insecticide-nematicide to control a variety of insect pests, primarily used on corn and sugar beets (USEPA, 2006). Terbufos sulfone is a degradate of terbufos. Total toxic residues of terbufos and degradates are highly mobile and persistent in the environment, with terbufos sulfone being more mobile and substantially more persistent than terbufos (USEPA, 2006).

    2. Agency Findings

    The agency is making determinations not to regulate terbufos and terbufos sulfone with NPDWRs. They do not occur at levels and frequencies of public health concern. As a result, the agency finds that an NPDWR does not present a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction.

    The primary data for terbufos are from the First Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR 1) screening survey (2001-2003) (USEPA, 2008). The UCMR 1 screening survey collected 2,301 finished water samples from 295 PWSs for terbufos and it was not detected at levels at or above the MRL (0.5 μg/L), which is slightly higher than the HRL (0.35 μg/L) (USEPA, 2008). Based on the results of the UCMR 1 screening survey, the estimated population exposed to terbufos at or above the MRL is 0%.

    The primary data for terbufos sulfone are nationally representative finished water monitoring data generated through the EPA's UCMR 2 (2008-2010) (USEPA, 2015c). UCMR 2 collected 32,149 finished water samples from 4,140 PWSs (serving ~230 million people) for terbufos sulfone and it was detected in only one sample, at a concentration of 0.42 μg/L. The MRL is 0.4 μg/L, which is slightly higher than the HRL (0.35 μg/L) (USEPA, 2015c). Based on the results of the UCMR 2 samples, the estimated population exposed to terbufos sulfone at a level of public health concern (based on the HRL for terbufos) is 44,600 (0.02% of the population served by PWSs).

    Finished water data for terbufos and terbufos sulfone from California, Iowa, USDA and USGS are consistent with the UCMR 1 and UCMR 2 data. Terbufos and (very limited) terbufos sulfone occurrence data for ambient water from the EPA, STORET and several USGS programs or studies are also consistent with those for finished water. These data sources are discussed in the October 2014 Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    D. Public Comments on Four Contaminants With Final Regulatory Determinations

    The agency received comments in support of the agency's preliminary determinations not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone. The agency did not receive any comments to the contrary.

    Agency Response: EPA agrees with the comments and, as previously explained, is making final determinations not to regulate dimethoate, 1,3-dinitrobenzene, terbufos and terbufos sulfone.

    V. Summary of Public Comments on Strontium and the Agency's Responses A. Background on Strontium and the EPA's Preliminary Determination

    Strontium is a naturally occurring element (atomic number 38) and a member of the alkaline earth metals (ANL, 2007). There are several radioactive strontium isotopes formed by nuclear fission of uranium or plutonium. Since drinking water contamination by radioactive isotopes, including beta particle emitters, is covered under the existing Radionuclides Rule, this section describes the stable 88Sr isotope.

    In October 2014, the agency made a preliminary determination to regulate strontium with an NPDWR after evaluating the available health, occurrence and other related information against the three SDWA statutory criteria. Specifically, EPA made a preliminary determination that (a) strontium may have an adverse effect on the health of persons, (b) it is known to occur or there is substantial likelihood that strontium will occur in public water systems with a frequency and at levels of public health concern and (c) regulation of strontium with an NPDWR presents a meaningful opportunity to reduce health risks for persons served by PWSs. EPA describes the underlying science in support of these criteria in the Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    In the Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3, EPA calculated a non-cancer HRL of 1500 µg/L for strontium using the reference dose of 0.3 mg/kg/day, a default Relative Source Contribution (RSC) of 20% and age-specific exposure factors (i.e., drinking water intake expressed as liters per kg of body weight) for the sensitive population of birth through 18 years to reflect the most active period of bone growth and development. The RSC is the level of exposure believed to result from drinking water when compared to other sources (e.g., food, ambient air). In the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 EPA used the default 20% RSC to calculate the HRL. For more detailed information see the October 20, 2014, Federal Register notice of the Preliminary Regulatory Determination 3 (USEPA, 2014c).

    After consideration of public comments on the preliminary regulatory determination for strontium (see Section V.B.), the agency is delaying the final determination for strontium in order to consider additional scientific data and decide whether there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction by regulating strontium in drinking water.

    B. What comments did the EPA receive on strontium?

    Some commenters supported the preliminary determination to regulate strontium. These commenters supported a regulation due to the adverse effect on bone growth and/or the potential for elevated levels of strontium in the environment as a result of spills and disposal of waste products related to gas production.

    Many comments called upon the agency to delay the final determination, collect more data and perform additional analyses before making a final determination for strontium. Specifically, the comments were focused on the following areas: The relationship between occurrence and health risk, the RSC of strontium, the costs and benefits of a potential strontium regulation and the feasibility of treating strontium.

    Three commenters questioned whether enough water systems show strontium at levels and frequency of concern that a meaningful reduction in health risk can be achieved through a national regulation. Two of these commenters suggested conducting an epidemiology study that evaluates whether adverse human health effects are occurring and at what drinking water concentrations (and frequency of occurrence) to determine whether there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction of a regulation.

    Two commenters indicated the agency should quantify the RSC or provide stronger justification for using an RSC of 20%. One commenter stated the RSC has a significant impact on the reference dose. One commenter stated that defaults of 20% and 80% have utility in relatively simple circumstances where it is accepted that the drinking water component is either very small or large. The commenter indicated that it is essential to analyze and quantify the RSC when it is intermediate and there are data to perform a meaningful estimate. The commenter asserted that it is essential because the impact on the MCLG and ultimately the MCL and compliance costs can become significant.

    Several commenters indicated concerns with the costs and benefits of a potential strontium regulation. One commenter urged the agency to update the current affordability standard under SDWA before promulgating any new NPDWRs in order to allow rural and small communities to utilize the most economical and safe treatment options. One commenter stated that the agency failed to estimate the social benefits and social costs in its analysis for the strontium determination, specifically the additional energy usage and its externalities. Several commenters compared the cost of a potential strontium regulation to that of the arsenic regulation, based on the percentage and type of systems with strontium occurrence at levels of concern.

    Several commenters supported the agency's commitment to conducting more extensive treatment research prior to promulgating a regulation for strontium. Two commenters indicated that the treatment technology to remove strontium may remove beneficial alkaline earth metals, such as calcium, that partially counter the uptake of strontium.

    Agency Response: The agency is delaying the final determination for strontium in order to consider additional scientific data and decide whether there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction by regulating strontium in drinking water.

    Strontium is known to occur in food, ambient air and soil. While data on levels in those media and estimates of intake from those sources were limited when EPA made the preliminary determination to regulate strontium, the EPA is evaluating recent additions to the exposure database to determine if the agency can develop a data-derived RSC rather than using a default 20% RSC in the calculation of the HRL. In the absence of this type of relevant exposure information, the agency supports the use of the default RSC and may ultimately use the default 20% RSC in the final regulatory determination for strontium and for other compounds in the future. The agency selects the default RSCs for regulatory determinations based on the Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health (USEPA, 2000).

    If the agency makes a final determination to regulate strontium, the EPA will conduct tests on treatment technologies for strontium prior to developing a regulation. The agency understands that strontium may co-occur with beneficial calcium in some drinking water systems and treatment technologies that remove strontium may also remove calcium. The agency is evaluating the effectiveness of treatment technologies under different water conditions, including calcium concentrations. The agency will continue to work with stakeholders in evaluating treatment technologies for strontium.

    At this time, the agency does not plan to initiate any longer term health effect studies, including human epidemiological studies on the relationship of skeletal effects and strontium exposure levels through consumption of drinking water and foods. The agency will continue to evaluate new health studies related to strontium exposure, including any epidemiology studies. It should be noted that while the agency is not precluded from conducting epidemiological studies, the agency is not required to do so to support the decision to regulate a contaminant.

    An evaluation of the costs and benefits of a potential strontium regulation is outside the scope of the regulatory determination process. If the agency decides to regulate strontium, as part of the regulation development process, the agency will conduct a health risk reduction and cost analysis, including an evaluation of the costs and benefits of regulating strontium.

    VI. Next Steps

    Prior to making a final regulatory determination for strontium, the agency will consider additional data gathered and analyses completed after publication of the preliminary determination (for further information, see discussion in section V.B. of this notice). The agency published the Draft Contaminant Candidate List 4 (CCL 4) on February 4, 2015 (USEPA, 2015a) and will issue a Final CCL 4 after consideration of public comments received. The agency will evaluate and consider contaminants on the Final CCL 4 for the Fourth Regulatory Determination.

    VII. References Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). 2007. Radiological and Chemical Fact Sheets to Support Health Risk Analyses for Contaminated Areas. Environmental Science Division. Available on the Internet at: http://www.gfxtechnology.com/ArgonneRadFacts.pdf. HSDB. 2010. Available on the Internet at: http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen?HSDB. Accessed September 2010. USEPA. 2000. Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health (2000). EPA 822-B-00-004. USEPA. 2006. Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Terbufos. Office of Pesticide Programs. Available on the Internet at: http://archive.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/web/pdf/terbufos_red.pdf. Accessed Oct 2015. USEPA. 2007. Revised Interim Reregistration Decision for Dimethoate. Available on the Internet at: http://archive.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/web/pdf/dimethoate_ired_revised.pdf. Accessed October 2015. USEPA. 2008. The Analysis of Occurrence Data from the First Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR 1) in Support of Regulatory Determinations for the Second Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List. EPA 815-R-08-012. June 2008. USEPA. 2009. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3—Final. Federal Register. Vol. 74, No. 194, p. 51850. October 8, 2009. USEPA. 2012. Storage and Retrieval (STORET) Data Warehouse. Available on the Internet at: http://www.epa.gov/storet/index.html. Data Warehouse. Accessed March 2012. USEPA. 2014a. Protocol for the Regulatory Determinations 3. Including Appendices A-F. EPA 815-R14-005. April 2014. USEPA. 2014b. Regulatory Determinations 3 Support Document. EPA 815-R14-003. April 2014. USEPA. 2014c. Announcement of the Preliminary Regulatory Determinations for Contaminants on the Third Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List; Proposed Rule. Federal Register. Vol. 79, No. 202, p. 62716. October 20, 2014. USEPA. 2015a. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 4—Draft. Federal Register. Vol. 80, No. 23, p. 6076. February 4, 2015. USEPA. 2015b. Regulatory Determinations 3 Support Document (Final). EPA 815-R15-014. December 2015. USEPA. 2015c. Occurrence Data from the Second Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR 2). EPA 815-R15-013. December 2015. Dated: December 22, 2015. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32760 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket Nos. 120328229-4949-02 and 150121066-5717-02] RIN 0648-XE346 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; annual adjustment of Atlantic bluefin tuna Purse Seine and Reserve category quotas; inseason quota transfer from the Reserve category to the Longline category.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is adjusting the Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) Purse Seine and Reserve category quotas for 2016, based on regulations implementing Amendment 7 to the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan. NMFS also is transferring inseason 34 metric tons (mt) of BFT quota from the Reserve category to the Longline category. This action is based on consideration of the regulatory determination criteria regarding inseason adjustments. The transfer to the Longline category is applied to eligible Atlantic Tunas Longline category permitted vessels with Individual Bluefin Quota (IBQ) shares, and as a result of this transfer, current IBQ vessel accounts will be distributed 0.25 mt of IBQ allocation each.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah McLaughlin, Tom Warren, or Brad McHale, 978-281-9260.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations implemented under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) governing the harvest of BFT by persons and vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27 subdivides the U.S. BFT quota recommended by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) among the various domestic fishing categories, per the allocations established in the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan (2006 Consolidated HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058, October 2, 2006), as amended by Amendment 7 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (Amendment 7) (79 FR 71510, December 2, 2014). NMFS is required under ATCA and the Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest the ICCAT-recommended quota.

    Annual Adjustment of the BFT Purse Seine and Reserve Category Quotas

    In 2015, NMFS implemented a final rule that increased the U.S. BFT quota and subquotas per ICCAT Recommendation 14-05 (80 FR 52198, August 28, 2015). As a result, based on the currently codified U.S. quota of 1,058.79 mt (not including the 25 mt allocated by ICCAT to the United States to account for bycatch of BFT in pelagic longline fisheries in the Northeast Distant Gear Restricted Area), the baseline Purse Seine, Longline, and Reserve category quotas are codified as 184.3 mt, 148.3 mt, and 24.8 mt, respectively. See § 635.27(a).

    Pursuant to § 635.27(a)(4), NMFS has determined the amount of quota available to individual Atlantic Tunas Purse Seine category participants in 2016, based on their BFT catch (landings and dead discards) in 2015. Specifically, NMFS is making available to each Purse Seine category participant 100 percent, 75 percent, 50 percent, or 25 percent of the individual baseline quota allocations based on 2015 catch, as described in § 635.27(a)(4)(ii), and is reallocating the remainder to the Reserve category for 2016. NMFS has calculated the amounts of quota available to individual Purse Seine fishery participants based on their individual catch levels in 2015 and the codified process adopted in Amendment 7. Total Purse Seine category BFT catches were 38.8 mt (33.9 mt of landings and 4.9 mt of dead discards) in 2015. Consistent with § 635.27(a)(4)(v)(C), NMFS will notify Atlantic Tunas Purse Seine fishery participants of the amount of quota available for their use this year through the Individual Bluefin Quota electronic system established under § 635.15 and in writing.

    Based on the procedures described above and by summing the individual available allocations, NMFS has determined the 2016 Purse Seine category quota available to Purse Seine fishery participants is 82.9 mt. Thus, the amount of Purse Seine category quota to be reallocated to the Reserve category is 101.4 mt. This reallocation would result in a 2016 Reserve category quota of 126.2 mt (24.8 mt + 101.4 mt). However, NMFS also is taking action, as described in the Quota Transfer section below, to transfer 34 mt from the Reserve category to the Longline category such that the 2016 Reserve category quota as adjusted by this action as a whole would be 92.2 mt. Consistent with the quota regulations, NMFS may allocate any portion of the Reserve category quota for inseason or annual adjustments to any fishing category quota pursuant to regulatory determination criteria described at 50 CFR 635.27(a)(8), in addition to using the Reserve category quota for scientific research collection of BFT.

    NMFS anticipates that it will announce additional BFT quota adjustments during 2016. For example, when complete 2015 BFT catch information is available and finalized, NMFS may augment the Reserve further by carrying forward underharvest, if any, from 2015, consistent with ICCAT limits. Subsequent notices will be published in the Federal Register. In addition, fishermen may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Line at (978) 281-9260, or access hmspermits.noaa.gov, for updates.

    Quota Transfer

    Under § 635.15(b)(5)(ii), as implemented through Amendment 7, additional IBQ may be allocated to eligible vessels with IBQ shares, after the initial annual allocations if the U.S. baseline quota increases as a result of an ICCAT recommendation or as a result of a transfer of quota from the Reserve category to the Longline category, pursuant to criteria for quota adjustments.

    Under § 635.27(a)(9), NMFS has the authority to transfer quota among fishing categories or subcategories, after considering determination criteria provided under § 635.27(a)(8), which are: The usefulness of information obtained from catches in the particular category for biological sampling and monitoring of the status of the stock; the catches of the particular category quota to date and the likelihood of closure of that segment of the fishery if no adjustment is made; the projected ability of the vessels fishing under the particular category quota to harvest the additional amount of BFT before the end of the fishing year; the estimated amounts by which quotas for other gear categories of the fishery might be exceeded; effects of the adjustment on BFT rebuilding and overfishing; effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the fishery management plan; variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migration patterns of BFT; effects of catch rates in one area precluding vessels in another area from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the category's quota; review of dealer reports, daily landing trends, and the availability of the BFT on the fishing grounds; optimizing fishing opportunity; accounting for dead discards, facilitating quota monitoring, supporting other fishing monitoring programs through quota allocations and/or generation of revenue; and support of research through quota allocations and/or generation of revenue.

    NMFS has considered the determination criteria regarding inseason adjustments and their applicability to the Longline category fishery and have determined that a quota transfer is warranted, as explained below. Consistent with the criteria for quota adjustments, this transfer is intended to increase the amount of quota available to pelagic longline permitted vessels with IBQ, and therefore help vessel owners account for BFT landings and dead discards while fostering conditions in which permit holders become more willing to lease IBQ. As described below, the amount of quota available to individual pelagic longline vessels will be particularly important beginning in 2016. The revised Longline category quota would support the broader objectives of Amendment 7, which include reducing BFT interactions and dead discards while maintaining an economically viable swordfish and yellowfin tuna directed fishery.

    Under Amendment 7, a vessel must have IBQ to account for its BFT landings and dead discards. If a vessel has insufficient IBQ to account for such landings and dead discards, it goes into “quota debt.” Starting in 2016, a Longline category permitted vessel will not be allowed to fish with pelagic longline gear if it has outstanding quota debt or does not have the minimum amount of quota to fish (i.e., 0.125 mt (276 lb) to depart on a fishing trip in the Atlantic and 0.25 mt (551 lb) to depart on a fishing trip in the Gulf of Mexico. Furthermore, vessels that had a quota debt remaining at the end of 2015 will be responsible for accounting for that quota debt using 2016 IBQ allocation before they may fish in 2016.

    Approximately one-fifth of active pelagic longline vessels had outstanding quota debt late in 2015, and quota leasing among fishery participants was limited. NMFS believes the reason for the limited quota leasing was due to the leasing program being so new, and shareholders may have been unwilling to lease quota to other shareholders because they did not know if they would have sufficient quota to account for any BFT they may catch.

    With respect to the effects of the adjustment on BFT rebuilding and overfishing and accomplishing the objectives of the fishery management plan, this action would be taken consistent with the previously implemented and analyzed quotas, and it is not expected to negatively impact stock health or otherwise affect the stock in ways not previously analyzed. The transfer of 34 mt of BFT quota from the Reserve category to the Longline category will result in an adjusted Longline quota of 182.3 mt, which remains within the ICCAT quota and is less than the historical average of landings and dead discards in the fishery (239 mt). This action is consistent with the rebuilding goals of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP as amended because NMFS does not anticipate that the overall U.S. BFT quota will be exceeded.

    Regarding the determination criteria “optimizing fishing opportunity,” the ability of pelagic longline vessel owners to account for BFT with allocated quota or lease IBQ at an affordable price is key to the success of the IBQ program. An inseason transfer of quota to the Longline category would facilitate accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP by optimizing fishing opportunity, contributing to full accounting for landings and dead discards, and reducing uncertainty in the fishery as a whole. Additional quota should reduce situations where fishing opportunity for target species is constrained by BFT quota debt or a low IBQ balance. It will also reduce vessel owner uncertainty about whether a vessel owner will have sufficient quota to account for BFT they may catch in the future. Without this inseason quota transfer, it is more likely that permit holders will have difficulty leasing quota to account for BFT catch or reduce quota debt, permit holders may have a reduced ability to make business plans for the future, and a higher number of permitted vessels may be prohibited from fishing during 2016 as a result of quota debt accrued during 2015.

    Regarding the determination criteria about accounting for dead discards and variations in seasonal distribution or abundance, a quota transfer from the Reserve category to the Longline category would contribute toward full accounting of BFT catch by vessels that have quota debt (i.e., reduce quota debt), enhance the likelihood that shareholders will make the decision to lease IBQ to others, and reduce the uncertainty in the fishery as a whole. A quota transfer effective in early January 2016 helps to address the diversity of the fishery with respect to the timing of fishing activities in different geographic areas. A quota transfer later in the year may disadvantage those fishing early in the year.

    Based on the considerations above, NMFS is transferring 34 mt of Reserve category quota, which is adjusted through the annual reallocation from the Purse Seine category to the Reserve category described above, to the Longline category. As a result of this quota transfer, the adjusted 2016 Reserve category quota is 92.2 mt, and the adjusted 2016 Longline category quota is 182.3 mt. This inseason quota transfer does not preclude future inseason quota transfers to any of the quota categories. As a result of this quota transfer, 0.25 mt (551 lb) of IBQ is being distributed to each of the 136 permit holders with IBQ shares, provided the permit is associated with a vessel. For those permits that qualified for IBQ shares and are not associated with a vessel at the time of the quota transfer, the IBQ will not be usable by the permit holder (i.e., may not be leased or used to account for BFT) unless and until the eligible permit is associated with a vessel. Eligible permits will be allocated either Gulf of Mexico (GOM) IBQ, Atlantic (ATL) IBQ, or both GOM and ATL IBQ, according to the eligible permit initial share's regional designations (and totaling 0.25 mt). This action is supported by the Amendment 7 Final Environmental Impact Statement and final rule, which analyzed and anticipated such an action.

    Monitoring and Reporting

    NMFS will continue to monitor the BFT fisheries, including the pelagic longline fishery, closely through the mandatory landings and catch reports. Dealers are required to submit landing reports within 24 hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Pelagic longline vessels are required to report BFT catch through Vessel Monitoring System, as well as through the online IBQ system.

    Longline category permit holders are reminded that all BFT discarded dead must be reported through the Vessel Monitoring System, and accounted for in the on-line IBQ system, consistent with requirements at § 635.15(a).

    If needed, subsequent adjustments will be published in the Federal Register. In addition, fishermen may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Line at (978) 281-9260, or access hmspermits.noaa.gov for updates on quota monitoring and inseason adjustments.

    Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, the transfer from the Reserve category to the Longline category for the following reasons:

    The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP, as amended, provide for inseason adjustments to quotas and other aspects of BFT fishery management, to respond to the diverse range of factors which may affect BFT fisheries, including ecological (e.g., rebuilding, or the migratory nature of HMS) and commercial (e.g., optimizing fishing opportunity, or reducing bycatch). Specifically, Amendment 7 stated that NMFS may need to consider providing additional quota to the Longline category as a whole in order to increase the amount of quota available to eligible permitted vessels via the IBQ program, and balance the need to have an operational directed pelagic longline fishery with the need to reduce BFT bycatch.

    NMFS has determined that adjustments to the Reserve and Longline category BFT quotas are warranted. Analysis of available data shows that adjustment to the Longline category quota from the initial level would result in minimal risks of exceeding the ICCAT-allocated quota. The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP, as amended, provide the flexibility to provide additional quota to the Longline category in order to optimize fishing opportunity, account for dead discards, and accomplish the objectives of the fishery management plan. A quota transfer effective in early January 2016 helps to address the diversity of the fishery with respect to the timing of fishing activities in different geographic areas. A quota transfer later in the year may disadvantage those fishing early in the year.

    Affording prior notice and opportunity for public comment to implement the quota transfer is impracticable, as NMFS needed to consider and respond to updated data and information from the 2015 fishery in deciding to transfer 34 mt of quota from the Reserve category to the Longline category. If NMFS were to offer a public comment period now, after having appropriately considered that data, it may unnecessarily preclude fishing opportunities for some vessel operators, particularly those that fish early in the fishing season.

    Delays in adjusting the Reserve and Longline category quotas would adversely affect those Longline category vessels that would otherwise have an opportunity to reduce or resolve quota debt, lease quota to other vessels, as well as delay potential beneficial effects on the ability for vessel operators to make business plans for their future. NMFS is trying to balance providing opportunity to the pelagic longline fishery, with the reduction of BFT bycatch, and delaying this action would be contrary to the public interest. Therefore, the AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment. For all of the above reasons, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.

    This action is being taken under §§ 635.15(b)(5)(ii), 635.15(f), 635.27(a)(8) and (9), and 635.27(a)(4) and (a)(7), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 et seq.

    Dated: December 18, 2015. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32288 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 1 Monday, January 4, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8136; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-189-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of missing fasteners in certain locations of the fuselage during production. This proposed AD would require inspecting for missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners; and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to prevent cracking of the fuselage due to missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

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

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8136; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-8136; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-189-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0197, dated September 4, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During inspection of various fuselage areas on some A330-200F aeroplanes on the production line, prior to delivery, some fasteners were found missing.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to crack initiation and propagation, possibly resulting in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.

    To address this condition, Airbus issued several Service Bulletins (SB), providing inspection and modification instructions, as applicable.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires detailed inspections of the affected areas and, depending on findings, accomplishment of the applicable corrective actions.

    Corrective actions include replacing any missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, and repair of any discrepancy (deformation or cracking of the fastener rows) of the affected fuselage frame areas. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8136.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information:

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3202, dated May 6, 2014 (Inspections).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3212, dated May 6, 2014 (Inspections).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3213, dated May 6, 2014 (Inspections).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3214, dated May 6, 2014 (Inspections).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3216, dated May 6, 2014 (Modification).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3217, dated May 6, 2014 (Modification).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3218, dated May 6, 2014 (Modification).

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3219, dated May 6, 2014 (Modification).

    The service information describes procedures for inspecting for missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners; and corrective actions if necessary. The service information also describes procedures for modification of certain sections of the fuselage. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    Explanation of “RC” Procedures and Tests in Service Information

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for annotating which procedures and tests in the service information are required for compliance with an AD. Differentiating these procedures and tests from other tasks in the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. The procedures and tests identified as RC (required for compliance) in any service information have a direct effect on detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an identified unsafe condition.

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

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 3 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 10 work-hours per product to comply with the basic inspection requirements of this proposed AD, and 1 work-hour per product to report inspection findings. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $2,805, or $935 per product.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary modification would take about 40 work-hours and require parts costing $210, for a cost of $3,610 per product. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this action.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide a cost estimate for the on-condition repairs specified in this proposed AD.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2015-8136; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-189-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes, certificated in any category; manufacturer serial numbers 1004, 1032, 1051, 1062, 1070, 1092, 1115, 1136, 1148, 1164, 1175, 1180, 1320, 1332, 1344, 1350, 1368, 1380, 1386, 1406, 1414, 1418, and 1428.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of missing fasteners in certain locations of the fuselage during production. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the fuselage due to missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Detailed Inspection

    Within 72 months since first flight of the airplane: Do a detailed inspection of all applicable fuselage zones for missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.

    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3202, dated May 6, 2014.

    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3212, dated May 6, 2014.

    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3213, dated May 6, 2014.

    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3214, dated May 6, 2014.

    (h) Corrective Actions

    If any missing, damaged, or incorrectly installed fasteners are found during the detailed inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, do a detailed inspection for discrepancies (deformation or cracking) of the adjacent fastener rows of the applicable fuselage zones, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.

    (1) If no discrepancy is found, before further flight, modify the affected fuselage zone, in accordance with the applicable service information specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(iv) of this AD.

    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3216, dated May 6, 2014.

    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3217, dated May 6, 2014.

    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3218, dated May 6, 2014.

    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3219, dated May 6, 2014.

    (2) If any discrepancy is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

    (i) Reporting Requirement

    Submit a report (including both positive and negative findings), using the applicable report sheet attached to the applicable service information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD; of the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD. Submit the report to Airbus, Customer Services Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex France, Attn: SDC32 Technical Data and Documentation Services; fax: (+33) 5 61 93 28 06; email: [email protected]; at the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.

    (1) For airplanes on which the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this AD is accomplished on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after performing the inspection.

    (2) For airplanes on which the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this AD is accomplished before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

    (j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

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

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

    (3) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    (4) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0197, dated September 4, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8136.

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32906 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8135; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-106-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple reports of un-commanded escape slide inflation. This proposed AD would require modifying the regulator valves of the forward entry door, forward service door, aft entry door, and aft service door, and as applicable, modifying the regulator valves of the mid entry door and mid service door. We are proposing this AD to prevent out-of-tolerance trigger mechanism components (sector and sear) in the regulator valves, which can produce insufficient trigger engagement and reduced pull force values, possibly leading to un-commanded deployment of the slide during normal airplane maintenance or operation, and could result in injury to passengers and crew, damage to equipment, and the slide becoming unusable in an emergency evacuation.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    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 Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356. 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-2015-8135.

    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-2015-8135; 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:

    Kimberly DeVoe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6495; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-8135; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-106-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 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 proposed AD.

    Discussion

    We received reports of two incidents of un-commanded escape slide inflation. In both cases, out-of-tolerance trigger mechanism components (sector and sear) were found in the regulator valves which produced insufficient trigger engagement and reduced pull force values. This condition, if not corrected, could result in possible un-commanded deployment of the slide during normal airplane maintenance or operation and could result in injury to passengers and crew, damage to equipment, and the slide becoming unusable in an emergency evacuation.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-0548, Revision 1, dated April 23, 2015. The service information describes procedures for modifying the regulator valves of the forward entry door, forward service door, aft entry door, aft service door, mid entry door and mid service door. The modification includes replacing the existing trigger mechanism sector and sear of the regulator valve with new trigger mechanism sector and sear. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD 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 proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information identified previously. For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8135.

    Explanation of “RC” Steps in Service Information

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for annotating which steps in the service information are required for compliance with an AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks in the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent judgment in AD compliance. The steps identified as Required for Compliance (RC) in any service information identified previously have a direct effect on detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an identified unsafe condition.

    For service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the following provisions apply: (1) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD, and an AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures; and (2) steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 302 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Replacement of trigger mechanism components—forward and aft entry/service doors 15 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,275 $2,236 $3,511 $1,060,322 Replacement of trigger mechanism components—mid entry/service doors 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 1,118 1,798 542,996
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

    (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

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

    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2015-8135; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-106-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-0548, Revision 1, dated April 23, 2015.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by multiple reports of un-commanded escape slide inflation. We are issuing this AD to prevent out-of-tolerance trigger mechanism components (sector and sear) in the regulator valves, which can produce insufficient trigger engagement and reduced pull force values, possibly leading to un-commanded deployment of the slide during normal airplane maintenance or operation, and could result in injury to passengers and crew, damage to equipment, and the slide becoming unusable in an emergency evacuation.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Replacement of the Trigger Mechanism Sector and Sear

    Within 42 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the regulator valves of the forward entry door, forward service door, aft entry door, and aft service door, and as applicable, modify the regulator valves of the mid entry door and mid service door, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-0548, Revision 1, dated April 23, 2015.

    (h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the modification required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if the modification was performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 767-25-0548, dated November 5, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

    (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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 manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]

    (2) 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.

    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) apply.

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

    (j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Kimberly DeVoe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6495; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, WA, on December 21, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32903 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-5193; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-35-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Technify Motors GmbH Reciprocating 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 Technify Motors GmbH (type certificate previously held by Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH) TAE 125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 reciprocating engines. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of in-flight shutdowns (IFSDs) on TAE 125-02 engines. This proposed AD would require removal of affected fuel feed pumps. We are proposing this AD to prevent failure of the fuel feed pump, which could result in damage to the engine and damage to the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 4, 2016.

    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 Technify Motors GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14, D-09356 Sankt Egidien, Germany, phone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-2912; email: [email protected] 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-2015-5193; 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:

    Philip Haberlen, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7770; 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-2015-5193; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-35-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 2015-0189, dated September 21, 2015 (referred to hereinafter as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    In-flight shut down occurrences have been reported on aeroplanes equipped with TAE 125-02 engines. The initial results of the investigations showed that a defective fuel feed pump was the probable cause of the engine failure.

    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-2015-5193.

    Related Service Information

    Technify Motors GmbH has issued Operation & Maintenance Manual, CD-135/CD-155, OM-02-02, Issue 4, Revision No. 5, dated September 18, 2015. The service information describes procedures for removing and replacing the fuel feed pump.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of Germany, 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 removal of affected fuel feed pumps.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 190 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 0.5 hours per engine to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Pro-rated cost of life limit reduction would be about $160 per part. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $38,475.

    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): Technify Motors GmbH (Type Certificate previously held by Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH): Docket No. FAA-2015-5193; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-35-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 4, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Technify Motors GmbH (type certificate previously held by Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH) TAE 125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 reciprocating engines with a fuel feed pump, part number (P/N) 05-7312-K0073xx, or P/N 05-7312-K0133xx, where “xx” can be any number, installed.

    (d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of in-flight shutdowns (IFSDs) on TAE 125-02 engines. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the fuel feed pump, which could result in damage to the engine and damage to the airplane.

    (e) Actions and Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. Remove from service each affected fuel feed pump before it exceeds 600 operating hours (OH) time in service (TIS) or within 110 OH after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (f) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install onto any engine, any fuel feed pump, P/N 05-7312-K0073xx or P/N 05-7312-K0133xx, where “xx” can be any number, if the fuel feed pump has 600 hours or more TIS. If TIS of a fuel feed pump is unknown or has exceeded 600 hours TIS, then the fuel feed pump is not eligible for installation. Rebuilt, overhauled, or repaired fuel feed pumps and/or fuel feed pumps that lack a serial number, are not eligible for installation.

    (g) 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]

    (h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Philip Haberlen, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7770; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2015-0189, dated September 21, 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-2015-5193.

    (3) For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Technify Motors GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14, D-09356 Sankt Egidien, Germany; phone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-2912; email: [email protected]

    (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 December 18, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32962 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-7532; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-069-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of multiple cases of ram air turbine (RAT) blade damage. This proposed AD would require deployment of the RAT, replacement of the RAT placard with a new RAT placard, and re-identification of the RAT. We are proposing this AD to prevent blade damage to the RAT which could prevent RAT deployment in flight during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone: 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7532; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Rodriquez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone: 425-227-1137; fax: 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-7532; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-069-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2015-0076, dated May 6, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A few cases of Ram Air Turbine (RAT) blade damage have been reported during maintenance operations. This kind of damage is caused by an incorrect locking of RAT rotor, due to improper positioning of blades at beginning of retraction, and locking check during retraction, which likely occurs during stowage of the RAT, after its deployment for maintenance purposes.

    This condition, if not corrected, could prevent RAT deployment in flight during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, Dassault Aviation issued Service Bulletin (SB) 7X-289, which provides instructions to smoothly deploy the RAT and install an improved placard to ensure proper RAT stowage/retraction after maintenance.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires replacement of the existing RAT placard with a new placard and RAT re-identification. This [EASA] AD also provides conditions for installation of a RAT on an aeroplane.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7532.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Dassault Aviation has issued Dassault Mandatory Service Bulletin 7X-289, dated January 21, 2015. The service information describes procedures for deployment of the RAT, replacement of the RAT placard with a new RAT placard, and re-identification of the RAT. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 45 airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 4 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $121 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $20,745, or $461 per product.

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2015-7532; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-069-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24, Electrical power.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of multiple cases of ram air turbine (RAT) blade damage. We are issuing this AD to prevent blade damage to the RAT which could prevent RAT deployment in flight during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Placard Replacement

    Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD: Within 28 months or during the next accomplishment of the RAT functional test, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, deploy the RAT, replace the RAT placard with a new RAT placard, and re-identify the RAT part number (P/N) 1705673A to a part number identified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Mandatory Service Bulletin 7X-289, dated January 21, 2015.

    (1) Change P/N 1705673A to P/N 1705673B.

    (2) Change P/N 1705673A to a part number that is approved as a replacement for P/N 1705673A and approved as part of the type design by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA); after the issue date of Dassault Mandatory Service Bulletin 7X-289, dated January 21, 2015.

    (h) Exception to Paragraph (g) of This AD

    An airplane on which Dassault Aviation Modification M1428 has been embodied in production is not affected by the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD, provided no RAT P/N 1705673A has been installed on that airplane since first flight.

    (i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a RAT, part number 1705673A, on any airplane.

    (j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriquez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone: 425-227-1137; fax: 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

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

    (k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2015-0076, dated May 6, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7532.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone: 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 18, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32891 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-5539; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-37-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft 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 Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2E turboshaft engines. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of fuel flow non-conformities found during acceptance tests of Arriel 2E hydro-mechanical metering units (HMUs). This proposed AD would require removing the pre-TU 193 adjusted high-pressure/low-pressure (HP/LP) pump and metering valve assembly and replacing it with a part that is eligible for installation. This proposed AD would also require replacing the constant delta-pressure (delta-P) diaphragm of the fuel metering valve. We are proposing this AD to prevent failure of the delta-P diaphragm, which could result in an uncommanded in-flight shutdown and damage to the helicopter.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 4, 2016.

    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 Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. 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-2015-5539 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:

    Kyle Gustafson, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7183; 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-2015-5539; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-37-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 based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD 2015-0213, dated October 16, 2015 (referred to hereinafter as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    Fuel flow non-conformities were found during reception tests of ARRIEL 2E Hydraulic Mechanical Metering Unit (HMU). Investigation and instrumented tests revealed instabilities on the additional check valve. These instabilities lead to hydraulic pulses. All HMU installed on ARRIEL 2E and 2N engines could present these instabilities.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to life reduction of the delta pressure valve diaphragm, and consequently, an uncommanded engine power increase, or an uncommanded in flight shutdown, possibly resulting in an emergency landing.

    This proposed AD applies to Arriel 2E engines only. There are no Arriel 2N engines installed on aircraft of U.S. registry.

    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-2015-5539.

    Related Service Information

    Turbomeca S.A. has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 292 73 2193, Version A, dated July 16, 2015. The MSB describes procedures for incorporating modification TU 193 and replacing the constant delta-P diaphragm of the fuel metering valve. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of France, 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 referenced above. We are proposing this NPRM 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 NPRM would require removing the pre-TU 193 adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve assembly and replacing it with a part that is eligible for installation. This NPRM would also require replacing the constant delta-P diaphragm of the fuel metering valve.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 12 engines installed on helicopters of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2 hours per engine to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Required parts cost about $13,400 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $162,840.

    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): Turbomeca S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2015-5539; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-37-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 4, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2E turboshaft engines that have a pre-TU 193 adjusted high-pressure/low-pressure (HP/LP) pump and metering valve assembly, installed.

    (d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of fuel flow non-conformities found during acceptance tests of Arriel 2E hydro-mechanical metering units. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the constant delta-pressure (delta-P) diaphragm of the fuel metering valve, which could result in an uncommanded in-flight shutdown and damage to the helicopter.

    (e) Actions and Compliance

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

    (1) Prior to exceeding 880 operating hours since new on the adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve assembly or within 50 operating hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later:

    (i) remove from service the adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve assembly and replace with a part that is eligible for installation, and

    (ii) replace the constant delta-P diaphragm of the fuel metering valve.

    (2) Reserved.

    (f) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install into any engine any pre-TU 193 adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve assembly, nor install onto any helicopter any engine that has a pre-TU 193 adjusted HP/LP pump and metering valve assembly.

    (g) 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]

    (h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Kyle Gustafson, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7183; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2015-0213, dated October 16, 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-2015-5539.

    (3) Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 292 73 2193, Version A, dated July 16, 2015, can be obtained from Turbomeca S.A., using the contact information in paragraph (h)(4) of this proposed AD.

    (4) For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15.

    (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 December 18, 2015. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32963 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8129; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-197-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a determination that certain maintenance tasks for the horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA) are inadequate. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new airworthiness limitations for the HSTA. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct premature wear and cracking of the HSTA, which could result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    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.

    Fax: (202) 493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; 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.

    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-2015-8129; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7318; fax 516-794-5531.

    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-2015-8129; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-197-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2014-30, dated September 5, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A revision has been made to the CL 604/605 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC) manual, to introduce new tasks for the HSTA. Failure to comply with the TLMC tasks could lead to an unsafe condition.

    This [Canadian] AD is issued to ensure that premature wear and cracking of the affected components are detected and corrected.

    The unsafe condition is premature wear and cracking of the HSTA, which could result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss of control of the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8129.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new airworthiness limitations for the HSTA.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier Inc. has issued the following service information.

    • For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive: Task 27-42-01-109, Restoration (Overhaul) of the Horizontal Stabilizer Trim Actuator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); and Task 27-42-01-111, Detailed Inspection of the Horizontal Trim Actuator (HSTA) Secondary Load Path Indicator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); of Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 22, dated July 11, 2014, of the Bombardier Challenger 604 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual.

    • For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial numbers 5701 through 5962 inclusive: Task 27-42-01-109, Restoration (Overhaul) of the Horizontal Stabilizer Trim Actuator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); and Task 27-42-01-111, Detailed Inspection of the Horizontal Trim Actuator (HSTA) Secondary Load Path Indicator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); of Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 10, dated July 11, 2014, of the Bombardier Challenger 605 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual.

    The service information describes procedures for revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new airworthiness limitations for the HSTA. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 78 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $6,630, or $85 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2015-8129; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-197-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive, and 5701 through 5962 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight Controls.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that certain maintenance tasks for the horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA) are inadequate. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct premature wear and cracking of the HSTA, which could result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate Task 27-42-01-109, Restoration (Overhaul) of the Horizontal Stabilizer Trim Actuator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); and Task 27-42-01-111, Detailed Inspection of the Horizontal Trim Actuator (HSTA) Secondary Load Path Indicator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); of the applicable document identified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.

    (1) For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive: Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 22, dated July 11, 2014, of the Bombardier Challenger 604 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual.

    (2) For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial numbers 5701 through 5962 inclusive: Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 10, dated July 11, 2014, of the Bombardier Challenger 605 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual.

    (h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised, as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

    (i) 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 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.

    (j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2014-30, dated September 5, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8129.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 18, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32888 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-112-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-17-10 for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes. AD 2011-17-10 currently requires inspecting for a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank fuel quantity indication (FQI) cable plug and the cable shield, and corrective actions if necessary. AD 2011-17-10 also requires revising the airplane maintenance program. Since we issued AD 2011-17-10, revised service information has been issued to update the critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) that address potential ignition sources inside fuel tanks. This proposed AD would require revising the airplane maintenance or inspection program by incorporating the instructions in the revised service information. The proposed AD also removes certain airplanes from the applicability. We are proposing this AD to prevent potential ignition sources inside the fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1137; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-112-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    On August 3, 2011, we issued AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), for all Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes. AD 2011-17-10 requires inspecting for a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield and corrective actions (installing a by-pass wire) if necessary. AD 2011-17-10 also requires revising the airplane maintenance program.

    Since we issued AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), revised service information has been issued to update the critical CDCCLs that address potential ignition sources inside fuel tanks.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0111, dated May 8, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    * * * [T]he FAA published Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 88, and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) published Interim Policy INT/POL/25/12.

    The review conducted by Fokker Services on the F28 design, in response to these regulations, revealed that on certain aeroplanes, an interrupted shield contact may exist or develop between the housing of an in-tank Fuel Quantity Indication (FQI) cable plug and the cable shield of the shielded FQI system cables in the main and collector fuel tanks, which can, under certain conditions, form a spark gap.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, may create an ignition source in the fuel tank vapour space, possibly resulting in a wing fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the aeroplane.

    To address and correct this unsafe condition, Fokker Services published Service Bulletin (SB) SBF28-28-053 which provides instructions, for early production aeroplanes, for a one-time inspection to check for the presence of a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield and, depending on findings, for the installation of a by-pass wire. In addition, SBF28-28-053 provides a Critical Design Configuration Control Limitation (CDCCL) item to make certain that the by-pass wire remains installed on these aeroplanes.

    On later production aeroplanes, an improved plug Part Number (P/N) 20P227-2 was introduced with a better shield connection to the housing of the plug. Therefore, SBF28-28-053 (original issue and Revision 1) also provided a CDCCL item to ensure that this type of plug remains installed on those aeroplanes.

    EASA issued AD 2010-0217 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011)] to require accomplishment of the instructions related to the by-pass wire and implementation of the CDCCL items as specified in Fokker Services SBF28-28-053 Revision 1, as applicable to aeroplane s/n.

    Since EASA AD 2010-0217 was issued, it was identified that P/N 20P227-2 and 20P228-1 plugs are also approved and can therefore be installed on the later production aeroplanes. Prompted by this finding, Fokker Services issued SBF28-28-055 to address the implementation of a CDCCL item to make certain that only approved plug types remain installed on the later production aeroplanes, while SBF28-28-053 Revision 2 was issued for early production aeroplanes to address the by-pass wire related actions only.

    Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011-0184, retaining the requirements of EASA AD 2010-0217, which was superseded, to require implementation of the related CDCCL items as specified in Fokker Services SBF28-28-053 Revision 2, or SBF28-28-055, as applicable to aeroplane s/n.

    More recently, Fokker Services published Revision 3 of SBF28-28-053, to eliminate the use of a heat gun in or near to the fuel tank, and prompted by a change to the definition of the related CDCCL item. Fokker Services also cancelled SBF28-28-055, due to the introduction of a revised definition of the CDCCL item that has been published in Fokker Services SBF28-28-050, Revision 2.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements related to SBF28-28-053 of EASA AD 2011-0184, which is superseded, but requires those actions to be accomplished in accordance with the instructions of Fokker Services SBF28-28-053, Revision 3 (R3).

    All the actions related to SBF28-28-055, as previously required through paragraphs (5) and (6) of EASA AD 2011-0184, are now addressed by EASA AD 2014-0110 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0110] which has been superseded by EASA AD 2015-0030 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2015-0030].

    The CDCCL requirement in AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011) for Model F.28 Mark 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes is now addressed in other related rulemaking. Therefore this proposed AD does not include Model F.28 Mark 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes in the applicability.

    This AD also removes airplanes having serial numbers 11993 and 19994 from the applicability because those airplanes were scrapped and removed from the type certificate data sheet.

    The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks. Such ignition sources, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. 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-2015-8138.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. The service information describes procedures for inspecting for a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield, and installing a by-pass wire if necessary. The service information also describes CDCCL item 1.7 for fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS) wiring in wing tanks. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    This proposed AD would require implementation of certain maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. This proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.

    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and CDCCLs. Compliance with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these actions, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

    Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational requirements, components that have been identified as airworthy or installed on the affected airplanes before accomplishing the revision of the airplane maintenance or inspection program specified in this AD, do not need to be reworked in accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once the airplane maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by this AD, future maintenance actions on these components must be done in accordance with the CDCCLs.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 5 airplanes of U.S. registry. This proposed AD would merely require using the Accomplishment Instructions in the revised service information. The current costs associated with this proposed AD are repeated as follows for the convenience of affected operators:

    The actions that are required by AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), will take about 6 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that were required by AD 2011-17-10 is $510 per product.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions required by AD 2011-17-10 will take about 7 work-hours and require parts costing $308, for a cost of $903 per product. We have no way of determining the number of products that may need these actions.

    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to revise the maintenance or inspection program in this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $425, or $85 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD) 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), and adding the following new AD: Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2015-8138; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-112-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 1000 airplanes; certificated in any category; serial numbers (S/Ns) 11003 through 11041 inclusive, and S/Ns 11991 and 11992.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the issuance of revised service information to update the critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) that address potential ignition sources inside fuel tanks. We are issuing this AD to prevent potential ignition sources inside the fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Inspection and Installation With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (g) of AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), with revised service information. At a scheduled opening of the fuel tanks, but not later than 84 months after September 16, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-17-10), do a general visual inspection for the presence of a by-pass wire between the housing of each in-tank fuel quantity indication (FQI) cable plug and the cable shield, in accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 1, dated September 20, 2010, or Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. As of the effective date of this AD, only Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014, may be used.

    (h) Retained Corrective Actions, With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (h) of AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), with revised service information. If during the general visual inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, it is found that a by-pass wire is not installed: Before the next flight, install the by-pass wire between the housing of the in-tank FQI cable plug and the cable shield, in accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 1, dated September 20, 2010, or Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. As of the effective date of this AD, only Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014, may be used.

    (i) Retained Maintenance Program Revision To Add Fuel Airworthiness Limitation, With a New Exception

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (i) of AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD, concurrently with paragraph (g) of this AD, revise the airplane maintenance program by incorporating CDCCL-1 specified in paragraph 1.L.(1)(c) of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053 Revision 1, dated September 20, 2010.

    (j) Retained No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or CDCCLs Requirement, With a New Exception

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (k) of AD 2011-17-10, Amendment 39-16774 (76 FR 50111, August 12, 2011), with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD: After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspection, interval) and/or CDCCLs may be used unless the actions, intervals, and/or CDCCLs are approved as an alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD.

    (k) New Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision To Add Fuel Airworthiness Limitation

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the airplane maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating CDCCL item 1.7 as specified in paragraph 1.L.(1)(c) of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 3, dated January 9, 2014. Accomplishing the revision required by this paragraph terminates the revision required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

    (l) No Alternative CDCCLs

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (k) of this AD, no alternative CDCCLs may be used unless the CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD.

    (m) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the applicable actions required by paragraphs (k) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-053, Revision 2, dated June 22, 2011.

    (n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1137; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

    (o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0111, dated May 8, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8138.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32905 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8137; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-104-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-05-18 R1 for certain Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 050, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes. AD 2008-05-18 R1 currently requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations for fuel tank systems. Since we issued AD 2008-05-18 R1, revised service information has been issued to update the Fuel Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALIs) and critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) that address fuel tank system ignition sources. This proposed AD would require a new maintenance or inspection program revision to incorporate the revised ALIs and CDCCLs. This proposed AD would add certain airplanes to the applicability. We are proposing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8137; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1137; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-8137; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-104-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    On October 26, 2009, we issued AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009) for certain Model F.27 Mark 050, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes. AD 2008-05-18 R1 requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new limitations for fuel tank systems.

    Since we issued AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), revised service information has been issued to update the fuel ALIs and CDCCLs. The revised service information applies to all Model F.27 Mark 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0029, dated February 24, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    * * * [T]he FAA published Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 88, and the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) published Interim Policy INT/POL/25/12. The review conducted by Fokker Services on the Fokker F27 design in response to these regulations identified a number of Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) items to prevent the development of unsafe conditions within the fuel system.

    To introduce these Fuel ALI and CDCCL items, Fokker Services published Service Bulletin (SB) F27/28-070. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2006-0207, requiring the implementation of these Fuel ALI and CDCCL items. That [EASA] AD was later revised to make reference to SBF27-28-070R1 and to specify that the use of later SB revisions was acceptable.

    In 2014, Fokker Services issued Revision 2 of SBF27-28-070 to update the Fuel ALI and CDCCL items and to consolidate Fuel ALI and CDCCL items contained in a number of other SBs. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2014-0105, superseding AD 2006-0207R1 and requiring the implementation of the updated Fuel ALI and CDCCL items.

    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Fokker Services issued Revision 3 of SBF27-28-070, primarily to introduce 2 additional CDCCL items.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2014-0105, which is superseded, and requires implementation of the updated Fuel ALI and CDCCL items.

    More information on this subject can be found in Fokker Services All Operators Message AOF27.043#05.

    The unsafe condition is the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks. Such ignition sources, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. 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-2015-8137. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 3, dated December 11, 2014. The service information describes tasks for revising the maintenance or inspection program to update the fuel ALIs and CDCCLs that address fuel tank system ignition sources. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    This proposed AD would require implementation of certain maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. This proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.

    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and CDCCLs. Compliance with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these actions, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to the procedures specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

    Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational requirements, components that have been identified as airworthy or installed on the affected airplanes before accomplishing the revision of the airplane maintenance or inspection program, or before accomplishing the revision of the Airworthiness Limitation Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, as specified in this AD, do not need to be reworked in accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once the airplane maintenance or inspection program, or ALS, has been revised as required by this AD, future maintenance actions on these components must be done in accordance with the CDCCLs

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 16 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    The actions that are required by AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), take about 1 work-hour per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions required by AD 2008-05-18 R1 is $85 per product.

    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the new basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $1,360, or $85 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD) 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), and adding the following new AD: Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2015-8137; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-104-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 18, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 050, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes; certificated in any category; all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the issuance of revised service information to update the Fuel Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALIs) and critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) that address fuel tank system ignition sources. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Revision of the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness To Incorporate Limits (Inspections, Thresholds, and Intervals), With Revised Table Reference

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (f)(1) of AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), with revised table reference. For Model F.27 Mark 050, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes, serial numbers 10102 through 10692 inclusive: Within 3 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)), revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate the limits (inspections, thresholds, and intervals) specified in Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable. For all tasks identified in Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; the initial compliance times are as specified in Table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, as applicable. The repetitive inspections must be accomplished thereafter at the intervals specified in Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable, except as provided by paragraphs (i) and (n)(1) of this AD.

    Table 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD—Initial Compliance Times for ALS Revision For— The later of— Model F.27 Mark 050 airplanes: Task 280000-01 102 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)); or 102 months after the date of issuance of the original Dutch standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original Dutch export certificate of airworthiness. Model F.27 Mark 050 airplanes: Task 280000-02 30 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)); or 30 months after the date of issuance of the original Dutch standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original Dutch export certificate of airworthiness. Model F.27 Mark 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes: Task 280000-01 78 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)); or 78 months after the date of issuance of the original Dutch standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original Dutch export certificate of airworthiness. Model F.27 Mark 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes: Task 280000-02 18 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)); or 18 months after the date of issuance of the original Dutch standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original Dutch export certificate of airworthiness. (h) Retained Revision of the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness To Incorporate CDCCLs, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (f)(2) of AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), with no changes. For Model F.27 Mark 050, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes, serial numbers 10102 through 10692 inclusive: Within 3 months after April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)), revise the ALS of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate the CDCCLs as defined in Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitations Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable.

    (i) Retained Exceptional Short-Term Extensions Provision, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the exceptional short-term extensions provision specified in paragraph (f)(3) of AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), with no changes. Where Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable; allow for exceptional short-term extensions, an exception is acceptable to the FAA if it is approved by the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office.

    (j) Retained No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or CDCCLs, With New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirement specified in paragraph (f)(4) of AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph (l) of this AD, after accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, no alternative inspections, inspection intervals, or CDCCLs may be used, unless the inspections, inspection intervals, or CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.

    (k) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the credit provided in paragraph (f)(5) of AD 2008-05-18 R1, Amendment 39-16083 (74 FR 57402, November 6, 2009), with no changes. Actions done before April 16, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-05-18, Amendment 39-15412 (73 FR 13071, March 12, 2008)), in accordance with Fokker 50/60 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-671, Issue 1, dated January 31, 2006; and Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27/28-070, dated June 30, 2006; are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD.

    (l) New Requirements of This AD: Revise the Maintenance or Inspection Program

    For Model F.27 Mark 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes: Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating the Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items and CDCCLs identified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 3, dated December 11, 2014. Accomplishing the actions required by this paragraph ends the requirements specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD for that airplane. The initial compliance time for the Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items identified in Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 3, dated December 11, 2014, is at the initial compliance time specified in Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-28-070, Revision 3, dated December 11, 2014, or within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (m) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, or Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (l) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, or CDCCLs may be used; unless the actions, intervals, or CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD.

    (n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1137; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

    (o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0029, dated February 24, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8137.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 21, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32904 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 20 CFR Part 404 [Docket No. SSA-2015-0018] RIN 0960-AH85 Extension of the Workers' Compensation Offset From Age 65 to Full Retirement Age—Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act AGENCY:

    Social Security Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to amend our regulations to incorporate changes made by the ABLE Act to section 224(a) of the Social Security Act. The ABLE Act amends section 224(a) by changing the age at which disability insurance benefits (DIB) are no longer subject to reduction (offset) based on receipt of workers' compensation or public disability benefits (WC/PDB), from age 65 to the day the individual attains full retirement age. This change will make our rules consistent with the provisions of the Act, as amended by the ABLE Act.

    DATES:

    To ensure that we consider your comments, we must receive them by no later than February 3, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, by any one of three methods—Internet, fax, or mail. Do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method. Regardless of which method you choose, please state that your comments refer to Docket No. SSA-2015-0018 so that we may associate your comments with the correct regulation.

    Caution: You should be careful to include in your comments only information you wish to make publicly available. We strongly urge you not to include in your comments any personal information, such as Social Security numbers or medical information.

    1. Internet: We strongly recommend this method for submitting your comments. Visit the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Use the Web page's Search function to find docket number SSA-2015-0018. Once you submit your comment, the system will issue you a tracking number to confirm your submission. You will not be able to view your comment immediately because we post each comment manually. It may take up to a week for your comment to be viewable.

    2. Fax: Fax comments to (410) 966-2830.

    3. Mail: Address your comments to the Office of Regulations and Reports Clearance, Social Security Administration, 3100 West High Rise Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401.

    Comments are available for public viewing on the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov or in person, during regular business hours, by arranging with the contact person identified below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Dwight, Office of Income Security Programs, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401, (410) 966-7161. For information on eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national toll-free number, 1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our Internet site, Social Security Online, at http://www.socialsecurity.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    We propose amending our regulations to incorporate changes made to section 224(a) of the Social Security Act by the ABLE Act 1 . The ABLE Act extends the WC/PDB offset to full retirement age (i.e. “retirement age” as defined in section 216(l)(1) of the Social Security Act and “full retirement age” as discussed in 20 CFR 404.409). As a result of the changes made by the ABLE act, we will no longer terminate the WC/PDB offset at age 65. The provision applies to any individual whose DIB payment is offset for WC/PDB and who attains age 65 on December 19, 2015 or later.

    1 Public Law 113-295, § 201, 128 Stat. 4010, 4064.

    Explanation of Changes

    We propose amending section 404.408 of our rules to reflect the changes mandated by section 201 of the ABLE Act. We also propose to make a conforming change to section 404.401(a)(4) of our rules. We are not making any other changes to our rules.

    Workers' Compensation/Public Disability Benefit

    Before the ABLE Act, WC/PDB offset ended at age 65. Under the ABLE Act, the WC/PDB offset will apply until a beneficiary attains full retirement age.

    Clarity of This Proposed Rule

    Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. In addition to your substantive comments on these proposed rules, we invite your comments on how to make them easier to understand.

    For example:

    • Would more, but shorter, sections be better?

    • Are the requirements in the rules clearly stated?

    • Have we organized the material to suit your needs?

    • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?

    • What else could we do to make the rules easier to understand?

    • Do the rules contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?

    • Would a different format make the rules easier to understand, e.g. grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing?

    Regulatory Procedures Executive Order 12866 as supplemented by Executive Order 13563

    We consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and determined that these proposed rules do not meet the criteria for a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, OMB did not review them.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We certify that these proposed rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it affects individuals only. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, does not require us to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    These rules do not create any new or affect any existing collections and, therefore, do not require Office of Management and Budget approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 96.006, Supplemental Security Income.) List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 404

    Administrative practice and procedure; Blind; Disability benefits; Government employees; Old-age, Survivors and Disability Insurance; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Social security.

    Dated: December 23, 2015. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, we propose to amend subpart E of Part 404 of title 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:

    PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE (1950-). Subpart E—[Amended] 1. The authority citation for subpart E of part 404 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Secs. 202, 203, 204(a) and (e), 205(a) and (c), 216(l), 222(c), 223(e), 224, 225, 702(a)(5), and 1129A of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402, 403, 404(a) and (e), 405(a) and (c), 416(l), 422(c), 423(e), 424a, 425, 902(a)(5), and 1320a-8a); 48 U.S.C. 1801.

    2. In § 404.401, revise paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
    § 404.401 Deduction, reduction, and nonpayment of monthly benefits or lump-sum death payments.

    (a) * * *

    (4) An individual under full retirement age (see § 404.409) is concurrently entitled to disability insurance benefits and to certain public disability benefits (see § 404.408);

    3. In § 404.408, revise paragraph (a)(2)(ii) to read as follows:
    § 404.408 Reduction of benefits based on disability on account of receipt of certain other disability benefits provided under Federal, State, or local laws or plans.

    (a) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (ii) The individual has not attained full retirement age as defined in 20 CFR 404.409.

    [FR Doc. 2015-33036 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 172 [Docket No. FDA-2015-F-4317] Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff; Filing of Food Additive Petition AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that we have filed a petition, submitted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff, proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to no longer authorize the use of seven listed synthetic flavoring food additives and to establish zero tolerances for the additives.

    DATES:

    The food additive petition was filed on August 17, 2015. Submit either electronic or written comments by March 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2015-F-4317 for “Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff; Filing of Food Additive Petition.”

    Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Judith Kidwell, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 240-402-1071.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Under section 409(b)(5) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), we are giving notice that we have filed a food additive petition (FAP 5A4810) submitted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Food Safety, Consumers Union, Improving Kids' Environment, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, and James Huff, c/o Thomas Neltner, 1875 Connecticut Ave. NW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20009. The petition proposes to amend § 172.515 (21 CFR 172.515), Synthetic flavoring substances and adjuvants, to no longer provide for the use of seven listed synthetic flavoring food additives and to establish zero tolerances for these additives.

    The seven food additives that are the subject of this petition are as follows:

    • Benzophenone (also known as diphenyl ketone) (CAS No. 119-61-9);

    • Ethyl acrylate (CAS No. 140-88-5);

    • Eugenyl methyl ether (also known as 4-allylveratrole or methyl eugenol) (CAS No. 93-15-2);

    • Myrcene (also known as 7-methyl-3-methylene-1,6-octadiene) (CAS No. 123-35-3);

    • Pulegone (also known as p-menth-4(8)-en-3-one) (CAS No. 89-82-7);

    • Pyridine (CAS No. 110-86-1); and

    • Styrene (CAS No. 100-42-5).

    II. Amendment of § 172.515

    In accordance with the procedures for amending or revoking a food additive regulation in § 171.130 (21 CFR 171.130), the petition asks us to amend § 172.515 to no longer provide for the use of these seven food additives as synthetic flavoring substances. Specifically, the petitioners contend that new data establish that these substances are carcinogenic and are, therefore, not safe for use in food under the Delaney Clause (section 409(c)(3)(A) of the FD&C Act), which provides that no food additive shall be deemed to be safe if it is found to induce cancer when ingested by man or animal, or if it is found, after tests which are appropriate for the evaluation of the safety of food additives, to induce cancer in man or animal. The petitioners cite, as evidence, conclusions by the National Toxicology Program, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, and the California Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. The petitioners also include results from an observational epidemiology study in humans exposed to styrene and a number of long-term, animal feeding studies conducted on each of the seven additives to support their request. If we determine new data are available that establish these food additives induce cancer, then FDA will amend § 172.515 to no longer provide for their use by publishing an amendment to the regulation in the Federal Register, as set forth in §§ 171.130 and 171.100 (21 CFR 171.100).

    Although the petition proposes to amend only § 172.515 to no longer provide for the use of these seven synthetic flavoring substances, our action in response to the petition could affect other regulations which provide specifically for the use of these additives. Specifically, benzophenone is also approved for use as an indirect food additive, i.e., a plasticizer (21 CFR 177.2600(c)(4)(iv) diphenyl ketone). We note that some of these flavoring substances (e.g., ethyl acrylate, pyridine, styrene) are permitted for use by other food additive regulations and food contact notifications as reactants or manufacturing aids. Such uses are not the subject of these food additive regulations and food contact notifications, and as such, may not necessarily be affected if this petition results in a regulation.

    III. Establish a Zero Tolerance

    The petition also requests that FDA explicitly establish a zero tolerance for these seven substances in § 172.515. There is no statutory or regulatory provision for establishing a zero tolerance standard for flavoring food additives in § 172.515. We note, however, that 21 CFR part 189 permits FDA to prohibit by rulemaking the use of substances in human foods because of a determination that they present a potential risk to the public health or have not been shown by adequate scientific data to be safe for use in human foods. To the extent that a rulemaking under part 189 to prohibit the use of these seven substances in food satisfies the petitioner's request for a zero tolerance, we will consider, to the extent appropriate, whether such a rulemaking is necessary if this petition results in a regulation.

    We also are reviewing the potential environmental impact of the petitioners' requested action. The petitioners have claimed a categorical exclusion from preparing an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under 21 CFR 25.32(m). In accordance with regulations issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1506.6(b)), we are placing the environmental document submitted with the subject petition on public display at the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) so that interested persons may review the document. If we determine that the petitioners' claim of categorical exclusion is warranted and that neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required, we will announce our determination in the Federal Register if this petition results in a regulation. If we determine that the claim of categorical exclusion is not warranted, we will place the environmental assessment on public display at the Division of Dockets Management and provide notice in the Federal Register announcing its availability for review and comment.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Dennis M. Keefe, Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33011 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 147 [Public Notice: 9390] RIN 1400-AD87 Electronic and Information Technology AGENCY:

    Department of State.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule implements Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 508) for the Department of State. Section 508 requires that Federal departments and agencies shall ensure accessibility by individuals with disabilities who are Federal employees, applicants for employment, or members of the public when developing, procuring, maintaining, or using electronic and information technology.

    DATES:

    You may submit comments by March 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] with the subject line, “Section 508 proposed rule.”

    Internet: At www.regulations.gov, search for this notice by searching for Docket No. DOS-2015-0072 or by the rule's RIN (1400-AD87).

    By mail: Office of the Legal Adviser for Management, ATTN: Section 508 Rule, Room 4325, 2201 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20520.

    Comments received outside of the comment period may be considered if feasible, but consideration cannot be assured. Those submitting comments to www.regulations.gov should not include any personally identifying information or information for which a claim of confidentiality would be asserted; the Department of State will not remove or mask any information from comments that are posted at www.regulations.gov. Parties who wish to comment anonymously may do so by submitting their comments via www.regulations.gov, leaving the fields that would identify the commenter blank and including no identifying information in the comment itself. Comments submitted via www.regulations.gov are immediately available for public inspection.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alice Kottmyer, Attorney-Adviser, 202-647-2318, [email protected] (please use the subject line: “Section 508 proposed rule”).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of this proposed rule is to add a new part 147, which implements Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d) (“Section 508”), as it applies to programs and activities conducted by the Department of State (“the Department”). The title of this proposed rule reflects that it applies to Electronic and Information Technology (EIT). Some authorities cited in this rulemaking might use the term “Information and Communications Technology” or “ICT.” For the purposes of this rulemaking, the Department considers “EIT” and “ICT” to be interchangeable.

    Subpart A—General Provisions

    Proposed §§ 147.1 and 147.2 provide that these proposed rules are intended to implement Section 508, consistent with that statute and the regulations promulgated by the Access Board, at 36 CFR part 1194 (“Part 1194”). This proposed rule applies to all development, procurement, maintenance, and use of electronic and information technology by the Department of State. Section 147.3 provides the definitions of “The Department,” “Electronic and Information Technology (EIT)”, “Section 508,” “undue burden,” “Section 508 complaint”, “the Secretary,” and otherwise adopts the definitions in 36 CFR 1194.4.

    Section 147.4 provides that the Department will ensure that its employees and applicants for employment are provided with adequate notice of the Department's obligations under Section 508, part 1194, and these rules.

    Sections 147.5 and 147.6 generally reiterate the requirements of Section 508 regarding the prohibition against discrimination, and the requirement for ensuring that EIT is accessible (in accordance with part 1194), unless an undue burden would be imposed on the Department—in which case an alternative means of access must be provided.

    Subpart B—Complaint Procedures

    Section 147.7 provides procedures for filing a complaint under Section 508. The procedures included therein are substantially the same procedures the Department has established in implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (22 CFR part 144). The relevant procedures are repeated in this rulemaking, for convenience. Any complaint must be filed with the Department's Office of Civil Rights, must be in writing, and submitted by fax, email, mail, or hand-delivery. The final, approved complaint form will be accessible and fillable and will be included for download on the following page: http://eforms.state.gov/searchform.aspx. Prior to approval by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, a static version of the form (in PDF format) will be available upon request; see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. The Department's analysis and notice pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act is included in the “Regulatory Analysis,” below. This form will be used for complaints not only under Section 508, but under other statutes as well. This is reflected in the Paperwork Reduction Act analysis, below.

    An individual with a disability alleging a violation of Section 508 must file a complaint not later than 180 days after the date the complainant knew, or should have known, of the alleged violation of Section 508. Once the Department receives the complaint, it must conduct an investigation and, within 180 days of receiving the complaint, shall notify the complainant of the results of the investigation in a letter containing findings of fact and conclusions of law; a description of a remedy for each violation found; and a notice of the right to appeal within 90 days of the complainant's receipt from the Department of the notice. The Department will notify the complainant of the results of the appeal within 60 days of the receipt of the appeal request.

    Section 147.8 provides that a decision from the Department on the merits of a complaint, or no notification in writing from the Department within 180 days of filing the complaint, will constitute exhaustion of the complainant's administrative remedies for purposes of 5 U.S.C. 701, et seq. This provision does not yet have a counterpart in the Department's Section 504 implementing procedures; however, the Department believes that this provision is helpful to clarify when there is exhaustion of administrative remedies under the Administrative Procedure Act for purposes of a complaint under Section 508. The Department is reviewing the possibility of adding a parallel provision to 22 CFR part 144 in the near future.

    Regulatory Analysis Administrative Procedure Act

    The Department of State is publishing this rulemaking as a proposed rule, with 60-day provision for public comment.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 for the purposes of Congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801-808).

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million in any year; and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

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

    Regulatory Flexibility Act: Small Business

    The Department of State certifies that this rulemaking will not have an impact on a substantial number of small entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.).

    Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    The Department of State has provided the rule to OMB for its review. The Department has also reviewed the proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866, and finds that the benefits of the proposed rule (in providing mechanisms for individuals to submit complaints of discrimination) outweigh any costs to the public, which are minimal. The Department of State has also considered this rulemaking in light of Executive Order 13563, and affirms that this proposed regulation is consistent with the guidance therein.

    Executive Order 12988

    The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule in light of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.

    Executive Orders 12372 and 13132

    This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effect on the states, on the relationships between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. Executive Order 12372, regarding intergovernmental consultation on federal programs and activities, does not apply to this regulation.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection contained in this proposed rule is pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35 and, although not yet in use, has been assigned an OMB Control Number. As part of this rulemaking, the Department is seeking comment on the administrative burden associated with this collection of information. The Department has submitted an information collection request to OMB for review and approval under the PRA.

    This information collection will provide a way for employees and members of the public to submit a complaint of discrimination under Section 508 and other federal statutes relating to discrimination, as described below.

    (1) Type of Information Collection: New collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Discrimination Complaint Form, OMB Control No. 1405-0220.

    (3) Agency form number: DS-4282.

    (4) Affected public: This information collection will be used by any federal employee or member of the public who wishes to submit a complaint of discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d); or Sections 504 or 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794 and 794d).

    (5) Change to information collected by the Department of State: This is a new information collection.

    (6) An estimate of the total number of respondents: The Department estimates a total of 10 respondents per year.

    (7) An estimate of the total annual public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The average burden associated with this information collection is estimated to be 1 hour per respondent. Therefore, the Department estimates the total annual burden for this information collection to be 10 hours.

    (8) Submit comments to both OMB and the Department of State by the following methods:

    Office of Management and Budget (OMB):

    • Direct comments to the Department of State Desk Officer in the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). You may submit comments by the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]. You must include the DS form number, information collection title, and the OMB control number in the subject line of your message.

    Fax: 202-395-5806. Attention: Desk Officer for Department of State.

    Department of State:

    Date(s): The Department will accept comments from the public up to March 4, 2016.

    Web: Persons with access to the Internet may view this notice and provide comments by going to the regulations.gov Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/index.cfm. Search for Docket No. DOS-2015-0072 or for RIN number 1400-AD87.

    • You must include the DS form number (DS-4282) or information collection title in any correspondence. Please note that comments submitted in response to this Notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your comments as submitted, including your personal information, will be available for public review.

    Email: [email protected]. You must include the DS form number (DS-4282), information collection title, and the OMB control number in any correspondence.

    (9) The Department seeks public comment on:

    • Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    • the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Abstract of Proposed Collection

    The form created by this information collection (DS-4282) will be used to present complaints of discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; or Sections 504 or 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794 and 794d).

    Methodology

    The form will be downloaded from http://eforms.state.gov/searchform.aspx. After completion, the form may be submitted by email, mail, fax, or hand-delivery.

    List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 147

    Civil rights, Communications equipment, Computer technology, Government employees, Individuals with disabilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 22 CFR part 147 is proposed to be added to subchapter O to read as follows:

    PART 147—ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Subpart A—General Provisions Sec. 147.1 Purpose. 147.2 Application. 147.3 Definitions. 147.4 Notice. 147.5 Discrimination prohibited. 147.6 Electronic and information technology requirements. Subpart B—Complaint Procedures 147.7 Filing a Section 508 complaint. 147.8 Final agency action. Authority:

    22 U.S.C. 2651a; 29 U.S.C. 794, 794d; 36 CFR part 1194.

    Subpart A—General provisions
    § 147.1 Purpose.

    The purpose of this part is to implement section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which requires that when Federal departments and agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they shall ensure accessibility by individuals with disabilities who are Federal employees, applicants for employment, or members of the public.

    § 147.2 Application.

    This part applies to all development, procurement, maintenance, and use of electronic and information technology (EIT), as defined in § 147.3(b) and in 36 CFR 1194.4.

    § 147.3 Definitions.

    This part incorporates the definitions in 36 CFR 1194.4. In addition, as used in this part:

    Department means the United States Department of State and any of its passport agencies or other facilities.

    Electronic and Information Technology (EIT) includes information technology and any equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment that is used in the creation, conversion, or duplication of data or information. The term electronic and information technology includes, but is not limited to, telecommunications products (such as telephones), information kiosks and transaction machines, Web sites, multimedia, and office equipment such as copiers and fax machines. The term does not include any equipment that contains embedded information technology that is used as an integral part of the product, but the principal function of which is not the acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information. For example, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) equipment such as thermostats or temperature control devices, and medical equipment where information technology is integral to its operation, are not information technology. As used herein, the Department intends that EIT mean the same as the term “information and communications technology” or “ICT.”

    Secretary means the Secretary of State or his or her designee.

    Section 508 means section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. 794d, Public Law 93-112, Title V, Section 508, as added Public Law 99-506, Title VI, Section 603(a), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1830, and amended Public Law 100-630, Title II, Section 206(f), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3312; Public Law 102-569, Title V, Section 509(a), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4430; Public Law 105-220, Title IV, Section 408(b), Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1203.

    Undue burden has the same meaning as that contained in 36 CFR 1194.4.

    § 147.4 Notice.

    (1) The Secretary shall ensure that employees and applicants for employment are provided with adequate notice of the requirements of Section 508, the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards (36 CFR part 1194), and this part, as they relate to the programs or activities conducted by the Department.

    (2) The Secretary shall ensure that the home page of the Department's public-facing Web site provides Department policy regarding accessibility of EIT in accordance with Section 508 and 36 CFR part 1194, as well as an email address for the public to ask questions or express concerns.

    § 147.5 Discrimination prohibited.

    The Department must comply with EIT Standards and Guidelines when it develops, procures, maintains, or uses EIT. EIT must permit access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of information and data by federal employees and members of the public without disabilities. The Department must also ensure that individuals with disabilities who are members of the public seeking information or services from the Department have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to that provided to the public without disabilities, unless providing comparable access would impose an undue burden on the Department.

    § 147.6 Electronic and information technology requirements.

    (a) Development, procurement, maintenance, or use of EIT. When developing, procuring, maintaining, or using EIT, the Department shall ensure, unless an undue burden would be imposed on the Department, that the EIT allows, regardless of the type of medium of the technology, that—

    (1) Individuals with disabilities who are Department employees have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of the information and data by Department employees who are not individuals with disabilities; and

    (2) Individuals with disabilities who are members of the public seeking information or services from the Department have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of the information and data by such members of the public who are not individuals with disabilities.

    (b) In meeting its obligations under paragraph (a) of this section, the Department shall comply with the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards (See 36 CFR part 1194).

    (c) Alternative means of access when undue burden is imposed. When development, procurement, maintenance, or use of EIT that meets the standards as provided in 36 CFR part 1194 would impose an undue burden, the Department shall provide individuals with disabilities covered by this section with the relevant information and data by an alternative means of access that allows the individual to use the information and data.

    (d) Procedures for determining undue burden. The Department procedures for finding that full compliance with 36 CFR part 1194 would impose an undue burden can be found at: http://www.state.gov/m/irm/impact/126338.htm.

    Subpart B—Complaint Procedures
    § 147.7 Filing a Section 508 complaint.

    (a) An individual with a disability who alleges that Department EIT does not allow him or her to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to access and use by individuals without disabilities, or that the alternative means of access provided by the Department does not allow the individual to use the information and data, may file a complaint with the Department's Office of Civil Rights (S/OCR).

    (b) Employees, applicants for employment, or members of the general public are encouraged to contact personnel in the Department office that uses or maintains a system that is believed not to be compliant with Section 508 or 36 CFR part 1194 to attempt to have their issues addressed. Nothing in this complaint process is intended to prevent Department personnel from addressing any alleged compliance issues when made aware of such requests directly or indirectly.

    (c) A Section 508 complaint must be filed not later than 180 calendar days after the complainant knew, or should have known, of the alleged discrimination, unless the time for filing is extended by the Department. A Section 508 complaint must be submitted in writing by fax, email, mail, or hand delivery to the S/OCR office, using the Form DS-4282, Discrimination Complaint Form, which can be downloaded at: http://eforms.state.gov/searchform.aspx.

    (d) Once a Section 508 complaint has been received, S/OCR will conduct an investigation into the allegation(s) and render a decision as to whether a Section 508 violation has occurred. Within 180 days of the receipt of a complete complaint under this part, the Secretary shall notify the complainant of the results of the investigation in a letter containing—

    (1) Findings of fact and conclusions of law;

    (2) A description of a remedy for each violation found; and

    (3) A notice of the right to appeal.

    (e) Appeals of the findings of fact and conclusions of law or remedies must be filed by the complainant within 90 days of receipt from the agency of the letter required by § 147.7(d). The Department may extend this time for good cause.

    (f) Timely appeals shall be accepted and processed by the Department.

    (g) The Secretary shall notify the complainant of the results of the appeal within 60 days of the receipt of the appeal. If the Secretary determines that additional information is needed from the complainant, the Secretary shall have 60 days from the date of receipt of the additional information to make his or her determination on the appeal.

    (h) Individuals who submit a complaint must keep S/OCR updated at all times with current contact information, to include address, phone number, and working email address. Failure to do so may result in having the complaint closed prior to arriving at a decision on the merits of the complaint.

    (i) A Department employee who receives a Section 508 complaint or a communication that raises an issue that might reasonably be considered a Section 508 complaint, should forward such communication(s) to S/OCR.

    § 147.8 Final agency action.

    Either a decision by the Secretary on the merits of a complaint, or no notification in writing from the Secretary within 180 days of filing the complaint, will a constitute a final agency action and exhaustion of the complainant's administrative remedies for purposes of 5 U.S.C. 701, et seq.

    Dated: December 17, 2015. John M. Robinson, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Department of State.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32485 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 512 [Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0130] RIN 2127-AL62 Confidential Business Information AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice proposes to modify the existing procedures for the submission and processing of requests for confidential treatment. NHTSA is proposing that it will defer acting on requests for confidential treatment until it receives a FOIA request for the information, if the Agency decides that making a determination of confidentiality is necessary or if making a determination is in the public interest. In general, unless and until a determination is made, the information for which confidential treatment is requested will not be disclosed.

    To ensure that requests for confidential treatment will provide an adequate basis for deferred determinations, this notice also proposes that submitters affirmatively specify whether the materials for which confidential treatment is sought were voluntarily submitted and provide an adequate basis for their claim of voluntariness. The proposal also contains provisions addressing agency disposition of inadequate or incomplete requests to ensure that submitters comply with the requirements when making requests for confidential treatment. Additionally, to facilitate communication with those making requests for confidential treatment, this notice proposes that an electronic mail address be provided with all requests.

    NHTSA is also proposing to amend the regulation to provide submitters of confidential information with the option of submitting their requests for confidential treatment and the materials accompanying these requests electronically.

    DATES:

    Comments on the proposal are due March 4, 2016. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, NHTSA is also seeking comment on amendments to an information collection. See the Paperwork Reduction Act section under Rulemaking Analyses and Notices below. Please submit all comments relating to the information collection requirements to NHTSA and to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Comments to OMB are most useful if submitted within 30 days of publication. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION portion of this document for DOT's Privacy Act Statement regarding documents submitted to the Agency's dockets.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments to the docket number identified in the heading of this document by any of the following methods:

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

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

    Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: (202) 493-2251.

    Comments regarding the proposed information collection should be submitted to NHTSA through one of the preceding methods and a copy should also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: NHTSA Desk Officer.

    Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the docket number of this document.

    You may call the Docket at 202-366-9324.

    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Privacy Act: Please see the Privacy Act heading under Regulatory Analyses and Notices.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Otto Matheke, Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5263, facsimile (202) 366-3820, or Thomas Healy, Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA, (202) 366-7161, facsimile (202) 366-3820. The mailing address for both these officials is 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Executive Summary II. Background A. NHTSA's Confidentiality Practices and Regulations B. Other NHTSA Statutes and Regulations and Confidential Materials C. Federal Government Confidentiality Determination Practices D. Volume and Scope of Confidentiality Requests E. Receipt of Confidentiality Requests III. Proposed Rule A. Time of Determination B. Request Requirements C. Consequences for Noncompliance D. Manner of Submission E. Other Changes in the NPRM F. Class Determination for Exemptions for Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard IV. Public Participation V. Privacy Act Statement VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices I. Executive Summary

    This notice proposes to amend NHTSA's regulations governing requests for confidential treatment (49 CFR part 512) to allow the Agency to defer making determinations on requests for confidential treatment until a request is made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or if the Agency decides that making a determination is necessary or is in the public interest so that NHTSA can more efficiently manage the increasing number of requests for confidential treatment. Generally, unless and until a determination is made, the information for which confidential treatment is requested will be kept confidential.

    NHTSA is also proposing to amend part 512 to provide requestors with the option of submitting their requests for confidential treatment and the materials accompanying these requests electronically in an effort to more efficiently manage requests for confidential treatment received by the agency.

    The number of requests for confidential treatment received by NHTSA has increased significantly since NHTSA first promulgated its confidentiality regulations in 1981. At that time the “Big Three” domestic automobile manufacturers still dominated the U.S. market. The U.S. automobile market has since become more diverse because of new entries from Asia, a significant decline in the market share controlled by the “Big Three” and the corresponding expansion of market share by other companies, including “foreign” manufacturers, many of whom now have U.S. production facilities. Not surprisingly, as the market share of these companies increased, their interactions with the agency have increased as well. New agency programs, such as the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), have further increased the flow of data into NHTSA. More recently, the digitization of information, the widespread adoption of email, and the relative ease of storing, organizing and maintaining electronic information, have often expanded the volume of data encompassed by requests for confidential treatment. By proposing to accept requests for confidential treatment electronically and to limit agency confidentiality determinations to instances where the confidential materials involved are the subject of a FOIA request, or where the Agency finds that a determination is necessary or is in the public interest, the Agency will be able to more efficiently manage the increasing number and size of requests for confidential treatment.

    Requests for confidential treatment would be reviewed for completeness and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and, if necessary, denied. Ordinarily, complete and compliant requests would be substantively reviewed when and if a FOIA request seeking the information is received. However, to ensure that the scope of requests for confidential treatment is consistent with applicable law, the agency is also proposing that it may also make confidentiality determinations on its own initiative, even when it has not made a finding that a determination is necessary.

    To ensure that persons requesting confidential treatment provide the agency with all the information that may be required to make deferred determinations of confidentiality, this notice also proposes that confidentiality requests must state whether the information at issue was voluntarily submitted or submitted in response to a compulsory process. In either case, this notice proposes that requests for confidential treatment contain information about the circumstances of the NHTSA inquiry resulting in the submission of the materials claimed as confidential. Additionally, to facilitate communication with those seeking confidential treatment, this notice proposes that requests for confidential treatment contain the electronic mail address of the person designated as the intended recipient of any NHTSA determination of confidentiality.

    II. Background A. NHTSA's Confidentiality Practices and Regulations

    The Agency's regulations governing requests for confidential treatment are found in 49 CFR part 512. Part 512 directs that confidential materials and requests for confidential treatment must be submitted to NHTSA's Office of Chief Counsel. 49 CFR 512.7. Currently, requests must be in writing and may not be submitted electronically. Id. Once a request is submitted, the information at stake remains confidential until NHTSA makes its determination. 49 CFR 512.20. Determinations must be made by the Chief Counsel's office within a reasonable time. 49 CFR 512.17(b). However, if the information at issue in a request is also the subject of a FOIA request, part 512 states that NHTSA generally must determine whether to grant the confidentiality request in 20 days. 49 CFR 512.17(a). This 20 day limit may be extended by the Chief Counsel for “good cause.” Id. If NHTSA denies a request, the submitter has 20 working days (from receipt) to request reconsideration of the denial. 49 CFR 512.19. If a request for confidential treatment is granted, it may be modified by the Chief Counsel due to newly discovered or changed facts, a change in the applicable law, a change in a class determination, the passage of time, or a finding that a prior determination is erroneous. 49 CFR 512.22.

    First promulgated in 1981, part 512 established that NHTSA would make confidentiality determinations within 30 days for certain classes of information. 46 FR 2049 (January 8, 1981). These classes included: (1) Information relating to a rulemaking proceeding with an established public docket, (2) information relating to a petition proceeding with an established public docket, (3) information relating to a defect proceeding, (4) information relating to an enforcement proceeding involving alleged violations or a regulation or standard, or (5) information provided pursuant to a NHTSA reporting requirement. See e.g. 49 CFR 512.5(b) (1981). In all other instances, the 1981 final rule established that NHTSA would defer making a confidentiality determination unless a FOIA request was made for information the submitter claimed to be confidential. 49 CFR 512.5(d)(1981). If a FOIA request was made, the 1981 final rule specified that NHTSA would determine the confidential status of materials covered by the request within 10 days of the request unless the information fell within the five categories described above. Id.

    The Agency noted that many commenters suggested that the issuance of confidentiality determinations in 30 days or less was inconsistent with the practices of other Federal agencies and would be unduly burdensome for the Agency. 46 FR. at 2050. NHTSA also observed that some Federal agencies had adopted a policy of immediate determination and that making immediate determinations would benefit both submitters and the public. Id. The Agency stated that making immediate determinations would make it easier for NHTSA to segregate and control confidential information and that the public would benefit by having access to information that was not be presumed to be confidential because no determination over its status had been made. Id. NHTSA also explained that concerns over overloading the Agency with unnecessary work were “unfounded.” The information that would be subject to immediate determinations would be limited to materials that generated by investigations, required regulatory reports and rulemaking actions. For these categories of information, the Agency concluded that non-confidential information would customarily be made public. Id. Accordingly, the best course for NHTSA would be to make immediate determinations for the 5 named classes of information. Id.

    Responding to a petition for reconsideration filed by the Motor Vehicle Manufacturer's Association (MVMA), NHTSA modified the 1981 final rule in a notice published on June 7, 1982. 47 FR 24587 (June 7, 1982). The Agency observed that the crux of the MVMA petition, as well as the comments generated during the rulemaking process, was that making immediate determinations of confidentiality was inconsistent with other government agency practices and would be overly burdensome on both submitters and NHTSA. Id. at 24588. After reviewing its use of confidential information, the Agency determined that most of these materials originated in defects investigations and standards enforcement proceedings. Id. Mindful that 49 CFR 554.9 provides that communications submitted by a manufacturer which are the subject of an investigation will be made public during that investigation, NHTSA concluded that it may withhold information claimed to be confidential pending a final determination of confidentiality if that request for confidential treatment appeared to have a reasonable chance of success. Id. NHTSA then stated that it would be “. . . unnecessary or inappropriate . . .” to immediately determine the confidentiality of defect and noncompliance information when it is received. Accordingly, the Agency concluded that the immediate determination process previously established for five classes of information no longer fit NHTSA's needs. Therefore, NHTSA amended section 512.6 of part 512 to state that the Agency would make confidentiality determinations at its own initiative or when it received a FOIA request for the information claimed to be confidential. Id.

    The 1982 response to the MVMA petition for reconsideration established that NHTSA would make confidentiality determinations at one of two junctures—when the Agency decided that it would do so or when NHTSA received a FOIA request for the information at issue. However, NHTSA promulgated a number of amendments to part 512 in 1989. See 54 FR 48892 (November 28, 1989). Among other things, the 1989 amendments eliminated the prior reference to the five classes of data and simply stated that any confidentiality determinations would be made within a “reasonable time” unless a FOIA request for the information had been made. Id. at 48897. If a FOIA request for the data had been made, the 1989 amendments retained the requirement that a determination must be made within 10 days of the FOIA request. Id.

    Beyond stating that the amendment would ensure efficient processing and proper identification of business information received by NHTSA, neither the NPRM (54 FR 28696 (July 7, 1989)) nor the preamble to the final rule (54 FR 48892 (November 28, 1989)) explained the rationale for adopting this “reasonable time” standard. NHTSA also did not offer any guidance on what time period would constitute a “reasonable time.”

    NHTSA subsequently promulgated amendments to part 512 in July 2003, (68 FR 44209, (July 28, 2003)), October 2007 (72 FR 59434 (October 19, 2007)), and July 2009 (74 FR 37878 (July 29, 2009)). These amendments established class determinations for data submitted pursuant to the early warning reporting (EWR) requirements authorized by the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act, Public Law 106-414, 114 Stat. 1800, the “Cash for Clunkers” program authorized by the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act of 2009 (the CARS Act) (Pub. L. 111-32) and established procedures for submitting and marking electronic documents and information. The “reasonable time” standard for making confidentiality determinations established by the 1989 amendments to part 512 was not addressed or modified by the 2003, 2007, and 2009 final rules.

    B. Other NHTSA Statutes and Regulations and Confidential Materials

    Any proposal examining potential modifications to NHTSA's regulations governing the confidentiality of information submitted to the Agency must be consistent with statutory provisions directing the disposition of these materials. Because NHTSA is proposing to defer acting on requests for confidential treatment until a FOIA request is made, a particular concern is whether statues governing NHTSA's activities require disclosure of confidential information in the absence of a FOIA request.

    When originally enacted in 1966, the Safety Act contained provisions directly addressing certain categories of confidential information submitted to NHTSA. The provision then codified at 15 U.S.C. 1402 imposed a duty on motor vehicle manufacturers to notify vehicle owners and NHTSA if the manufacturer had determined that a safety related defect existed in one of its products. Section 1402(d) required that these manufacturers provide NHTSA with all communications related to the defect that were sent to dealers and vehicle owners. This section further commanded that the Secretary “. . . shall disclose so much of the information contained in such notice . . .” or other information obtained from a manufacturer in relation to a failure to comply with Federal motor vehicle safety standards that “. . . will assist in carrying out the purposes of this Chapter . . .”.1

    1 The purpose of the Safety Act is “to reduce traffic accidents and deaths and injuries to persons resulting from traffic accidents.” 49 U.S.C. 30101.

    The authority to release information from defect-related manufacturer communications to dealers and customers was not, and is not, unlimited. 15 U.S.C. 1402(d) further stated that the Secretary “. . . shall not disclose any information which contains or relates to a trade secret or other matter referred to in [the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905)]” unless such disclosure “is necessary to carry out the purposes” of the Safety Act.2

    2 As discussed below, the Trade Secrets Act is considered to be co-extensive with FOIA exemption 4. See CNA Financial Corp. v. Donovan, 830 F.2d 1132, 1151 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

    Congress amended the Safety Act in 1974 and, among other things, expanded the reporting requirements originally found in section 1402 by adding part B “Discovery, Notification and Remedy of Motor Vehicle Defects.” See Motor Vehicle and Schoolbus Safety Amendments of 1974, Public Law 93-492. The new reporting requirements of 15 U.S.C. 1418 commanded manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to furnish the Secretary with copies of all defect or non-compliance related notices and other communications given by the manufacturer to dealers and consumers (15 U.S.C. 1418(a)(1)). Section 1418(a)(2)(A) directed the Secretary to disclose “. . . so much of any information which is obtained under this Act . . .” relating to safety related defect or a non-compliance determined to exist by the manufacturer or NHTSA “. . . as he determines will assist in carrying out the purposes of this part . . .”. Again, the authority to disclose safety-related defect or non-compliance related information was limited. The amendment further specified that information subject to the Trade Secrets Act shall not be disclosed unless the Secretary determines such disclosure is necessary to carry out the purposes of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1418(a)(2)(B)). Additionally, section 1418(a)(2)(C) stated that the foregoing disclosure requirements “. . . shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of . . .” the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). The foregoing sections were redesignated as 49 U.S.C. 30167(a) and (b) when the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., was codified (without substantive change) as 49 U.S.C. chapter 301—Motor Vehicle Safety in 1994, Public Law 103-272.

    The 1974 amendments also replaced the reporting requirements in 15 U.S.C. 1402 with specific provisions addressing the disclosure of cost information in the event a manufacturer opposes an action of the Secretary on the basis of increased cost. 15 U.S.C. 1402(a) directed that manufacturers submit such cost information for evaluation by the Secretary. 15 U.S.C. 1402(b)(1) and (b)(2) specified that such cost information, and the Secretary's evaluation of the cost data, shall be made available to the public unless the submitter satisfies the Secretary that the information contains a “trade secret or other confidential matter.” In that event, disclosure shall only be made in a manner preserving the confidentiality of the information (15 U.S.C. 1402(b)(1) and (2)). The provisions of section 1402 are now found in 49 U.S.C. 30167(c) as a result of the 1994 codification (without substantive change) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., as 49 U.S.C. chapter 301—Motor Vehicle Safety, Public Law 103-272.

    Other statutory provisions relating to various programs administered by NHTSA are also relevant to agency processing of confidential information. Section 32303(c) of chapter 323 (49 U.S.C. 32301 et. seq.) forbids the disclosure of personally identifying information collected from a vehicle insurer without the consent of that person when NHTSA has obtained crash or injury information from an insurance company. NHTSA is authorized to collect information pursuant to administration of the odometer fraud provisions of chapter 327 (see e.g. 49 U.S.C. 32706) but is forbidden by Section 32708 of that chapter from publicly disclosing information subject to the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905). Similarly, NHTSA is empowered to collect information under the vehicle anti-theft provisions of chapter 331 (49 U.S.C. 33101 et. seq.) but Section 33116 of chapter 331 directs that the Agency may not publicly disclose any of this information that is subject to the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905).

    The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) provisions of chapter 329 (49 U.S.C. 32901 et. seq.) direct that certain information be released, but also restricts information that NHTSA may release to the public. Section 32910(c) provides that NHTSA shall disclose certain information obtained under this chapter under section 552 of title 5. However, this command to release fuel economy information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) is limited by subsequent language stating that NHTSA “. . . may withhold information under section 552(b)(4) of title 5 only if the Secretary or Administrator decides that disclosure of the information would cause significant competitive damage.” Section 32910(c) further provides that fuel economy measurements and calculations performed by the Environment Protection Agency under section 32904(c) “shall be disclosed under section 552 of title 5 without regard to section 552(b).” Under the foregoing provisions, NHTSA has a general duty to make fuel economy information available under FOIA unless the Agency finds that release of the information would cause significant competitive harm. If the information at issue is fuel economy measurement and calculation data generated under section 32904(c) by the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), NHTSA must make these materials available regardless of whether the information is exempt from disclosure under the FOIA exceptions found 5 U.S.C. 552(b).

    With the exception of the EPA fuel economy calculations described in 49 U.S.C. 32904(c), which NHTSA is required to release, NHTSA's release of information obtained in furtherance of its varied missions is tempered by the requirement that the Agency not disclose information whose release would cause competitive harm or is subject to the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905). We note that is has long been established that the Trade Secrets Act is considered to be co-extensive with FOIA exemption 4. See CNA Financial Corp. v. Donovan, 830 F.2d 1132, 1151 (D.C. Cir. 1987). Accordingly, other than EPA fuel economy calculation data, the statutes governing various agency programs do not require NHTSA to release information it has received if that information is confidential under FOIA exemption 4.

    The Agency is also not required to release confidential information under its own regulations. NHTSA promulgated regulations codifying the procedures employed in defect and non-compliance investigations in 1980. See 45 FR 10796 (February 19, 1980). The 1980 final rule created 49 CFR part 554. While Section 554.9 directs that files from closed or suspended investigations, including communications between the Agency and the manufacturer of the product in question, are to be made be publicly available, it does not require the disclosure of confidential information. Rather, information made public under section 554.9 may include confidential material if NHTSA determines such disclosure to be necessary to the investigation.

    C. Federal Government Confidentiality Determination Practices

    NHTSA has traditionally followed a practice of responding to all requests for confidential treatment as soon as is practicable after those requests have been filed. This practice, as well as the Agency's requirement that submitters provide formal requests for confidential treatment when submitting information to NHTSA, is rather unique. Most Federal agencies have adopted different approaches. Some agencies normally make determinations regarding the confidentiality of information only when they receive a FOIA request for the information. See e.g. 17 CFR 145.9(d)(10) (Commodity Futures Trading Commission). Other agencies adopt the position that determinations of confidentiality will be made either at the Agency's discretion or when a FOIA request is made. See 12 CFR 261.16(a) (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve), 18 CFR 388.112 (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), and 40 CFR 2.204 (Environmental Protection Agency). Within the Department of Transportation, NHTSA is the only agency that has followed a practice of making immediate determinations of confidentiality in response to all requests that it received. Given our experience, and under our considered judgment, we have tentatively concluded that the better practice, like that of other agencies, is to make determinations only upon receipt of a FOIA request or if a determination is otherwise necessary.

    D. Volume and Scope of Confidentiality Requests

    The task of making substantive determinations on requests for confidential treatment has increased in complexity in recent years. Changes in the automotive industry, new agency programs and changes to existing agency programs have increased the volume of information being submitted to NHTSA. Furthermore, materials for which confidential treatment is sought more often include, images, databases, pictures, videos and other digital materials which has increased the amount of data being submitted to NHTSA. NHTSA is now receiving almost twice the number of requests for confidential treatment and requests for reconsideration than it did ten years ago. NHTSA receives between approximately 300 to 500 requests for confidential treatment in a given year.

    The widespread use of electronic documents, data systems and information management and storage systems have enabled manufacturers to create and store more information and, when compelled by an agency request requiring them to produce it, to submit more data to NHTSA.

    A 2003 study performed by the University of California at Berkeley concluded that the growth in electronic storage needs for data had doubled between 2000 and 2003. See http://www2.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info-2003/. In 2012, it was believed that the amount of electronic data maintained by businesses and other large entities was doubling every 18 months. See http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/72421?source=ctwartcio#slide1. In almost all contexts, but particularly in the case of defect and non-compliance investigations, the submission of data to NHTSA in an electronic format via CD-ROM, thumb drives, hard drives or other media is now an established practice. The size of these submissions is increasing over time as more emails, photographs, videos, spreadsheets, PowerPoint presentations and other digital documents are being generated by manufacturers. Further, the relative ease of storing and managing digital documents makes it possible to retain multiple iterations and drafts of similar documents and data. While NHTSA's recent series of investigations into unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles are not representative of typical agency defect investigations, it is noteworthy to observe that Toyota submitted over 42 gigabytes of data to the Agency in response to NHTSA requests. More recently, two investigations, the General Motors ignition switch investigation (TQ14-001) and the Takata air bag rupture investigation (EA15-001), resulted in more than a terabyte of data being provided to the Agency.

    As more data is produced by manufacturers and subsequently given to NHTSA in the course of investigations, the workload imposed by substantive confidentiality reviews of the data has grown and continues to grow. In today's world, a gigabyte of data is not considered to be a significant amount. However, if that gigabyte of data consists of documents without embedded photographs or videos, the printed versions of the documents would fill the bed of a pickup truck. See “How Much Information? Data Powers of Ten” http://www2.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info/datapowers.html. Applying this estimate to the digital materials submitted during the Toyota unintended acceleration investigations described above, one can conclude that NHTSA received enough documents to fill at least 42 pickup trucks.

    Although the size and scope of the Toyota unintended acceleration, the GM ignition switch, and Takata air bag rupture investigations were unusually large, large amounts of data are being submitted in routine defect matters. In one recent NHTSA investigation examining fuel pump failures in certain Volkswagen vehicles, Volkswagen submitted approximately 2.5 gigabytes of documents in response to formal agency Information Requests (IRs) during this investigation. Using the rule of thumb noted above, that one gigabyte of electronic documents would fill a pickup truck if reproduced on paper, substantive review of this data required that the Agency examine two and one-half truckloads of documents.

    The explosive data growth resulting from the development and use of digital materials has created new industries and products for managing this information. Law firms and litigants have had to adapt to these developments through the use of various tools to organize and sift through the mountains of information now being produced by business entities. A variety of software packages now exist for these purposes. See http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/tech/ltrc/charts/litsupportchart_final.authcheckdam.pdf. These products, although essential for litigating complex cases in today's world, are not suitable for use as tools in substantively reviewing submissions for confidentiality purposes.

    When materials are provided to NHTSA in response to a formal investigation request or similar compulsory inquiry, the proper legal standard for any grant of confidential treatment is whether release of the information at issue would be likely to cause the submitter to suffer substantial competitive harm or would impair the government's ability to obtain similar information in the future. See National Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1974). Therefore, the central determination that must be made is not related to a particular issue, set of individuals or specific events and transactions. This central issue—would release of the data be likely to cause substantial competitive harm—is general in nature when compared to the specific inquiries involved in litigation. Moreover, determining if competitive harm would be likely to flow from releasing information is not tied to specific persons, particular transactions or discrete events. For this reason, commercially available litigation support software is not suitable for making confidentiality determinations, and development of a dedicated software solution for this purpose would certainly be difficult and expensive.

    E. Receipt of Confidentiality Requests

    A claim for confidential treatment must be submitted to the Chief Counsel at an address specified in the regulations. 49 CFR 512.7. NHTSA is proposing to amend part 512 to provide submitters of confidential information with the option of submitting their requests for confidential treatment and the materials accompanying these requests electronically, by email, through a secure portal or through a similar secured site, rather than to an actual physical address used by the post office. The Agency is currently working to develop a system that would allow submission of materials electronically.

    The Agency notes that the many of the requests for confidential treatment involve materials stored on electronic media in various file formats. These include discs, thumb drives, and portable external hard drives. The current regulation requires a complete copy of the submission, a redacted version, and either a second complete copy of the submission or those portions of the submission containing the material for which confidential treatment is claimed and any additional information the submitter deems important to the Chief Counsel's consideration of the claim. 49 CFR 512.5. As discussed in a final rule, 68 FR 44209, 44212 (July 28, 2003), the Chief Counsel was to distribute the complete copy and the public version of the material to the program office for its use, and will use the additional marked copy or set of material to evaluate the claim for confidential treatment. The rationale for the foregoing system was to provide the program office with the information necessary for program activity expeditiously and ensure that the program office is aware of which material is claimed to be confidential and which is not, and to provide the Chief Counsel with the information needed to consider the claim for confidential treatment. Id.

    The proposal to allow submission of materials electronically would eliminate the requirement for the additional marked copy or set for those submissions, as this information will be stored in an electronic repository or other system that would permit the applicable NHTSA program office as well as the Office of Chief Counsel to access it. Therefore, the Agency believes that the proposal to allow electronic submission will reduce inefficiencies.

    NHTSA also believes that the proposal to allow electronic submissions could result in savings for requestors. Many requestors use commercial carriers to send the confidential information to NHTSA's physical address. If a requestor is permitted to submit the request and information electronically, it would serve to eliminate those delivery costs. Furthermore, requestors who submit electronically would not incur the additional expense associated with producing discs, thumb drives, and portable hard drives to NHTSA. Finally, those submitting confidential materials electronically would not be required to submit two copies of the confidential version of the information at issue because a single copy would be sufficient to address the agency's needs.

    Adopting an electronic submission process also has the potential to improve transparency and facilitate public access to information that is not claimed as confidential by submitters. Such “public” data, if provided electronically, can be (after review by the Agency and redaction, if necessary) quickly and easily transferred to repositories that allow for public access. Adopting an electronic submission process would also allow NHTSA to more efficiently manage requests for confidential treatment as the agency will no longer have to use resources to process and store incoming hard copies of these requests.

    III. Proposed Rule

    NHTSA is proposing to amend part 512 to explicitly direct that confidentiality determinations will be made only at certain times: When the materials at issue are the subject of a FOIA request or, in the absence of such a FOIA request, if NHTSA determines it is necessary because it is required by statute, regulation or other requirement, or otherwise necessary, it determines that it is in the public interest, or to ensure that a person submitting requests for confidential treatment comply with part 512 and is not making claims that are unduly broad or not supported by applicable law. We believe that these proposed changes will allow NHTSA to more efficiently manage requests for confidential treatment and the materials with which these requests are associated. These proposed changes will also more align NHTSA's approach for handling requests for confidential treatment with those of other operating administrations within DOT.

    It is the Agency's intent that it will ordinarily make substantive determinations of confidentiality only when a FOIA request seeking the information has been filed. Otherwise, NHTSA will make determinations in response to requests for confidential treatment when, at the Agency's discretion, a determination is either in the public interest or is otherwise necessary. In most cases, the Agency's exercise of discretion will result in no determination being issued unless and until a FOIA request for the information has been filed with the Agency. Although this proposal appears to not deviate from the existing requirements of part 512, NHTSA has long followed a practice of responding to every request for confidential treatment as soon as it is practicable to do so. As noted above, NHTSA now believes it should not continue to make determinations for each and every request for confidential treatment it receives.

    Under the current regulations, information received by NHTSA, for which a properly filed confidentiality request is submitted, will be kept confidential until the Chief Counsel makes a determination regarding its confidentiality. 49 CFR 512.20(a). Such information will not be disclosed publicly, except in accordance with part 512. Id. The Agency is not proposing any change to this regulation.

    Because the Agency is proposing to follow a policy, in the absence of special circumstances, of making confidentiality determinations only when a FOIA request is filed, this notice proposes additional amendments aimed at ensuring that requests for confidential treatment are sufficiently complete to allow making a determination in the future, should the Agency act on the request. The Agency does intend to perform an initial review of all requests for confidential treatment to ensure completeness and compliance with the requirements of part 512 to ensure that the request is complete so it can be processed at a later date. This initial review will be limited to the sufficiency of incoming requests. In the event that a request is found to be insufficient, the agency is proposing to employ an abbreviated letter to deny the request and notify the recipient of the reason(s) for the denial. Furthermore, NHTSA is also proposing to amend part 512 to explicitly provide that the Agency may make confidentiality determinations in certain instances to ensure that manufacturers are not making overly broad requests.

    A. Time of Determination

    49 CFR 512.17 currently provides that NHTSA will make confidentiality determinations at one of two junctures: Within 20 working days after a FOIA request is made for the information claimed to be confidential or within a reasonable period of time, if not requested under FOIA. Section 512.17(b), which governs when determinations are made in the absence of a FOIA request, states:

    (b) When information claimed to be confidential is not requested under the Freedom of Information Act, the determination of confidentiality will be made within a reasonable period of time, at the discretion of the Chief Counsel.

    This provision, which was inserted into the newly created 512.17 in the July 2003 final rule amending part 512 (68 FR 44209), is similar to language that originally appeared as Section 512.6(d) in the 1989 amendments intended to simplify part 512:

    (d) For information not requested pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, the determination of confidentiality is made within a reasonable period of time at the discretion of the Chief Counsel.

    54 FR 48892, 48897 (Nov. 28, 1989)

    As promulgated in 1989, section 512.6 provided that NHTSA would place submitter-redacted or “public” versions of materials submitted with a confidentiality request on public view (see 54 FR at 48897, section 512.6(b)) and make a determination of confidential treatment within 10 days after a FOIA request is filed for information claimed as confidential (54 FR at 48897, section 512.6(c)). For information not subject to a FOIA request, the determination would be made within a “reasonable time” as described in section 512.6(d).

    As noted above, section 512.6 established different timing requirements for confidentiality determinations for different categories of materials prior to the 1989 amendments. For materials outside of five specific categories, section 512.6(d) declared that confidentiality determinations would be made within 10 days of a FOIA request seeking the information. 47 FR 24587, 24591-2 (June 7, 1982). As set forth in section 512.6(b), confidentiality determinations for five discrete categories of data would be made when required by the FOIA, NHTSA statues or regulations or when NHTSA determined disclosure was in the public interest. Id. at 24591. Accordingly, prior to the 1989 amendment stating that determinations would be made within a “reasonable time,” NHTSA's regulations provided that it would make confidentiality determinations at its own initiative unless the information at issue the subject of a FOIA request. Id. at 24591.

    The most identifiable constant in the evolution of NHTSA's approach to the timing of confidentiality determinations is that determinations must be made within a designated time period after a FOIA request. Beyond this, the record does not provide much insight into how the position taken in 1982 that NHTSA would make determinations at its own initiative became transformed into a 1989 final rule stating determinations would be made within a reasonable period of time at the discretion of the Chief Counsel. While the adoption of the latter phrase was characterized as not constituting a substantive change (54 FR 48894), the language employed appears to provide that the discretion exercised by NHTSA's Chief Counsel was limited to when a determination would be made and not, as the 1982 final rule provides, if a final determination would be made.

    The Agency's recent practice of making determinations on all requests for confidential treatment as soon as is practicable is at odds with the position stated in the 1982 final rule. The current language—determinations are made within a reasonable time at the Chief Counsel's discretion—infers that determinations will be made in all cases. If this was not intended, and an ambiguity exists, an interpretation that the Chief Counsel has the discretion to not make final confidentiality determinations is more consistent with the existing record.

    NHTSA believes that the evolution of part 512 supports the conclusion that the Agency is not required to act on all requests for confidential treatment and is only compelled to do so by a FOIA request, when it determines it is necessary, or in the public interest.

    NHTSA is therefore proposing to amend section 512.17 to explicitly provide that it will make confidentiality determinations only under certain conditions. One condition will be when NHTSA receives a FOIA request seeking information that may be within the scope of a request for confidential treatment. Other conditions under which NHTSA will make a confidentiality determination will exist if the Chief Counsel, at his discretion, determines that making a determination is necessary or is in the public interest.

    As it did when issuing the 1982 final rule governing the timing of confidentiality determinations, NHTSA tentatively concludes that publicly releasing materials not claimed to be confidential is consistent with the requirement found in 49 CFR part 554.9 that non-confidential materials submitted by a manufacturer will be made available to the public during the course of an investigation. See 47 FR 24587, 24588 (June 7, 1982). Furthermore, it is our tentative view that permitting electronic submissions will facilitate a more expeditious process in making the material not claimed to be confidential publicly available. However, the Agency does note that the disclosure of such material will not be instantaneous— there will necessarily be a delay in making the material publicly available, as the Agency will need to review, and if necessary, redact certain information contained in the submissions, such as names, addresses and telephone numbers of consumers that must be removed in order to protect the personal privacy of individuals.

    Deferring determinations on requests for confidential treatment until NHTSA receives a FOIA request for the information, or decides that making a determination is required by statute or regulation or is in the public interest, will allow the agency to more efficiently process requests falling into these classes. By deferring determinations on requests for confidentiality for materials failing into other categories, NHTSA can focus its resources on reviewing those requests for which a FOIA request has been filed or for which the agency has decided that a confidentiality determination is otherwise necessary.

    B. Request Requirements

    This notice also contains proposals to amend certain current requirements for requests for confidential treatment. In recognition of the increasing importance and use of electronic mail, NHTSA is proposing to amend section 512.8(f), which presently requires those requesting confidential treatment to provide the name, address and telephone number of the person to whom a determination should be sent, to require that those seeking confidential treatment also provide an electronic mail address for the designated recipient of NHTSA's determination of confidentiality. We are also proposing to amend section 512.8(a), which presently requires identification of the confidentiality standard applicable to the request, to more explicitly direct that persons requesting confidential treatment specify why the materials for which confidentiality is requested are being submitted to NHTSA and whether the submission is required by statute, regulation or other compulsory process. Among other things, the proposed amendment would require the identification of the NHTSA official requesting the information claimed as confidential, the date of the request, the subject matter of the request and the form in which the request was made. The proposal also amends section 512.8 to more explicitly require that requesters specify the factual basis for any claim that materials claimed as confidential are voluntarily submitted and, where applicable, to specify which materials are voluntarily submitted and which are not.

    The applicable legal standards for granting confidential treatment differ significantly depending on whether the materials are voluntarily submitted or in response to a legal requirement. See, Critical Mass Energy Project v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 975 F.2d 871 (D.C. Cir. 1992) and National Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1974). Under the test set forth in Critical Mass, financial or commercial information provided to the government on a voluntary basis is “confidential” for purposes of Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)) if it is the kind of information that would customarily not be released to the public by the submitter. 975 F.2d at 879. For compulsory submissions, under National Parks, information is confidential under Exemption 4 if its disclosure would be likely to cause substantial competitive harm to the submitter or to impair the government's ability to collect the information in the future. 498 F.2d at 770. Proper application of these standards obviously has an impact on whether materials are granted confidential treatment as well as the time and resources required for submitters to prepare a request for confidential treatment and the resources needed to review such a request.

    It is NHTSA's experience that persons submitting requests for confidential treatment often resort to employment of a standard form letter that does not properly designate or identify data voluntarily submitted or submitted as a result of legal compulsion. These requests generally contend, in a conclusory fashion, materials are entitled to confidential treatment under both National Parks and Critical Mass. In other instances, additional information may be provided by a submitter voluntarily along with materials that were required. Submitters providing conflated requests run the risk that their requests will not be evaluated properly. From NHTSA's point of view, these requests may also be more difficult to process. Our concern that the confidentiality standards applicable to specific requests may not be correctly identified, documented and supported is heightened by our proposal to defer making confidentiality determinations. If the foregoing proposal is adopted, most determinations, to the extent determinations are made, will not be made until some period of time after an initial request is filed. It is therefore important that requests for confidential treatment provide an adequate record on which such deferred determinations could be properly made.

    C. Consequences for Noncompliance

    NHTSA is also proposing to amend section 512.13(a) to remove language stating that improperly filed requests for confidential treatment may not necessarily result in a waiver of confidential treatment if the agency receives notice of the request or otherwise becomes aware of the claim before the material at issue is disclosed to the public.

    We first note that the existing language is somewhat superfluous. Section 512.13(a) authorizes the Chief Counsel to make a determination that failing to follow the submission requirements in section 512.4 may waive claims for confidential treatment. Since NHTSA is not required to make a waiver determination when requests are not filed or are improperly filed, it may continue to exercise its discretion and not find that a waiver has occurred for any number of reasons. As these may include NHTSA's independent knowledge that the materials involved are confidential or NHTSA's receiving notice that a proper claim for confidential treatment will be asserted, the agency's tentative conclusion is that that the existing language is not necessary.

    The agency is also concerned that retaining the existing language is undesirable. As noted above, incomplete, improperly prepared and untimely requests for confidential treatment create additional burdens for NHTSA. We see no reason to maintain language that could encourage a casual approach to submitting requests for confidential treatment, particularly since we are also proposing to defer making confidentiality determinations until receipt of a FOIA request or the determination is necessary or in the public interest. When making determinations is deferred, the passage of time necessarily compounds the impact of errors in requests and increases the difficulties inherent in resolving them. Accordingly, our proposal includes revising section 512.13(a) to strike language implying that failure to file a request for confidential treatment or filing one improperly will not result in a waiver of confidentiality.

    D. Manner of Submission

    NHTSA is proposing to amend part 512 to allow requests for confidential treatment and the accompanying materials to be submitted electronically. Currently, part 512 anticipates that materials will be submitted to a physical address. 49 CFR 512.7. NHTSA believes that providing the option for electronic submission will increase efficiencies, reduce burdens for the agency and submitters and facilitate more expeditious release of non-confidential information.

    E. Other Changes in the NPRM

    NHTSA is also proposing to amend 49 CFR 512.4 to clarify how requestors submitting requests for confidential treatment for materials submitted in compliance with 49 CFR part 537, Automotive Fuel Economy Reports, should submit their requests. Because requests for confidential treatment are submitted in compliance with 49 CFR part 537 are also required to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR part 512, we are amending 49 CFR 512.4 to make this clarification. We also note that the amendments to 49 CFR part 512 in this NPRM are intended to be consistent with, and not to conflict with, the amends to 49 CFR part 512 proposed in our NPRM, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2, 80 FR 40138, 40732 (July 13, 2015). Depending on the timing of the final rule in this rulemaking action, NHTSA may make additional revisions to the final rule to effectuate the proposed revisions to 49 CFR part 512 in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2, NPRM. NHTSA also requests comment on whether it would be more efficient for persons submitting request for confidential treatment to submit only those reports specified in 49 CFR part 537 through the part 537 electronic portal and to submit the certification in Appendix A the materials specified in 49 CFR 512.8 through the electronic submission method proposed in this NPRM.

    F. Class Determination for Vehicle Model Identifying Information Provided in Petitions for Exemption From Parts Marking Requirements Under the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard

    NHTSA has tentatively concluded that the name of the passenger motor vehicle make, model, line, and model year for which a manufacturer is seeking an exemption from the theft prevention standard under 49 CFR part 543 will be presumed to be confidential until such time that the petition for exemption is granted or denied.

    The agency notes that vehicle manufacturers routinely seek confidential treatment for this make, model, line and model year information. We have previously stated, when making determinations on requests for confidential treatment, that 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication requirements related to the disposition of all 543 petitions. Under the foregoing section, the information published in the Federal Register (whether the petition is granted or denied) includes make, model, and model year of vehicle and a general description of the proposed theft deterrent device. Because listing the name of the passenger motor vehicle make, model, line, and model year that is the subject of the petition is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of models exempt from the Theft Prevention Standard, NHTSA has tentatively concluded that release of the information is necessary to achieve the objectives of part 543.

    We have also tentatively concluded that release of this information at the time NHTSA issues a determination in response to a petition filed under part 543 is not likely to result in substantial competitive harm to the petitioner. This tentative conclusion is based on two factors. The first is that manufacturers have a significant degree of latitude in when exemption petitions are filed and can therefore control when model information is released by NHTSA. The second is that now model name, line, model year and make information routinely enters the public domain, either by accident or design, before NHTSA grants or denies parts marking exemption petitions.

    Section 543.5(b)(4) requires that petitions for exemption must be filed no later than eight months prior to start of production for the model line for which the exemption is sought. In turn, NHTSA is required under 49 CFR 543.7(c) to make a determination on the petition not later than 120 days after the petition is filed. Provided that a petition for exemption is filed not less than eight months prior to the start of production, a manufacturer is free to file that petition at any time of its own choosing. Moreover, a manufacturer filing a petition knows that NHTSA must act on it within 120 days after it is filed. Manufacturers can therefore both control and predict when NHTSA will release its decision in response to an exemption petition, particularly since the agency's practice has traditionally been to use to full 120 days allocated to the task.

    NHTSA's experience in processing requests for confidential treatment for make, model name, line and model year information contained in parts marking exemption petitions strongly suggests that some or all of this information is often in the public domain when NHTSA acts on the exemption petition. We also note that in some instances the make, model name, line and model year information has been found to be publicly available when the petition for exemption and accompanying request for confidential treatment were submitted. In at least one instance, the “confidential” information at issue was “leaked” to members of the automotive press several months before the request for confidential treatment was made.

    For the foregoing reasons, we are proposing that make, model name, line and model year information submitted in petitions for exemption under 49 CFR part 543 shall be presumed to be confidential up to the date that NHTSA acts on the exemption petition or until this information enters the public domain, whichever comes first. We request comments on this proposal.

    IV. Public Participation How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket number of this document in your comments. Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long.3 We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.

    3See 49 CFR 553.21.

    Please submit your comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the electronic docket site by clicking on “Help” or “FAQ.”

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

    Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: (202) 493-2251.

    If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search and copy certain portions of your submissions.4

    4 Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.

    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_reproducible. DOT's guidelines may be accessed at https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/subject_areas/statistical_policy_and_research/data_quality_guidelines/html/guidelines.html.

    How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you submit your comments by mail and wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by mail.

    How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim to be confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. When you send a comment containing information claimed to be confidential business information, you should include a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential business information regulation.5

    5See 49 CFR part 512.

    In addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to the Docket by one of the methods set forth above.

    Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider comments received after that date. Therefore, if interested persons believe that any new information the agency places in the docket affects their comments, they may submit comments after the closing date concerning how the agency should consider that information for the final rule. If a comment is received too late for us to consider in developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

    How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the materials placed in the docket for this document (e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management Facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    V. Privacy Act Statement

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 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 DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

    VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866 or Executive Order 13563.

    This action would amend part 512 to modify agency procedures for receiving and processing requests for confidential treatment. There are no new significant burdens on information submitters or related costs that would require the development of a full cost/benefit evaluation. Therefore, this rulemaking has been determined to be not “significant” under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures and the policies of the Office of Management and Budget.

    Executive Order 13609: Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation

    The policy statement in section 1 of Executive Order 13609 provides, in part:

    The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

    NHTSA requests public comment on whether (a) “regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments” concerning the subject matter of this rulemaking and (b) the above policy statement has any implications for this rulemaking. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) I certify that this rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting obligations on small entities. This proposed rule addresses the Agency's receipt and treatment of requests for confidential treatment and would modify procedures for all submitters, including small entities, with regard to confidentiality determinations. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this proposed action.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposed rule for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

    Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that this action would not have “federalism implications” because it would not have “substantial direct effects on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,” as specified in section 1 of the Executive Order. This proposed rule generally would apply to private motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment manufacturers, entities that sell motor vehicles and equipment and motor vehicle repair businesses. Thus, Executive Order 13132 is not implicated and consultation with State and local officials is not required.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This proposal would not result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually.

    Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation, section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform” (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General.

    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows: This proposed rule would addresses the Agency's receipt and treatment of requests for confidential treatment and would modify procedures for all submitters with regard to confidentiality determinations. The rule would not have retroactive effect.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et. seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. This proposal would make changes to the materials that persons requesting confidential treatment of documents submit to NHTSA to justify confidential treatment.

    In compliance with the PRA, we announce that NHTSA is seeking comment on a revision of a currently approved collection.

    Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

    Title: 49 CFR part 512, Confidential Business Information.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    OMB Control Number: 2127-0025.

    Form Number: The collection of this information uses no standard form.

    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from the date of approval.

    Summary of the Collection of Information:

    Persons who submit information to the agency and seek to have the agency withhold some or all of that information from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. 552, must provide the agency with sufficient support that justifies the confidential treatment of that information. In addition, a request for confidential treatment must be accompanied by: (1) A complete copy of the submission; (2) a copy of the submission containing only those portions for which confidentiality is not sought with the confidential portions redacted; and (3) either a second complete copy of the submission or alternatively those portions of the submission that contain the information for which confidentiality is sought. Furthermore, the requestor must submit a completed certification as provided in 49 CFR part 512, Appendix A. See generally 49 CFR part 512 (NHTSA Confidential Business Information regulations). Requestors who submit their requests for confidential treatment electronically must only provide one copy of the complete submission and one copy of the submission containing only those portions for which confidentiality is not sought with the confidential portions redacted along with their supporting justification for their request for confidential treatment and a completed certification.

    The proposed rule would amend Part 512 to require the identification of the NHTSA official requesting the information claimed as confidential, the date of the request, the subject matter of the request and the form in which the request was made. The proposal would also amend section 512.8 to more explicitly require that requesters specify the factual basis for any claim that materials claimed as confidential are voluntarily submitted and, where applicable, to specify which materials are voluntarily submitted and which are not.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Use of the Information:

    NHTSA receives confidential information for use in its activities, which include investigations, rulemaking actions, program planning and management, and program evaluation. The information is needed to ensure the agency has sufficient relevant information for decision-making in connection with these activities. Some of this information is submitted voluntarily, as in rulemaking, and some is submitted in response to compulsory information requests, as in investigations.

    Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number, and Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information):

    There are thousands of potential submitters of claims for confidential treatment of information, including vehicle manufacturers, equipment manufacturers, and registered importers. The vast majority of these requests, however, have come, and will continue to come, from large manufacturers. Based on our recent experience with submissions, we estimate that we will receive approximately 500 requests for confidential treatment of information annually. A vast majority of these requests come from a small number entities. Therefore some entities subject to NHTSA's jurisdiction will file multiple requests while a majority will file none at all.

    Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Resulting from the Collection of Information

    To the extent that there is an “average” submission, preparation of a request for confidential treatment, including the review and marking of documents and writing a request letter, consumes 2-4 hours. In the case of submissions by large manufacturers, which often consist of hundreds of pages of information, on average, it would probably take about eight and half hours to prepare the submission. Some submissions, usually those related to major agency investigations, may require hundreds of hours of time for document review, marking, organization and preparation of request letters. On the other hand, the typical small business that submits a single blueprint should only need about five (5) minutes to fully comply with the regulation. We believe that 10 hours per request in reasonable estimate of the time it takes to submit response given that differences in amount of time it takes to prepare individual each request. We believe that the modifications to this collection will increase the burden of submitting a request for confidential treatment by 15 minutes or less. The total number of burden hours is estimated at 5000 hours (10 hours × 500 requests/year) for 49 CFR part 512. Comments are invited on:

    • Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility.

    • Whether the Department's estimate for the burden of the information collection is accurate.

    • Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attn: NHTSA Desk Officer. PRA comments are due within 30 days following publication of this document in the Federal Register.

    The agency recognizes that the collection of information contained in today's proposed rule may be subject to revision in response to public comments.

    Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. This proposed action does not meet either of these criteria.

    Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

    Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration of the following questions:

    • Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?

    • Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?

    • Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that isn't clear?

    • Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?

    • Would more (but shorter) sections be better?

    • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?

    • What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?

    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them in your comments on this proposal.

    List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 512

    Administrative procedure and practice, Confidential business information, Freedom of information, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and record keeping requirements.

    Proposed Regulatory Text

    For reasons discussed in the preamble, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR part 512 as follows:

    1. The authority for Part 512—Confidential Business Information continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 322; 5 U.S.C. 552; 49 U.S.C. 30166, 49 U.S.C. 30167; 49 U.S.C. 32307; 49 U.S.C. 32505; 49 U.S.C. 32708; 49 U.S.C. 32910; 49 U.S.C. 33116; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

    2. Amend Section 512.4 by adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 512.4 When requesting confidentially, what should I submit?

    (e) Any person submitting information pursuant to 49 CFR part 537 requesting that the information be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b) shall comply with this Section as well as with § 537.5.

    3. Amend Section 512.5 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 512.5 How many copies should I submit?

    (a) Except as provided for in either paragrpah (c) or (d), a person must send the following in hard copy or electronic format to the Chief Counsel when making a claim for confidential treatment covering submitted material:

    (d) A claim for confidential treatment submitted electronically in accordance with this part must include:

    (1) A complete copy of the submission, and

    (2) A copy of the submission containing only the portions for which no claim of confidential treatment is made and from which those portions for which confidential treatment is claimed have been redacted.

    (3) A copy of any special software required to review materials for which confidential treatment is requested and user instructions must also be provided.

    4. Amend Section 512.6 by revising paragraph (c)(1) and adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 512.6 How should I prepare documents when submitting a claim for confidentiality?

    (c) Submissions in electronic format accompanying a request for confidential treatment in hard copy or paper—(1) Persons submitting a claim for confidential treatment in hardcopy or on paper as specified in § 512.7(a) of this part may submit all or part of the information claimed as confidential in an electronic format. Except for early warning reporting data submitted to the agency under 49 CFR part 579, information submitted in an electronic format shall be submitted in a physical storage medium such as an optical disk, portable hard drive or similar device and shall be submitted with the hardcopy or paper request for confidential treatment. The exterior of the medium (e.g., the disk or portable hard drive itself) shall be permanently labeled with the submitter's name, the subject of the information and the words “CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION”.

    (d) Submissions in electronic format accompanying a request for confidential treatment submitted electronically—(1) Persons submitting a claim for confidential treatment electronically as specified in § 512.7(b) of this part shall mark the materials claimed to be confidential in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraphs d(2) and (3) of this section.

    (2) Confidential portions of electronic files submitted in other than their original format must be marked “Confidential Business Information” or “Entire Page Confidential Business Information” at the top of each page. If only a portion of a page is claimed to be confidential, that portion shall be designated by brackets. Files submitted in their original format that cannot be marked as described above must, to the extent practicable, identify confidential information by alternative markings using existing attributes within the file or means that are accessible through use of the file's associated program. When alternative markings are used, such as font changes or symbols, the submitter must use one method consistently for electronic files of the same type within the same submission. The method used for such markings must be described in the request for confidentiality. Files and materials that cannot be marked internally, such as video clips or executable files or files provided in a format specifically requested by the agency, shall be renamed prior to submission so the words “Confidential Bus Info” appears in the file name or, if that is not practicable, the characters “Conf Bus Info” or “Conf” appear. In all cases, a submitter shall provide an electronic copy of its request for confidential treatment.

    (3) Confidential portions of electronic files submitted in other than their original format must be marked with consecutive page numbers or sequential identifiers so that any page can be identified and located using the file name and page number. Confidential portions of electronic files submitted in their original format must, if practicable, be marked with consecutive page numbers or sequential identifiers so that any page can be identified and located using the file name and page number. Confidential portions of electronic files submitted in their original format that cannot be marked as described above must, to the extent practicable, identify the portions of the file that are claimed to be confidential through the use of existing indices or placeholders embedded within the file. If such indices or placeholders exist, the submitter's request for confidential treatment shall clearly identify them and the means for locating them within the file. If files submitted in their original format cannot be marked with page or sequence number designations and do not contain existing indices or placeholders for locating confidential information, then the portions of the files that are claimed to be confidential shall be described by other means in the request for confidential treatment. In all cases, submitters shall provide an electronic copy of their request for confidential treatment.

    (4) Electronic media may be submitted only in commonly available and used formats.

    5. Revise Section 512.7 to read as follows:
    § 512.7 Where should I send the information for which I am requesting confidentiality?

    (a) Claims for confidential treatment submitted in hardcopy or on paper must be submitted in accordance with the provisions of this regulation to the Chief Counsel of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building W41-326, Washington, DC 20590.

    (b) Claims for confidential treatment submitted electronically must be submitted in accordance with the provisions of this regulation by the designated method or to the designated NHTSA system permitting electronic submission.

    6. Revise Section 512.8 to read as follows:
    § 512.8 What supporting information should I submit with my request?

    When requesting confidential treatment, the submitter shall:

    (a) Explain why the information for which confidential treatment is being requested has been submitted to NHTSA, and specifically identify:

    (1) Any request by the government for the information submitted, including the subject matter of the request, the form in which the request was made, the date of the request, and the name of any government official requesting the information, and

    (2) Any statute, regulation, order, subpoena, information request or other compulsory process that requires the submission;

    (b) Describe the information for which confidential treatment is being requested;

    (c) Identify the confidentiality standard(s) under which the request for confidential treatment should be evaluated in accordance with § 512.15, and indicate whether the materials for which confidential treatment is sought were, either in whole or in part, voluntarily submitted or were required to be submitted by statute or regulation or other requirement. The request must also specify with sufficiency what information was submitted voluntarily and what information was required to be submitted;

    (d) Justify the basis for the claim of confidentiality under the confidentiality standard(s) identified pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section by describing:

    (1) Why the information qualifies as a trade secret, if the basis for confidentiality is that the information is a trade secret;

    (2) What the harmful effects of disclosure would be and why the effects should be viewed as substantial, if the claim for confidentiality is based upon substantial competitive harm;

    (3) What significant NHTSA interests will be impaired by disclosure of the information and why disclosure is likely to impair such interests, if the claim for confidentiality is based upon impairment to government interests;

    (4) What measures have been taken by the submitter to ensure that the information is not customarily disclosed or otherwise made available to the public, if the basis for confidentiality is that the information is voluntarily submitted;

    (5) The factual basis supporting any and all claims that any of the materials for which confidential treatment is sought were voluntarily submitted or were required to be submitted by any statute or regulation; and

    (6) If the information is otherwise entitled to protection, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b).

    (e) Indicate if any items of information fall within any of the class determinations included in Appendix B to this part;

    (f) Indicate the time period during which confidential treatment is sought; and

    (g) State the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the person to whom NHTSA's response to any inquiries should be directed.

    7. Section 512.13 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 512.13 What are the consequences for noncompliance with this part?

    (a) If the submitter fails to comply with § 512.4 of this part at the time the information is submitted to NHTSA or does not request an extension of time under § 512.11, the claim for confidentiality may be waived. If the information is placed in a public docket or file, such placement is disclosure to the public within the meaning of this part and may preclude any claim for confidential treatment. The Chief Counsel may notify a submitter of information or, if applicable, a third party from whom the information was obtained, of inadequacies regarding a claim for confidential treatment and deny the request as described in § 512.18(b) or may allow the submitter additional time to supplement the claim, but has no obligation to provide either notice or additional time.

    8. Section 512.17 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 512.17 How long should it take to determine whether information is entitled to confidential treatment?

    (b) When information claimed to be confidential is not requested under the Freedom of Information Act, but a determination is necessary because it is required by a statute, regulation or other requirement, the Chief Counsel will make a determination on the claim within in a reasonable period of time, at the discretion of the Chief Counsel.

    (c) When information claimed to be confidential is not requested under the Freedom of Information Act, and a determination is not otherwise required by a statute, regulation or by other requirement, the Chief Counsel may make a determination on the claim when:

    (1) The Chief Counsel, at his or her discretion, decides that making a determination of confidential treatment may assist in ensuring that persons submitting requests for confidential treatment comply with this part and applicable law;

    (2) The Chief Counsel, at his or her discretion, decides that making a determination is otherwise necessary; or

    (3) The Chief Counsel, at his or her discretion, decides that making such a determination is in the public interest.

    9. Appendix F to part 512 is redesignated at Appendix G to part 512. 10. A new Appendix F is added to read as follows: Appendix F to Part 512—Exemptions From Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard

    The Chief Counsel has determined that the name of a line, make, model and the model year of a vehicle that is the subject of a petition filed under 49 CFR part 543, if released, is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the manufacturer submitting the information: The foregoing determination will remain effective until the information specified above enters the public domain or the agency issues a determination in response to the petition, whichever comes first.

    Dated: December 18, 2015. Paul A. Hemmersbaugh, Chief Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32585 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    81 1 Monday, January 4, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food and Nutrition Service Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request—Regional Office Administered Program (ROAP) Child Nutrition Payment Center (for the National School Lunch, School Breakfast, and Special Milk Programs) AGENCY:

    Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on this existing information collection. This collection is a renewal of a currently approved collection for reporting annual application and monthly claim data via the Child Nutrition Payment Center for the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and the Special Milk Program for schools and institutions administered by a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) Regional Office Administered Program.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before March 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    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 will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were 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 those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments may be sent to Steve Hortin, Branch Chief, Operational Support, Child Nutrition Programs, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 640, Alexandria, VA 22302-1594. Comments will also be accepted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will be a matter of public record.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of this information collection should be directed to Steve Hortin at the address indicated above or by phone at 703-305-4375.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 7 CFR part 210 National School Lunch Program, Part 220 School Breakfast Program, and Part 215 Special Milk Program.

    Form Number: (formerly FNS-806A and FNS-806B).

    OMB Number: 0584-0284.

    Expiration Date: 04/30/2016.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Abstract: The National School Lunch Program (NSLP), School Breakfast Program (SBP), and Special Milk Program (SMP) are administered by State agencies; however, in the States of Virginia and Colorado, there are some schools and institutions where these Programs are instead administered directly by the associated USDA FNS Regional Office (as part of a Regional Office Administered Program, or ROAP). The State of Virginia, however, will no longer be using a FNS ROAP as of July 1, 2016. As part of a ROAP, these SFAs and institutions complete a Federal Claim for Reimbursement to receive reimbursement for meals and milk served to children. The forms previously used were forms FNS-806A and FNS-806B, respectively. These SFAs and institutions also complete a Federal application to participate in these Programs. The forms previously used were forms FNS-66, FNS-66A, FNS-66B and were previously part of other information collections (OMB control #0584-0006—7 CFR part 210 National School Lunch Program, expiration date February 29, 2016 and OMB control #0584-0005—7 CFR part 210 Special Milk Program for Children, expiration date November 30, 2018). The information previously collected on these five forms is now entered directly into one computerized web application and payment system (submitted electronically via the Internet) referred to as the Child Nutrition Payments Center (currently administered by the FNS Mid-Atlantic Regional Office).

    The Child Nutrition (CN) Payment Center is the secure online portal operated by FNS for use by a limited number of institutions and school food authorities (SFAs) within Virginia, Colorado, and U.S. Department of Defense school installations. Through this portal, these SFAs and institutions can submit Program applications and claims for meal reimbursement.

    With the renewal of this information collection, the five forms are officially being removed and replaced by the electronic system that currently exists. The reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the application information are being incorporated into this information collection since it is part of the same ROAP system. This system fulfills the requirements set forth in NSLP, SBP and SMP regulations issued by the Secretary of Agriculture (7 CFR 210.8 and 220.11; and 215.10) to collect the meal and milk data for the schools and institutions that are directly administered by the ROAP. This information collection is required to administer and operate these programs in accordance with the NSLA. All of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements are currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget and are in force. This is a revision of the currently approved information collection.

    Affected Public: SFAs and institutions participating in the NSLP, SBP, and SMP administered by a FNS ROAP (as of July 1, 2016 when Virginia will no longer be using a FNS ROAP).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 60.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 11.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 660.

    Reporting Time per Response: 0.5 hours.

    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden: 330 hours

    Refer to the table below for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent.

    Affected public Number of
  • respondents
  • Number
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Estimated
  • average
  • hours per
  • response
  • Estimated
  • total burden
  • (hours)
  • ROAP School Food Authorities & Institutions 60 11 660 0.5 330 Total Annual Burden 60 11 660 0.5 330
    Dated: December 17, 2015. Audrey Rowe, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33027 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Klamath National Forest, California; Craggy Vegetation Management Project AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The Klamath National Forest is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) to improve fire resiliency on National Forest System lands by reducing fuels and stand density. The project area includes about 6,270 acres of private land and 29,500 acres of National Forest System lands. Project treatments will be limited to National Forest System lands. The project is about 10 miles north of Fort Jones and one mile west of Yreka, in Siskiyou County, California.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by February 3, 2016. The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be completed by April 2016, and the final environmental impact statement is expected to be completed by July 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Agency Web site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=31770. Select the “Comment on Project” link in the “Get Connected” group at the right hand side of the project Web page. Attachments may be in the following formats: Plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), Word (.doc, .docx), or portable document format (.pdf).

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: 530-468-1290.

    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Patricia Grantham, ATTN: Andrew Mueller, 11263 N. Highway 3, Fort Jones, CA 96032-9702.

    All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=31770, including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Mueller, Interdisciplinary Team Lead by email at [email protected] or by phone at 530-468-1223. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of the project is to:

    1. Reduce the threat of wildfire to communities in the wildland urban interface while moving toward a diverse fire-resilient ecosystem.

    2. Reduce overstocked, drought-stressed and dying trees to promote forest health.

    3. Enhance early seral foraging and winter range habitat for deer and wild turkeys; and improve long-term habitat for northern spotted owl.

    4. Maintain or improve habitat for Calochortus persistens, a Forest Service sensitive plant.

    5. Limit the discharge of sediment to streams from sediment legacy sites to improve water quality.

    Proposed Action

    The proposed action was designed to meet the purpose and need for the project. A total of 10,700 acres is being proposed for treatment within the 29,500-acre project area. Strategic actions within project boundary will treat about 250 acres of the 1,190-acre defense zone and 3,870 acres within the 12,350-acre threat zone around the community of Yreka, California. Proposed treatments also include about 1,450 acres of fuel breaks along strategic road systems and ridges; 4,160 acres of prescribed burning; 860 acres of mastication to enhance wildlife habitat while reducing hazardous fuels; 1,350 acres of thinning (without the removal of Forest products); and 2,880 acres of thinning (with removal of Forest products).

    Responsible Official

    Forest Supervisor, Klamath National Forest, 1711 South Main Street, Yreka, CA 96097.

    Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The responsible official will decide whether to adopt and implement the proposed action, an alternative to the proposed action, or take no action.

    Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. During the comment period, an open house will be held in conjunction with the Yreka Area Fire Safe Council at the Forest Headquarters, 1711 South Main Street in Yreka on Wednesday, January 13, 2016, from 5 to 7 p.m. This is an opportunity to share location-specific information about the project with the public.

    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. We are particularly interested in hearing about any potential issues, which are defined as points of discussion, dispute, or debate about the effects of the proposed action. Your participation will help the interdisciplinary team develop effective, issue-driven alternatives and mitigations to the proposed action as needed.

    This project is subject to comment pursuant to 36 CFR 218, subpart B. Only those who submit timely project-specific written comments during a public comment period are eligible to file an objection. Individuals or representatives of an entity submitting comments must sign the comments or verify identity upon request. Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public inspection (40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 21). However, comments submitted anonomously will be accepted and considered.

    Dated: December 15, 2015. Patricia A. Grantham, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32522 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-84-2015] Foreign-Trade Zone 78—Nashville, Tennessee; Application for Expansion of Subzone 78A, Nissan North America, Inc., Smyrna, Tennessee

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, grantee of FTZ 78, requesting to expand Subzone 78A—Site 1 at the facility of Nissan North America, Inc., located in Smyrna, Tennessee. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on December 23, 2015.

    Subzone 78A was approved on April 2, 1982 (Board Order 190, 47 FR 16191, April 15, 1982) and expanded on March 18, 1993 (Board Order 632, 58 FR 18850, March 30, 1993). The subzone currently consists of two sites: Site 1 (1,004 acres) located at 983 Nissan Drive, Smyrna; and, Site 2 (958 acres) located at 520 Nissan Powertrain Drive, Decherd. (An application is currently pending with the FTZ Board to expand Site 1 of the subzone to include 22 additional acres adjacent to the site (B-77-2015)).

    The applicant is requesting authority to further expand Site 1 of the subzone to include 77.03 additional acres adjacent to the present site. No authorization for additional production activity has been requested at this time.

    In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to review the application and make recommendations to the Executive Secretary.

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is February 16, 2016. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to February 29, 2016.

    A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Kathleen Boyce at [email protected] or (202) 482-1346.

    Dated: December 23, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32780 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-535-904] Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From Pakistan: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in Countervailing Duty Investigation AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kaitlin Wojnar, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3857.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On November 17, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated a countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe from Pakistan.1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than January 21, 2016.

    1See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from Pakistan: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 80 FR 73704 (November 25, 2015).

    Postponement of the Preliminary Determination

    Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in a CVD investigation within 65 days of the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(e), if a petitioner makes a timely request for an extension, section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act allows the Department to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), a petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reason for the request. The Department will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.2

    2See 19 CFR 351.205(e).

    On December 18, 2015, the petitioners in this investigation, Bull Moose Tube Company, EXLTUBE, Wheatland Tube, and Western Tube & Conduit (collectively, Petitioners) submitted a timely request, pursuant to section 703(c)(l)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e), to postpone the preliminary determination.3

    3See Letter from Petitioners, “Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from Pakistan: Request to Extend the Preliminary Determination,” December 18, 2015.

    The record does not present any compelling reasons to deny Petitioners' request. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(l)(A) of the Act, the Department is hereby postponing the due date for the preliminary determination in this investigation to no later than 130 days after the day on which the investigation was initiated. As a result, the deadline for completion of the preliminary determination is now March 28, 2015.

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(l).

    Dated: December 24, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33057 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-863] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that certain corrosion-resistant steel products (“corrosion-resistant steel”) from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The period of investigation (“POI”) is April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alexis Polovina or Ryan Mullen, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3927 or (202) 482-5260, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on June 30, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 37228 (June 30, 2015) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is corrosion-resistant steel from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., “scope”).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this preliminary determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify that corrosion-resistant steel which is further processed in a third country is covered by the scope of the investigation. See “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I, which includes the additional clarifying language.

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    4See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 37229.

    5See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated concurrently with this preliminary determination.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Constructed export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(b) of the Act. Normal value (“NV”) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.6 Therefore, we preliminary calculated the all-others rate based on a weighted-average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents using each company's publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration.7

    6 With two respondents, we would normally calculate (A) a weighted-average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; (B) a simple average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents using each company's publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration. We would compare (B) and (C) to (A) and select the rate closest to (A) as the most appropriate rate for all other companies. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010).

    7See Memorandum to the File, From Ryan Mullen, International Trade Compliance Analyst, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India: Calculation of All-Others' Rate in Preliminary Determination,” dated concurrently with this preliminary determination.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/producer Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • JSW: 8, JSW Steel Ltd., JSW Coated Products Limited 6.64 Uttam Galva: 9, Uttam Galva Steels Limited, Uttam Value Steels Limited, Atlantis International Services Company Ltd., Uttam Galva Steels, Netherlands, B.V., and Uttam Galva Steels (BVI) Limited 6.92 All-Others 6.76
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of corrosion-resistant steel from India as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.10

    8 We preliminarily find JSWSL and its wholly-owned affiliated JSW Steel Coated Products Limited (“JSCPL”), (collectively “JSW”) are affiliated and have met the criteria to be collapsed. See Memorandum to the File, Through Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Enforcement and Compliance, Office V, From Alexis Polovina, Senior International Trade Analyst, Enforcement and Compliance, Office V, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel Products from India: JSW Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,” dated concurrently with this preliminary determination. Therefore, we will assign one rate to these companies.

    9 We preliminarily find Uttam Galva Steels, Ltd. (“UGSL”) to be affiliated with these companies and that they have met the criteria to be treated as a single entity. For further discussion of this issue, which includes business proprietary information, see Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, Office V, from Ryan Mullen, International Trade Analyst, Office V, through Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Office V “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel Products from India: JSW Preliminary Affiliation and Single Entity Memorandum” dated concurrently with this preliminary determination. Therefore, we will assign one rate to these companies.

    10 On October 29, 2015, we preliminarily found that critical circumstances do not exist for imports exported by JSW, Uttam Galva, and “all others.” Because we reached a preliminary negative critical circumstances determination in this LTFV investigation, the suspension of liquidation will not be retroactive from effective from the date of publication of this notice. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR 68504 (November 5, 2015).

    Pursuant to section 733 (d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price as indicated in the chart above,11 adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies,12 as follows: (1) The rate for JSW, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 3.91 percent; (2) the rate for Uttam Galva, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 2.96 percent; (3) the rate for all others producers or exporters, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 3.11 percent. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    11See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    12See section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act. Unlike in administrative reviews, the Department calculates the adjustment for export subsidies in investigations not in the margin calculation program, but in the cash deposit instructions issued to CBP. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, 71 FR 45012 (August 8, 2006), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.13 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    13See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.14 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. 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 time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    14See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by Petitioners. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On December 2, 2015, and December 3, 2015, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(b) and (e), JSW and Uttam Galva requested that, contingent upon an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV for the respondents, the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.15

    15See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from JSW “Request for Postponement of Final Determination” (December 2, 2015); see also Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Uttam Galva “Request for Postponement of Final Determination” (December 3, 2015).

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.16

    16See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (“ITC”) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by the scope are certain flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metal coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness 4.75 mm or more than a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling” (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above:

    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for above, and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific period (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope in this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    • 2.50 percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.

    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to interstitial-free (“IF”)) steels and high strength low alloy (“HSLA”) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.

    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (“AHSS”) and Ultra High Strength Steels (“UHSS”), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.

    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to annealing, tempering painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope corrosion resistant steel.

    All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin free steel”), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;

    • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measure at least twice the thickness; and

    • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant steel flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.

    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Preliminary Determination of No Critical Circumstances V. Scope of the Investigation VI. All-Others Rate VII. Affiliation and Collapsing VIII. Discussion of Methodology A. Determination of the Comparison Method B. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis IX. Date of Sale X. Product Comparisons XI. Export Price and Constructed Export Price XII. Normal Value A. Comparison Market Viability B. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test C. Level of Trade D. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test E. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison-Market Prices XIII. Currency Conversion XIV. Adjustments to Cash Deposit Rates for Export Subsidies in Companion Countervailing Duty Investigation XV. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-32758 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review AGENCY:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4735.

    Background

    Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), may request, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213, that the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation.

    All deadlines for the submission of comments or actions by the Department discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting date.

    Respondent Selection

    In the event the Department limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) data for U.S. imports during the period of review. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (“APO”) to all parties having an APO within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 21 days of publication of the initiation Federal Register notice. Therefore, we encourage all parties interested in commenting on respondent selection to submit their APO applications on the date of publication of the initiation notice, or as soon thereafter as possible. The Department invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within five days of placement of the CBP data on the record of the review.

    In the event the Department decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:

    In general, the Department finds that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (i.e., treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, the Department will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of this review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding (i.e., investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to this review, if the Department determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, the Department will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, the Department will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete the Quantity and Value Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding where the Department considered collapsing that entity, complete quantity and value data for that collapsed entity must be submitted.

    Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that requests a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that the Department may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. In order to provide parties additional certainty with respect to when the Department will exercise its discretion to extend this 90-day deadline, interested parties are advised that, with regard to reviews requested on the basis of anniversary months on or after January 2016, the Department does not intend to extend the 90-day deadline unless the requestor demonstrates that an extraordinary circumstance prevented it from submitting a timely withdrawal request. Determinations by the Department to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    The Department is providing this notice on its Web site, as well as in its “Opportunity to Request Administrative Review” notices, so that interested parties will be aware of the manner in which the Department intends to exercise its discretion in the future.

    Opportunity To Request A Review: Not later than the last day of January 2016,1 interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in January for the following periods:

    1 Or the next business day, if the deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday or any other day when the Department is closed.

    Period of review Antidumping duty proceedings BRAZIL: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand A-351-837 1/1/15-12/31/15 INDIA: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand A-533-828 1/1/15-12/31/15 MEXICO: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand A-201-831 1/1/15-12/31/15 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand A-580-852 1/1/15-12/31/15 SOUTH AFRICA: Ferrovanadium A-791-815 1/1/15-12/31/15 THAILAND: Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand A-549-820 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Calcium Hypochlorite A-570-008 7/25/14-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-570-012 9/8/14-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Crepe Paper Products A-570-895 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Ferrovanadium A-570-873 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Folding Gift Boxes A-570-866 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Potassium Permanganate A-570-001 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Wooden Bedroom Furniture A-570-890 1/1/15-12/32/15 Countervailing duty proceedings THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Calcium Hypochlorite C-570-009 5/27/14-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod C-570-013 7/8/14-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods C-570-944 1/1/15-12/31/15 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe C-570-936 1/1/15-12/31/15 Suspension agreements RUSSIA: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate A-821-808 1/1/15-12/31/15

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review. In addition, a domestic interested party or an interested party described in section 771(9)(B) of the Act must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which was produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover.

    Note that, for any party the Department was unable to locate in prior segments, the Department will not accept a request for an administrative review of that party absent new information as to the party's location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or exporter at the same time it files its request for review, in order for the Secretary to determine if the interested party's attempts were reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii).

    As explained in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), and Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) the Department clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders.2

    2See also the Enforcement and Compliance Web site at http://trade.gov/enforcement/.

    Further, as explained in 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 (November 4, 2013), the Department clarified its practice with regard to the conditional review of the non-market economy (NME) entity in administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders. The Department will no longer consider the NME entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. Accordingly, the NME entity will not be under review unless the Department specifically receives a request for, or self-initiates, a review of the NME entity.3 In administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders on merchandise from NME countries where a review of the NME entity has not been initiated, but where an individual exporter for which a review was initiated does not qualify for a separate rate, the Department will issue a final decision indicating that the company in question is part of the NME entity. However, in that situation, because no review of the NME entity was conducted, the NME entity's entries were not subject to the review and the rate for the NME entity is not subject to change as a result of that review (although the rate for the individual exporter may change as a function of the finding that the exporter is part of the NME entity).

    3 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), parties should specify that they are requesting a review of entries from exporters comprising the entity, and to the extent possible, include the names of such exporters in their request.

    Following initiation of an antidumping administrative review when there is no review requested of the NME entity, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries for all exporters not named in the initiation notice, including those that were suspended at the NME entity rate.

    All requests must be filed electronically in Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”) on Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS Web site at http://access.trade.gov. 4 Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(l)(i), a copy of each request must be served on the petitioner and each exporter or producer specified in the request.

    4See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of “Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation” for requests received by the last day of January 2016. If the Department does not receive, by the last day of January 2016, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of (or bond for) estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered.

    For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review.

    This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.

    Dated: December 22, 2015. Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33055 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-475-832] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that certain corrosion-resistant steel products (“corrosion-resistant steel”) from Italy are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair-value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”). The period of investigation (“POI”) is April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julia Hancock or Susan Pulongbarit, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1394 or (202) 482-4031, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on June 30, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 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 https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value investigations, 80 FR 37228 (June 30, 2015) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”), dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is corrosion-resistant steel from Italy. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., “scope”).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this preliminary determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify that corrosion-resistant steel which is further processed in a third country is covered by the scope of the investigation. See “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I, which includes the additional clarifying language.

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296 (May 19, 1997).

    4See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 37229.

    5See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated December 21, 2015.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Constructed export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(b) of the Act. Normal value (“NV”) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated excluding any zero or de minimis and margins based entirely under section 776 of the Act. Pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, if the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for all exporters and producers individually examined are zero, de minimis or determined based entirely under section 776 of the Act, the Department may use any reasonable method to establish the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for all other producers or exporters.

    Accordingly, because Arvedi is the only respondent in this investigation for which the Department preliminarily calculated a company-specific rate which is not zero, de minimis or based entirely on facts available, pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we are using the weighted-average dumping margin calculated for Arvedi as the estimated weighted-average dumping margin assigned to all other producers and exporters of the merchandise under consideration.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/producer Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A 3.11 Marcegaglia S.p.A 0.00 All-Others 3.11
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of corrosion-resistant steel from Italy, as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register except for those produced and exported by Marcegaglia. Because the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for Marcegaglia is zero, we are not directing CBP to suspend liquidation of entries of the merchandise it produced and exported.

    Pursuant to section 733 (d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price as indicated in the chart above,6 adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies.7 The Department has preliminarily determined in its companion countervailing duty investigation of corrosion-resistant steel from Italy that subject merchandise exported by Arvedi and Marcegaglia did not benefit from export subsidies.8 As a result, the Department will make no adjustment to Arvedi's or Marcegaglia's cash deposit rates. The rate for all others producers or exporters when adjusted for export subsidies is 2.96 percent. The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    6See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    7See section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act. Unlike in administrative reviews, the Department calculates the adjustment for export subsidies in investigations not in the margin calculation program, but in the cash deposit instructions issued to CBP. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, 71 FR 45012 (August 8, 2006), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.

    8See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Determination, 80 FR 68839 (November 6, 2015).

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of the publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.9 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    9See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.10 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. 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 time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    10See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by Petitioners. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination must be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On November 13, 2015, pursuant to sections 735(a)(2)(A) and 705(b) of the Act, Arvedi and Marcegaglia requested that, contingent upon an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV, the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.11

    11See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Arvedi and Marcegaglia “Request for Postponement of Final Determination” (November 13, 2015).

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.12

    12See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (“ITC”) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by the scope are certain flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metal coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness 4.75 mm or more than a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling” (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above:

    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for above, and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific period (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope in this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    • 2.50 Percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.

    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to interstitial-free (“IF”)) steels and high strength low alloy (“HSLA”) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.

    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (“AHSS”) and Ultra High Strength Steels (“UHSS”), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.

    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to annealing, tempering painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope corrosion resistant steel.

    All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin free steel”), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;

    • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measure at least twice the thickness; and

    • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant steel flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.

    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Preliminary Determination of No Critical Circumstances V. Scope of Investigation VI. All-Others Rate VII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Determination of the Comparison Method B. Results of Differential Pricing Analysis VIII. Date of Sale IX. Product Comparisons X. Export Price and Constructed Export Price XI. Normal Value A. Comparison Market Viability B. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test C. Level of Trade D. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test E. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices XII. Currency Conversion XIII. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-32759 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-856] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Negative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that certain corrosion-resistant steel products (“corrosion-resistant steel”) from Taiwan are not being, or are not likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The period of investigation (“POI”) is April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Medley, Paul Stolz, or Shanah Lee, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4987, (202) 482-4474, or (202) 482-6386, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on June 30, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 37228 (June 30, 2015) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is corrosion-resistant steel from Taiwan. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., “scope”).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this preliminary determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify that corrosion-resistant steel which is further processed in a third country is covered by the scope of the investigation. See “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I, which includes the additional clarifying language.

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    4See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 37229.

    5See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated December 21, 2015.

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determination

    On October 14, 2015, the Department published the notice of postponement for the preliminary determination in this investigation in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).6 As a result of the 41-day postponement, the revised deadline for the preliminary determination of this investigation is now December 21, 2015.7

    6See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 61793 (October 14, 2015).

    7Id., 80 FR at 61794.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Normal value (“NV”) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Preliminary Determination

    For this preliminary determination, we have calculated a zero dumping margin for each individually investigated producer/exporter of the subject merchandise. Consistent with section 733(b)(3) of the Act, we are disregarding these rates and preliminarily determine that the individually reviewed mandatory respondents have not made sales of subject merchandise at LTFV.

    Exporter/manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd 0.00 Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. and Synn Industrial Co., Ltd 8 0.00

    Consistent with section 733(d)(1)(A) of the Act, the Department has not calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for all other producers or exporters because it has not made an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV.

    8 We have preliminarily determined to collapse Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. with its affiliate Synn Industrial Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Yieh Phui”). See Memorandum to Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, “Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum for Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd.,” dated concurrently with this notice.

    Suspension of Liquidation

    Because the Department has not made an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at less than fair value, we are not directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of any entries of corrosion-resistant steel from Taiwan.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.9 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    9See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.10 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. 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 time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    Verification

    10See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    International Trade Commission (“ITC”) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our negative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by the scope are certain flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metal coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness 4.75 mm or more than a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling” (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above:

    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for above, and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific period (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope in this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    • 2.50 Percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.

    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to interstitial-free (“IF”)) steels and high strength low alloy (“HSLA”) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.

    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (“AHSS”) and Ultra High Strength Steels (“UHSS”), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.

    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to annealing, tempering painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope corrosion resistant steel.

    All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin free steel”), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;

    • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measure at least twice the thickness; and

    • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant steel flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.

    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum: I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances V. Affiliation and Collapsing VI. Scope of the Investigation VII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Determination of the Comparison Method B. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis VIII. Date of Sale IX. Product Comparisons X. Export Price and Constructed Export Price XI. Normal Value A. Comparison Market Viability B. Affiliated-Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test C. Level of Trade D. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test E. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison-Market Prices XII. Currency Conversion XIII. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-32761 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews AGENCY:

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

    Background

    Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury.

    Upcoming Sunset Reviews for February 2016

    The following Sunset Reviews are scheduled for initiation in February 2016 and will appear in that month's Notice of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Review (“Sunset Review”).

    Antidumping duty proceedings Department contact Magnesium Metal from China, (A-570-896) (2nd Review) David Goldberger (202) 482-4136. Porcelain-On-Steel Cooking Ware (A-570-506) (4th Review) Matthew Renkey (202) 482-2312. Countervailing duty proceedings No Sunset Review of countervailing duty orders is scheduled for initiation in February 2016. Suspended investigations No Sunset Review of suspended investigations is scheduled for initiation in February 2016.

    The Department's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Reviews provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Reviews.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.

    Please note that if the Department receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue. Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation.

    This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.

    Dated: December 22, 2015. Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33054 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-026] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that certain corrosion-resistant steel products (corrosion-resistant steel) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nancy Decker or Andrew Huston, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0196 or (202) 482-4261, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on June 30, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy, India, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 37228 (June 30, 2015) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the People's Republic of China” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this preliminary determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify that corrosion-resistant steel which is further processed in a third country is covered by the scope of the investigation. See “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I, which includes the additional clarifying language.

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    4See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 37229.

    5See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated December 21, 2015.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Because the PRC is a non-market economy within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, we calculated normal value (NV) in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Combination Rates

    In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that it would calculate combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.6

    6See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1, regarding, “Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries,” (April 5, 2005) (Policy Bulletin 05.1), available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter Producer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Yieh Phui (China) Technomaterial Co., Ltd Yieh Phui (China) Technomaterial Co., Ltd 255.80 Jiangyin Zongcheng Steel Co. Ltd Jiangyin Zongcheng Steel Co. Ltd 255.80 Union Steel China Union Steel China 255.80 PRC-Wide Entity 255.80

    As detailed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (Baoshan) and Hebei Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (Tangshan Branch) (Tangshan), mandatory respondents in this investigation, did not respond to our questionnaire and, thus, did demonstrate that they were entitled to separate rates. Accordingly, we consider Baoshan and Tangshan to be part of the PRC-Wide Entity. Furthermore, because we did not receive quantity and value questionnaire responses or separate rate applications from numerous companies, the PRC-wide entity also includes these non-responsive companies.7

    7See Memorandum to the File, “Quantity and Value Questionnaire Recipients” (July 16, 2015).

    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Section 733(e)(2) of the Act provides that, given an affirmative determination of critical circumstances, any suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the later of (a) the date which is 90 days before the date on which the suspension of liquidation was first ordered, or (b) the date on which notice of initiation of the investigation was published. On November 5, 2015, we preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist for imports of corrosion-resistant steel from the PRC produced or exported by the PRC-wide entity (which, as noted above, includes Tangshan and Baoshan).8 Accordingly, for the PRC-wide entity, in accordance with section 733(e)(2)(A) of the Act, the suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date which is 90 days before the publication of this notice.

    8See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR 68504, 68507 (November 5, 2015).

    Pursuant to section 733(d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit 9 equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for the exporter/producer combination listed in the table above will be the rate identified for that combination in the table; (2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise under consideration that have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the PRC-wide entity, 255.80 percent; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of the merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    9See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    We normally adjust antidumping duty cash deposit rates by the amount of export subsidies, where appropriate. In the companion CVD investigation, we preliminarily found that Yieh Phui did not receive export subsidies. The rate for all-others companies in the CVD case was based on Yieh Phui's rate, and thus the all-others companies did not receive an export subsidy rate.10 Therefore, no offset to Yieh Phui's or the Separate Rate entities' (these companies were considered “all-others” companies in the companion CVD case) cash deposit rates for export subsidies is necessary. Finally, we are not adjusting the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC-wide entity for export subsidies.11

    10See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination, 80 FR 68843 (November 6, 2015) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    11Id.

    Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act, we normally adjust preliminary cash deposit rates for estimated domestic subsidy pass-through, where appropriate. However, in this case we are not granting a domestic subsidy pass-through adjustment. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of announcement of this preliminary determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties may submit case briefs, rebuttal briefs, and hearing requests.12 For a schedule of the deadlines for filing case briefs, rebuttal briefs, and hearing requests, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum at Section IX.

    12See 19 CFR 351.309(c)-(d), 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by Petitioners. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On December 16, 2015, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(b) and (e), Yieh Phui (China) Technomaterial Co., Ltd. requested that, contingent upon an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV, the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.13

    13See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Yieh Phui “Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from China; Request to Extend Final Determination” (December 16, 2015).

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.14

    14See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by the scope are certain flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metal coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness 4.75 mm or more than a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling” (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above:

    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for above, and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific period (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope in this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    • 2.50 percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.

    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to interstitial-free (IF)) steels and high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.

    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (AHSS) and Ultra High Strength Steels (UHSS), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.

    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to annealing, tempering painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope corrosion resistant steel.

    All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (terne plate), or both chromium and chromium oxides (tin free steel), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;

    • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measure at least twice the thickness; and

    • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant steel flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.

    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances V. Scope of the Investigation VI. Discussion of the Methodology a. Non-Market Economy Country b. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Values Comments c. Separate Rates d. The PRC-Wide Entity e. Application of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences f. Date of Sale g. Comparisons to Fair Value VII. Currency Conversion VIII. Adjustment under Section 777A(F) of the Act IX. Disclosure and Public Comment X. Verification XI. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-32763 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-878] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the Republic of Korea: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that certain corrosion-resistant steel products (“corrosion-resistant steel”) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The period of investigation (“POI”) is April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elfi Blum or Lingjun Wang, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0197 or (202) 482-2316, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on June 30, 2015.1 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the memorandum that is dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.2 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Italy, India, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 37228 (June 30, 2015) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Korea” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”), dated concurrently with this notice.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is corrosion-resistant steel from Korea. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., “scope”).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this preliminary determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify that corrosion-resistant steel which is further processed in a third country is covered by the scope of the investigation. See “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix I, which includes the additional clarifying language.

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    4See Initiation Notice, 80 FR at 37229.

    5See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated December 21, 2015.

    Postponement of Deadline for Preliminary Determination

    On October 14, 2015, the Department published the notice of postponement for the preliminary determination in this investigation in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).6 As a result of the 41-day postponement, the revised deadline for the preliminary determination of this investigation is now December 21, 2015.7

    6See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 80 FR 61793 (October 14, 2015).

    7See id.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. Export prices (“EP”) have been calculated in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act. Constructed export prices (“CEP”) have been calculated in accordance with section 772(b) of the Act. Normal value (“NV”) is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    All-Others Rate

    Consistent with sections 733(d)(1)(A)(ii) and 735(c)(5) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated all-others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. Where the rates for investigated companies are zero or de minimis, or based entirely on facts othervwise available, section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act instructs the Department to establish an “all others” rate using “any reasonable method.”

    In this investigation, we calculated weighted-average dumping margins for Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai) and Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd./Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk/Union), that are above de minimis and which are not based on total facts available. We calculated the all-others rate using a simple average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents.8

    8 With two respondents, we would normally calculate (A) a weighted-average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; (B) a simple average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the dumping margins calculated for the mandatory respondents using each company's publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration. We would compare (B) and (C) to (A) and select the rate closest to (A) as the most appropriate rate for all other companies. See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010). As complete publicly ranged sales data was unavailable, we based the all-others rate on a simple average of the two calculated margins.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/manufacturer Dumping
  • margins
  • (percent)
  • Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd./Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd 2.99 Hyundai Steel Company 3.51 All Others 3.25
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of corrosion-resistant steel from Korea as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register, except for Hyundai ” as described below. Section 733(e)(2) of the Act provides that, given an affirmative determination of critical circumstances, any suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the later of (a) the date which is 90 days before the date on which the suspension of liquidation was first ordered, or (b) the date on which notice of initiation of the investigation was published. On October 29, 2015, we preliminarily found that critical circumstances exist for imports exported by Hyundai and “all others.” For Hyundai and “all others”, in accordance with section 733(e)(2)(A) of the Act, suspension of liquidation of corrosion-resistant steel from Korea, as described in the “Scope of the Investigation” section, shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date which is 90 days before the publication of this notice, the date suspension of liquidation is first ordered. Because we find critical circumstances do not exist for Dongkuk/Union, we will begin suspension of liquidation for such firm on the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Pursuant to section 733 (d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price as indicated in the chart above,9 adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies,10 as follows: (1) The rate for Hyundai and the “all others” producers or exporters, when adjusted for export subsidies, is 3.50 and 3.24 (adjusted by 0.01%) percent, respectively; (2) as Dongkuk/Union did not receive export subsidies in the accompanying CVD investigation, we did not make an adjustment to Dongkuk/Union's weighted-average dumping margin.11 These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    9See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    10See section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act. Unlike in administrative reviews, the Department calculates the adjustment for export subsidies in investigations not in the margin calculation program, but in the cash deposit instructions issued to CBP. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, 71 FR 45012 (August 8, 2006), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.

    11See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Affirmative Determination, 80 FR 68842 (November 6, 2015), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose the calculations performed to interested parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination. Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the final verification report is issued in this proceeding, and rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.12 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    12See 19 CFR 351.309.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.13 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. 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 time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    13See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we intend to verify information relied upon in making our final determination.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by Petitioners. 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On December 16, 2015, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(b) and (e), Dongkuk/Union requested that, contingent upon an affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV for the respondents, the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.14

    14See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Dongkuk/Union “Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea: Request for Postponement of the Final Determination” (December 16, 2015).

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination, pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act.15

    15See also 19 CFR 351.210(e).

    International Trade Commission (“ITC”) Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the ITC of our affirmative preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final determination whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by the scope are certain flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metal coating. The products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness 4.75 mm or more than a width exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling” (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above:

    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for above, and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific period (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope in this investigation are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    • 2.50 Percent of manganese, or • 3.30 percent of silicon, or • 1.50 percent of copper, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.00 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or • 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.

    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to interstitial-free (“IF”)) steels and high strength low alloy (“HSLA”) steels. IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.

    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength Steels (“AHSS”) and Ultra High Strength Steels (“UHSS”), both of which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation steels.

    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to annealing, tempering painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope corrosion resistant steel.

    All products that meet the written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted element levels listed above, are within the scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin free steel”), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;

    • Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measure at least twice the thickness; and

    • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant steel flat-rolled steel products less than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.

    The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.

    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances V. Scope of the Investigation VI. Successor-In-Interest Analysis A. Dongkuk/Union VII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Determination of the Comparison Method B. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis VIII. Date of Sale IX. Product Comparisons X. Export Price and Constructed Export Price XI. Normal Value A. Comparison Market Viability B. Affiliated-Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test C. Level of Trade D. Cost of Production Analysis E. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison Market Prices XII. Currency Conversions XIII. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2015-32762 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Science Advisory Board AGENCY:

    Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of a forthcoming meeting of the NOAA Science Advisory Board. The members will discuss and provide advice on issues outlined in the section on Matters to be considered.

    DATES:

    Time and Date: The meeting is scheduled for January 28, 2016 from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    Conference call. Public access is available at: NOAA, SSMC 3, Room 11836, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD. Members of the public will not be able to dial in to this meeting.

    Status: The meeting will be open to public participation with a 5-minute public comment period from 3:50 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. The SAB expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted verbal or written statements. In general, each individual or group making a verbal presentation will be limited to a total time of one minute. Written comments should be received in the SAB Executive Director's Office by January 21 to provide sufficient time for SAB review. Written comments received by the SAB Executive Director after January 21, will be distributed to the SAB, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting date.

    Special Accommodations: These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for special accommodations may be directed no later than 12 p.m. on January 21, to Dr. Elizabeth Turner, Acting SAB Executive Director, NOAA, Room 146 Gregg Hall, 35 Colovos Road, Durham, NH 03824; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NOAA Science Advisory Board (SAB) was established by a Decision Memorandum dated September 25, 1997, and is the only Federal Advisory Committee with responsibility to advise the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere on strategies for research, education, and application of science to operations and information services. SAB activities and advice provide necessary input to ensure that National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) science programs are of the highest quality and provide optimal support to resource management.

    Matters To Be Considered: The meeting will include the following topics: (1) Report from the Environmental Information Services Working Group on a Review of the NOAA Partnership Policy; (2) Discussion of Ways to Optimize SAB and Working Group Operations and Working Group staff support from the Line Offices and (3) Continued Discussion of Strategic Advice to NOAA and Impact on SAB Operations. For the latest agenda, please visit the SAB Web site at http://www.sab.noaa.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Elizabeth Turner Acting Executive Director, Science Advisory Board, NOAA, Room 146 Gregg Hall, 35 Colovos Road, Durham, NH 03824. Email: [email protected]; or visit the NOAA SAB Web site at http://www.sab.noaa.gov.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Jason Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32928 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-KD-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE381 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting (webinar).

    SUMMARY:

    The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific Council) will convene a joint webinar meeting of its Ad Hoc Trawl Groundfish Electronic Monitoring Policy Advisory Committee (GEMPAC) and Groundfish Electronic Monitoring Technical Advisory Committee (GEMTAC), which is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The webinar meeting will be held January 20 and March 2, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. until the earlier of 5 p.m. (Pacific Daylight Time) or when business for each day has been completed.

    ADDRESSES:

    To attend the webinar, visit: http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/webinar/join-webinar. Enter the Webinar ID, which is 125-796-547, and your name and email address (required). Participants are encouraged to use their telephone, as this is the best practice to avoid technical issues and excessive feedback (see the PFMC GoToMeeting Audio Diagram at http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/PFMC_Audio_Diagram_GoToMeeting.pdf for best practices). Please use your telephone for the audio portion of the meeting by dialing this TOLL number 1+ (213) 929-4212 (not a toll-free number); then enter the Attendee phone audio access code: 998-723-935; then enter your audio phone pin (shown after joining the webinar). System Requirements for PC-based attendees: Required: Windows® 7, Vista, or XP; for Mac®-based attendees: Required: Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer; and for mobile attendees: iPhone®, iPad®, AndroidTM phone or Android tablet (See the GoToMeeting Webinar Apps).

    You may send an email to [email protected] or contact him at (503) 820-2280, extension 425 for technical assistance. A public listening station will be available at the Pacific Council office.

    Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Brett Wiedoff, Staff Officer, Pacific Council; telephone: (503) 820-2280.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The primary purpose of the meeting is to discuss draft regulations that would implement the Pacific Council's electronic monitoring policies for the limited entry groundfish midwater trawl whiting fishery, and the limited entry fixed gear fishery fishing under the non-trawl shorebased individual fishing quota program.

    Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the GEMPAC's and GEMTAC's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    The public listening station is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt (503) 820-2280 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33046 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE378 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's (MAFMC) Ecosystem and Ocean Planning Committee will hold a public meeting.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Friday, January 22, 2016, from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. For agenda details, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Double Tree by Hilton Baltimore-BWI Airport, 890 Elkridge Landing Road, Linthicum, Maryland, 21090; telephone: (410) 859-8400.

    Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N. State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331; Web site: www.mafmc.org.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The MAFMC's Ecosystem and Ocean Planning Committee will meet to discuss the Council's Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment. The Committee will develop recommendations for the full Council to consider at their February 2016 meeting. This amendment will prohibit the development of new, or expansion of existing, directed fisheries on unmanaged forage species in Mid-Atlantic Federal waters until adequate scientific information is available to promote ecosystem sustainability. The Committee will consider advice from the Unmanaged Forage Fishery Management Action Team and recommendations from the Ecosystem and Ocean Planning Advisory Panel before developing recommendations for a draft list of unmanaged forage species to include in the amendment. The Committee will also discuss and may develop recommendations for a draft range of alternatives for analysis, a draft purpose and need statement as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, and other aspects of the amendment. A detailed agenda will be posted to www.mamfc.org.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33045 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Intent to Prepare a Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Conduct Scoping Meeting for the Corte Madera Creek Flood Control Project General Reevaluation Report and Integrated EIS/EIR, County of Marin, CA AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice; change in public meeting date and extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The comment period for the Notice of Intent to prepare a joint EIS/EIR and conduct a scoping meeting for the Corte Madera Creek Flood Control Project published in the Federal Register on Friday, December 18, 2015 (80 FR 79034) and required comments by February 1, 2016. The comment period has been extended to February 16, 2016.

    DATES:

    A public scoping meeting was originally scheduled for January 14, 2016, but will now be held on January 28, 2016 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. (PST).

    ADDRESSES:

    The scoping meeting location is: The Marin Arts and Garden Center, 30 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, Ross, CA 94957-9601.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephen M. Willis, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, Planning Branch, 1455 Market Street, San Francisco CA 94103-1398, (415) 503-6861, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    None.

    James S. Boyette, Major, US Army, Deputy District Engineer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33065 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, Montana AGENCIES:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD; Department of the Interior, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) propose to jointly prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) that analyzes and discloses effects associated with actions to provide fish passage at the Intake Diversion Dam. The proposed Federal action is to improve passage for endangered pallid sturgeon and other native fish at Intake Diversion Dam in the lower Yellowstone River.

    The Corps and Reclamation will serve as joint lead Federal agencies in the preparation of the Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage EIS. The Corps will serve as administrative lead for National Environmental Policy Act compliance activities during preparation of the EIS. The EIS will include consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Federal action that meet the purpose and need of improving passage while continuing a viable and effective operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project. The Corps and Reclamation will each consider and approve a Record of Decision regarding actions and decisions for which the respective agencies are responsible.

    DATES:

    Submit written comments on the scope of the issues and alternatives to be considered in the EIS on or before February 18, 2016.

    A public scoping meeting will be held on January 21, 2016, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., in Glendive, MT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written scoping comments, requests to be added to the mailing list, or requests for sign language interpretation for the hearing impaired or other special assistance needs to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District, ATTN: CENWO-PM-AA, 1616 Capitol Ave., Omaha, NE 68102; or email to [email protected]

    The scoping meeting will be located at Dawson County High School Auditorium, 900 N. Merrill Avenue, Glendive, MT 59330.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Tiffany Vanosdall, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1616 Capitol Ave, Omaha, NE 68102, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Corps and Reclamation are issuing this notice pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, 43 CFR parts 1500 through 1508; the Department of the Interior's NEPA regulations, 43 CFR part 46.

    Background Information

    Reclamation's Lower Yellowstone Project is located in eastern Montana and western North Dakota. Intake Diversion Dam is located approximately 70 miles upstream of the confluence of the Yellowstone and Missouri rivers near Glendive, Montana. The Lower Yellowstone Project was authorized by the Secretary of the Interior on May 10, 1904. Construction of the Lower Yellowstone Project began in 1905 and included Intake Diversion Dam (also known as Yellowstone River Diversion Dam)—a 12-foot high wood and stone diversion dam that spans the Yellowstone River and diverts water into the Main Canal for irrigation. The Lower Yellowstone Project was authorized to provide a dependable water supply sufficient to irrigate approximately 52,000 acres of land on the benches above the west bank of the Yellowstone River. Water is also supplied to irrigate approximately 830 acres in the Intake Irrigation Project and 2,200 acres in the Savage Unit. Both of the smaller irrigation projects pump water from the Main Canal. The average annual volume of water diverted for these projects is 327,046 acre-feet.

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) listed the pallid sturgeon as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1990. The best available science suggests Intake Diversion Dam impedes upstream migration of pallid sturgeon and their access to spawning and larval drift habitats. The lower Yellowstone River is considered by the Service to provide one of the best opportunities for recovery of pallid sturgeon.

    Section 7(a)(2) requires each Federal agency to consult on any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency to ensure it does not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species. Reclamation has been in formal consultation with the Service to identify potential conservation measures to minimize adverse effects to pallid sturgeon associated with continued operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project. The Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Plan specifically identifies providing passage at Intake Diversion Dam to protect and restore pallid sturgeon populations. By providing passage at Intake Diversion Dam, approximately 165 river miles of spawning and larval drift habitat would become accessible in the Yellowstone River.

    Section 3109 of the 2007 Water Resources Development Act authorizes the Corps to use funding from the Missouri River Recovery and Mitigation Program to assist Reclamation in the design and construction of Reclamation's Lower Yellowstone Project at Intake, Montana for the purpose of ecosystem restoration. Planning and construction of the Intake Project is a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) for the Corps in the 2003 Missouri River Amended Biological Opinion (BiOp) as amended by letter exchange in 2009, 2010, and 2013. The Reclamation Act/Newlands Act of 1902 (Pub. L. 161) authorizes Reclamation to construct and maintain the facilities associated with the Lower Yellowstone Project, which includes actions or modifications necessary to comply with Federal law such as the ESA.

    Reclamation initiated a collaborative effort with the Service; Corps; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; and The Nature Conservancy through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed on July 8, 2005. Reclamation coordinated a value planning study in August 2005 with representatives from parties signatory to the MOU and the Lower Yellowstone Project Irrigation Districts to explore and evaluate a broad range of alternatives for fish passage and entrainment reduction.

    In 2010, Reclamation and the Corps authorized the construction of a rock ramp and new screened headworks with the completion of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. The construction of the new headworks is complete and began operation during the 2012 irrigation season. During the final design of the rock ramp, following the release of the 2010 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, important new information on the design, constructability, and sustainability of the proposed rock ramp surfaced along with new information regarding pallid sturgeon movement which led to a reevaluation of fish passage options.

    In 2013, the Corps and Reclamation conducted a planning effort to examine new and previously considered alternatives. Following this effort, the Corps and Reclamation identified the bypass channel for detailed analysis which included a constraint related to Reclamation's obligation to deliver water necessary to continue a viable and effective operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project. A Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact selecting the bypass channel were completed in 2015. In response to concerns about the selected Bypass Channel Alternative, the Corps and Reclamation are proposing to prepare this EIS.

    The Corps and Reclamation will use the scoping period to fully identify the range of potentially significant issues, actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in the EIS. This scoping period will ensure the public has sufficient opportunity to review and comment on the proposed Federal action and reasonable alternatives for fish passage at Intake Diversion Dam. Public comments are invited and encouraged to assist agencies in identifying the scope of potentially significant environmental, social, and economic issues relevant to the proposed Federal action and determining reasonable alternatives to be considered in the EIS. Current and past project information and analyses can be accessed at: http://www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/loweryellowstone.

    The Corps and Reclamation will host a public scoping meeting and are inviting agencies, tribes, non-governmental organizations, and the public to participate in an open exchange of information and to provide comments on the proposed scope of the EIS.

    As required by CEQ's implementing regulations, the EIS will include consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Federal action that meet the purpose and need of improving pallid sturgeon passage while continuing a viable and effective operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project. The EIS will analyze and disclose environmental impacts associated with the proposed Federal action and alternatives together with engineering, operations and maintenance, social, and economic considerations. The public is invited and encouraged to identify issues and effects that should be addressed in the EIS, as well as reasonable alternatives to improve fish passage at the Intake Diversion Dam.

    The public scoping meeting date or location may change based on inclement weather or exceptional circumstances. If the meeting date or location is changed, the Corps and Reclamation will issue a press release and post it on the web at http://www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/loweryellowstone and http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil to announce the updated meeting details.

    Special Assistance for Public Scoping Meeting

    The meeting facility is physically accessible to people with disabilities. People needing special assistance to attend and/or participate in the open house should contact: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District, ATTN: CENWO-PM-AA, 1616 Capitol Ave, Omaha, NE 68102; or email [email protected] To allow sufficient time to process special requests, please contact no later than one week before the public scoping meeting.

    Public Disclosure Statement

    The Corps and Reclamation believe it is important to inform the public of the environmental review process. To assist the Corps and Reclamation in identifying and considering issues related to the proposed Federal action, comments made during formal scoping and later on the draft EIS should be as specific as possible. Reviewers must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts the Corps and Reclamation to the reviewer's position and contentions. It is very important that those interested in this proposed Federal action participate by the close of the scoping period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Corps and Reclamation at a time when they can meaningfully consider and respond to them.

    If you wish to comment, you may mail or email your comments as indicated under the ADDRESSES section. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or any other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made available to the public at any time. While you can request in your comment for us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    John W. Henderson, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District Commander. John F. Soucy, Deputy Regional Director, Great Plains Region, Bureau of Reclamation.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33066 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program AGENCY:

    Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 84.354A.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary intends to use the existing slate of applicants developed for the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 to make new grant awards in FY 2016. The Secretary takes this action because a number of high-quality applications remain on the grant slate and available funding for the program in FY 2016 can support only a limited number of new awards.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Clifton Jones, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW., Room 4W244, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: 202-205-2205 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: On January 15, 2014, we published in the Federal Register (79 FR 2640) a notice inviting applications (NIA) for new awards for FY 2014 under the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program. In this NIA, we indicated that, contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards later in FY 2014 and FY 2015 from the list of unfunded applicants from the FY 2014 competition.

    We received a number of applications for grants under the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program in FY 2014, many of which received very high scores. We made two initial awards in FY 2014 and two additional awards in FY 2015. Because we received a large number of high-quality applications and had limited funds available for awards, many high scoring applications did not receive funding in FY 2014 or FY 2015.

    Based on historical data, we believe that the funding available for this program in FY 2016 1 could support approximately two new awards. We do not believe that conducting a new competition in FY 2016, for so few awards, is warranted; and therefore, we intend to select FY 2016 grantees from the unfunded high-quality applications in the existing slate of applicants.

    1 The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 requires the Secretary to use not less than $16 million of the funds available for part B of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act for the Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities Program (subpart 2 of part B). We intend to use $16 million of such funds for awards under the program in FY16, consistent with the appropriations act requirement.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 223-7223j.

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Nadya Chinoy Dabby, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33091 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Membership of the Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    Office of Management, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary publishes a list of persons who may be named to serve on the Performance Review Board that oversees the evaluation of performance appraisals for Senior Executive Service members of the Department.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Membership

    Title 5, U.S.C. Section 4314(c)(4) of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, Public Law 95-454, requires that the appointment of Performance Review Board members be published in the Federal Register. The following persons may be named to serve on the Performance Review Board:

    Anderson, Margo K. Anthony, Perry E. Appel, Charles J. Ashley, Carol Baker, Jeffrey S. Battle, Sandra G Betka, Sue E. Buck, Ruthanne L. Canellos, Ernest C. Carr, Peggy G. Carter, Denise L. Chapman, Christopher Chavez, Anthony Chism, Monique M. Conaty, Joseph C. Cordes, Williams Cuffeegraves, Cassandra L. Culatta, Richard Dabby, Nadya C. Dipaolo, John K. Eliadis, Pamela D. Ellis, Kathryn A. Feely, Harry M. Galanter, Seth M. Garland, Teresa A. Gil, Libia S. Ginns, Laura Goniprow, Alexander T. Graham, William D. Green, Adrianne Grewal, Satyamdeep S. Hairfield, James Hall, Linda W. Harris, Danny A. Haynes, Leonard L. Iii Horwich, Julius Hurt, John W. Iii Jenkins, Harold B. Kean, Larry G. Kim, Robert Koeppel, Dennis P. Lucas, Richard J Luczak, Ronald J. Maestri, Philip A. Mahaffie, Lynn Mcfadden, Elizabeth A. Mcintosh, Amy B. Mclaughlin, Maureen A. Miller, Daniel Minor, James T. Moore, Kenneth R. Musgrove, Melody B. Osgood, Debora L. Pendleton, Audrey J. Pepin, Andrew, J. Riddle, Paul N. Robison, Gregory Ropelewski, James L. Rosenfelt, Philip H. Ryder, Ruth E. Santy, Ross Jr. Sasser, Tracey L. Schorr, Jonathan Shilling, Russell D Skelly, Thomas P. Soltis, Timothy F Stanton, Craig Stracke, Linda A. Studley, Jamienne S. Styles, Kathleen M Swenson, Sue Ellen Tada, Wendy Thomas, Milton L. Jr. Uvin, Johan E Vadehra, Emma Washington, Mark Willbanks, Linda R Whalen, Antonia Wills, Randolph E. Winchell, Susan A. Wood, Gary H. Wood, Hamilton E. Jr. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Raquel Boone, Director, Executive Resources Division, Office of Human Resources, Office of Management, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 2C150, LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4573. Telephone: (202) 453-6475.

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), or text telephone (TTY), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the search feature at www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33088 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-525-000] UGI Sunbury, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Sunbury Pipeline Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Sunbury Pipeline Project (Project), proposed by UGI Sunbury, LLC (Sunbury) in the above referenced docket. Sunbury requests authorization to construct and operate a natural gas pipeline facility in Snyder, Union, Northumberland, Montour and Lycoming Counties, Pennsylvania. The Project would provide 180,000 dekatherms of natural gas per day to the Hummel Station Generation Facility in Snyder County, Pennsylvania.

    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the proposed Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed Project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    The U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA. Cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA analysis.

    Sunbury proposes to: Construct and operate a 34.4-mile-long pipeline from the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company LLC (Transco) and MARC I Pipeline operated by Central New York Oil & Gas Company, LLC (CNYOG), both in Lycoming County, to the proposed Hummel Station Generation Facility.

    The FERC staff mailed copies of the EA to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and groups; newspapers and libraries in the project area; and parties to this proceeding. In addition, the EA is available for public viewing on the FERC's Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited number of copies of the EA are available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8371.

    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your comments prior to making its decision on this Project, it is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or before January 27, 2016.

    For your convenience, there are three methods in which you can use to file your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the project docket numbers (CP15-525-000) with your submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected]

    (1) You may file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You may also file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” You must select the type of filing you are making. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing”; or

    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).1 Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

    1 See the previous discussion on the methods for filing comments.

    Additional information about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15- 525). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33032 Filed 12-31-15; 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 exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG16-32-000

    Applicants: Pasadena Cogen, LLC

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Pasadena Cogen, LLC.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5185

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3079-010

    Applicants: Tyr Energy LLC

    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis of Tyr Energy, LLC.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5159

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/26/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-618-001; ER15-1015-002; ER12-957-001; ER12-1875-004; ER10-1840-004

    Applicants: AltaGas San Joaquin Energy Inc., AltaGas Brush Energy Inc., AltaGas Renewable Energy Colorado LLC, AltaGas Ripon Energy Inc., Blythe Energy Inc.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Alta Wind I, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 12/22/15

    Accession Number: 20151222-5340

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-636-000

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Petition of Southwest Power Pool, Inc. for Tariff Waiver.

    Filed Date: 12/24/15

    Accession Number: 20151224-5049

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-637-000

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico

    Description: Initial rate filing: Three-Party Economic Benefit Contract to be effective 3/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5080

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-638-000

    Applicants: Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: WPC 2016 eTariff Correction Filing to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5105

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-639-000

    Applicants: PacifiCorp

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: VA Salt Lake Non-Conforming SGIA to be effective 12/4/2015.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5143

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16

    Docket Numbers: ER16-640-000

    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Submission of Operational and Supplemental Services Agreement to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/28/15

    Accession Number: 20151228-5186

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES16-11-000

    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.

    Description: Supplement to December 11, 2015 Application under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of Westar Energy, Inc.

    Filed Date: 12/23/15

    Accession Number: 20151223-5081

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/16

    Docket Numbers: ES16-14-000

    Applicants: Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC

    Description: Supplement to December 11, 2015 Application of Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act.

    Filed Date: 12/23/15

    Accession Number: 20151223-5098

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/16

    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: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33030 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM15-14-000] Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards; Supplemental Notice of Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical Conference

    This notice establishes the agenda and topics for discussion at the technical conference to be held on January 28, 2016, to discuss issues related to supply chain risk management. The technical conference will start at 9:30 a.m. and end at approximately 4:30 p.m. (Eastern Time) in the Commission Meeting Room at the Commission's Headquarters, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC. The technical conference will be led by Commission staff, and FERC Commissioners may be in attendance. All interested parties are invited to attend, and registration is not required.

    The topics and related questions to be discussed during this conference are provided as an attachment to this Notice. The purpose of the technical conference is to facilitate a structured dialogue on supply chain risk management issues identified by the Commission in the Revised Critical Infrastructure Protection Standards Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) issued in this proceeding and raised in public comments to the NOPR. Prepared remarks will be presented by invited panelists.

    This event will be webcast and transcribed. The free webcast allows listening only. Anyone with internet access who desires to listen to this event can do so by navigating to the “FERC Calendar” at www.ferc.gov, and locating the technical conference in the Calendar of Events. Opening the technical conference in the Calendar of Events will reveal a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the webcast and offers the option of listening to the meeting via phone-bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit www.CapitolConnection.org or call 703-993-3100. The webcast will be available on the Calendar of Events at www.ferc.gov for three months after the conference. Transcripts of the conference will be immediately available for a fee from Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc. (202-347-3700).

    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please send an email to [email protected] or call toll free (866) 208-3372 (voice) or (202) 502-8659 (TTY), or send a fax to (202) 208-2106 with the requested accommodations.

    There is no fee for attendance. However, members of the public are encouraged to preregister online at: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/01-28-16-form.asp.

    For more information about the technical conference, please contact: Sarah McKinley, Office of External Affairs, 202-502-8368, [email protected]

    Critical Infrastructure Protection Supply Chain Risk Management RM15-14-000 January 28, 2016 Agenda Welcome and Opening Remarks by Commission Staff 9:30-9:45 a.m. Introduction

    In a July 16, 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) in the above-captioned docket, the Commission proposed to direct the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) to develop new or modified Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Reliability Standards to provide security controls relating to supply chain risk management for industrial control system hardware, software, and services. The Commission sought and received comments on this proposal, including: (1) The NOPR proposal to direct that NERC develop a Reliability Standard to address supply chain risk management; (2) the anticipated features of, and requirements that should be included in, such a standard; and (3) a reasonable timeframe for development of a standard. The purpose of this conference is to clarify issues, share information, and determine the proper response to address security control and supply chain risk management concerns.

    Staff Presentation: Supply Chain Efforts by Certain Other Federal Agencies 9:45 a.m.-10:05 a.m. Break 10:05 p.m.-10:15 p.m. Panel 1: Need for a New or Modified Reliability Standard 10:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m.

    The Commission staff seeks information about the need for a new or modified Reliability Standard to manage supply chain risks for industrial control system hardware, software, and computing and networking services associated with bulk electric system operations. Panelists are encouraged to address:

    • Identify challenges faced in managing supply chain risk.

    • Describe how the current CIP Standards provide supply chain risk management controls.

    • Describe how the current CIP Standards incentivize or inhibit the introduction of more secure technology.

    • Identify possible other approaches that the Commission can take to mitigate supply chain risks.

    Panelists:

    1. Nadya Bartol, Vice President, Industry Affairs and Cybersecurity Strategist, UTC

    2. Jon Boyens, Project Manager, Information Communication Technology (ICT) Supply Chain Risk Management, National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST)

    3. John Galloway, Director, Cyber Security, ISO New England

    4. John Goode, Chief Information Officer/Senior Vice President, Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO)

    5. Barry Lawson, Associate Director, Power Delivery & Reliability, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)

    6. Helen Nalley, Compliance Director, Southern Company

    7. Jacob Olcott, Vice President of Business Development, Bitsight Tech

    8. Marcus Sachs, Senior Vice President and Chief Security Officer, North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)

    Lunch 11:45 a.m.-1:00 p.m. Panel 2: Scope and Implementation of a New or Modified Standard 1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m.

    The Commission staff seeks information about the scope and implementation of a new or modified Standard to manage supply chain risks for industrial control system hardware, software, and computing and networking services associated with bulk electric system operations. Panelists are encouraged to address:

    • Identify types of assets that could be better protected with a new or modified Standard.

    • Identify supply chain processes that could be better protected by a Standard.

    • Identify controls or modifications that could be included in the Standard.

    • Identify existing mandatory or voluntary standards or security guidelines that could form the basis of the Standard.

    • Address how the verification of supply chain risk mitigation could be measured, benchmarked and/or audited.

    • Present and justify a reasonable timeframe for development and implementation of a Standard.

    • Discuss whether a Standard could be a catalyst for technical innovation and market competition.

    Panelists:

    1. Michael Kuberski, Manager, Grid Protection and Automation, Pepco Holdings Inc. (PHI)

    2. Jonathan Appelbaum, Director, NERC Compliance, The United Illuminating Company

    3. Brent Castegnetto, Manager, Cyber Security Audits & Investigations, WECC

    4. Art Conklin, Ph.D., Associate Professor and Director of the Center for Information Security Research and Education, University of Houston

    5. Edna Conway, Chief Security Officer, Value Chain Security, Cisco

    6. Bryan Owen, Principal Cyber Security Manager, OSIsoft

    7. Albert Ruocco, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, American Electric Power (AEP)

    8. Doug Thomas, Vice President and Chief Information Officer, Ontario Independent Electricity System Operation (IESO)

    Break 2:30 p.m.-2:45 p.m. Panel 3: Current Supply Chain Risk Management Practices and Collaborative Efforts 2:45 p.m.-4:15 p.m.

    The Commission staff seeks information about existing supply chain risk management efforts for information and communications technology and industrial control system hardware, software, and services in other critical infrastructure sectors and the government. Panelists are encouraged to address:

    • Generally describe how registered entities and other organizations currently manage supply chain issues.

    • Identify standards or guidelines that are used to establish supply chain risk management practices. Specifically, discuss experience under those standards or guidelines.

    • Identify organizational roles involved in the development and implementation of supply chain risk management practices.

    • Generally describe approaches for identifying, evaluating, mitigating, and monitoring supply chain risk.

    • Generally discuss how supply chain risk is addressed in the contracting process with vendors and suppliers.

    • Generally describe the capabilities that registered entities currently have to inspect third party information security practices.

    • Generally describe the capabilities that registered entities currently have to negotiate for additional security in their hardware, software, and service contracts. Describe how this may vary based on the potential vendor or supplier and the type of service to be provided.

    • Generally describe how vendors and suppliers are managing risk in their supply chain.

    Panelists:

    1. Douglas Bauder, Vice President, Operational Services, and Chief Procurement Officer, Southern California Edison

    2. Andrew Bochman, Senior Cyber & Energy Security Strategist, INL/DOE

    3. Dave Whitehead, Vice President of Research and Development, Schweitzer Engineering

    4. Andrew Ginter, Vice President, Industrial Security, Waterfall Security Solutions

    5. Steve Griffith, Industry Director, National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA)

    6. Maria Jenks, Vice President, Supply Chain, Kansas City Power & Light (KCP&L)

    7. Robert McClanahan, Vice President/Chief Information Officer, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation (AECC)

    8. Thomas O'Brien, Chief Information Officer, PJM Interconnection, LLC

    4:15 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Closing Remarks Dated: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33035 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL16-19-000] ISO New England Inc. Participating Transmission Owners Administrative Committee: Emera Maine; Town of Braintree Electric Light Department; NSTAR Electric Company; Chicopee Electric Light Department; Central Maine Power Company; Maine Electric Power Company (MEPCO); Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative & Connecticut Transmission Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative; The City of Holyoke Gas and Electric Department; New Hampshire Transmission, LLC; Green Mountain Power Corporation; Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company; New England Power Company, d/b/a National Grid; New Hampshire Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Eversource Energy Service Company as agent for: The Connecticut Light and Power Company, Western Massachusetts Electric Company, and Public Service Company of New Hampshire; Town of Hudson Light and Power Department; Town of Middleborough Gas & Electric Department; Town of Norwood Municipal Light Department; Town of Reading Municipal Light Department; Town of Wallingford (CT) Electric Division; Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant; The United Illuminating Company; Unitil Energy Systems, Inc. and Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company; Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. and Vermont Transco, LLC; Vermont Public Power Supply Authority; Shrewsbury Electric and Cable Operations Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On December 28, 2015, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL16-19-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into the justness and reasonableness of ISO-New England, Inc. Participating Transmission Owners' Regional Network Service and Local Network Service formula rates. ISO-New England, Inc. Participating Transmission Owners Administrative Committee, 153 FERC ¶ 61,343 (2015).

    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL16-19-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33034 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP15-91-000] East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Loudon Expansion Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Loudon Expansion Project, proposed by East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (East Tennessee) in the above-referenced docket. East Tennessee requests authorization to construct, own, and operate a new pipeline, new mainline valve, and new meter station in Monroe and Loudon Counties, Tennessee and install a pressure regulator at an existing meter station in Loudon County. The Loudon Expansion Project would provide up to 40,000 Dekatherms per day of firm transportation service Tate & Lyle Americas Ingredients, LLC for its new natural gas fueled combined cycle electric power plant at its manufacturing facility in Loudon County.

    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the Loudon Expansion Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    The proposed Loudon Expansion Project includes the following facilities:

    • 10.2 miles of new 12-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline from East Tennessee's existing 3200 mainline in Monroe County, Tennessee to the Tate & Lyle in Loudon County, Tennessee;

    • one 12-inch mainline valve, two 12-inch tee taps, above- and below-ground piping, and a pig launcher barrel in Monroe County;

    • one new meter facility, above- and below-ground piping, flow measurement and control equipment, a filter/separator, a pig receiver barrel, aboveground valve operators for below ground valves, blowdowns, and a condensate tank in Loudon County; and

    • a pressure regulator at existing Meter Station 59039 on its Loudon-Lenoir City Lateral Line 3218D-100 in Loudon County.

    The FERC staff mailed copies of the EA to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and groups; newspapers and libraries in the project area; and parties to this proceeding. In addition, the EA is available for public viewing on the FERC's Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited number of copies of the EA are available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8371.

    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your comments prior to making its decision on this project, it is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or before January 27, 2016.

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the project docket number (CP15-91-000) with your submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected]

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” You must select the type of filing you are making. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing”; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).1 Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

    1 See the previous discussion on the methods for filing comments.

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-91). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33031 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP16-37-000] National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Prior Notice Request Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on November 30, 2015, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) filed in Docket No. CP16-37-000, and pursuant to Sections 7 (b) & (c) of the Natural Gas Act, Part 157 of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) and its blanket certificate authority granted in Docket No. CP83-4-000, a prior notice application requesting authorization to; (i) Construct and operate a new 4,140 hp compressor station to be known as Keelor Compressor Station in McKean County, Pennsylvania; (ii) perform modifications at Bowen Compressor Station in Elk County, Pennsylvania, including the abandonment of 650 ft. of pipe; and (iii) perform modifications at Roystone Compressor Station, in Warren County, Pennsylvania, including installation of 750 ft of 12-inch pipe. The project is estimated to cost $27.9 million.

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to: Kenneth E. Webster, Attorney, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation, 6363 Main Street Williamsville, New York, 14221-5887, at (716) 857-7067 or by email at [email protected]

    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    National Fuel seeks authorization of this proposed Project to; (1) Increased capacity on National Fuel's existing Line D system by 77,500 Dekatherm per day, by increasing the operating pressure of Line AM60 and Line D, in order to provide firm transportation service to the Erie and Warren, Pennsylvania markets area from TGP at Lamont and to ensure that all existing storage withdrawal obligations can reliably be met, this will be accomplished by the installation of three-1,380 hp compressor stations (4,140 total hp) two of the three new compressor units at Keelor compressor station will be used to withdraw gas from the Keelor Storage Field and deliver such gas into Line AM60 (which is referred to as Line D west of the Roystone Compressor Station), the third compressor unit will be used to increase the pressure of gas withdrawn from National Fuel's East Branch and Swede Hill Storage Fields (2) to allow National Fuel to flow increased receipts from Tennessee Gas Pipeline, LLC (TGP) at Lamont and/or gas from Line K South of Bowen compressor station, through the Bowen compressor station, into Line K north of Bowen compressor station, and ultimately to Line AM60 and Line D, at sufficient pressure to allow the incremental volumes subscribed for by the Project shippers to reach the Erie and Warren, Pennsylvania markets, (3) to allow National Fuel to flow increased receipts from TGP at Lamont and/or gas from Line K south of Bowen compressor station, through the Bowen compressor station, into Line K north of Bowen compressor station, and ultimately to Line AM60 and Line D, at sufficient pressure to allow the incremental volumes subscribed for by the Project shippers to reach the Erie and Warren, Pennsylvania markets. The purpose of the proposed Roystone compressor station modification is to allow gas withdrawn from East Branch and Swede Hill storage fields, and first compressed and dehydrated by the Roystone compressor station, to reach the proposed Keelor compressor station for further compression up to the increased system maximum operating pressure of Line D of 720 psig. The Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open for public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with he Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the “e-Filing” link. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and five copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33033 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than January 28, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (Adam M. Drimer, Assistant Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:

    1. Capital Bank Financial Corp., Charlotte, North Carolina; to merge with CommunityOne Bancorp, and thereby indirectly acquire CommunityOne Bank, National Association, both in Charlotte, North Carolina.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Yvonne Sparks, Community Development Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:

    1. Royal Bancshares, Inc., University City, Missouri; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Frontenac Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Frontenac Bank, both in Earth City, Missouri.

    In connection with this application, Royal Acquisition LLC, University City, Missouri, has applied to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Frontenac Bank, Earth City, Missouri.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 29, 2015. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33017 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-15-2015; Docket No. CDC-2015-0023] 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 Paper 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 agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and 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] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice 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 Performance Measurement and Program Evaluation

    (Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network)—New—National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    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 seeks to request 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 provide feedback via site-specific interviews, a Checklist, Worksheets, and Performance Measures at six month and two-year intervals. The interviews will occur on pre-established individual site calls that CDC conducts monthly with each grantee. The Worksheets and Performance Measures will be submitted to CDC by completing a Microsoft Excel-based data collection tool and emailing the information to a designated CDC contact. By conducting brief telephone interviews and 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) Use of pre-established meeting time to conduct interviews, (2) awardees' familiarity with the software, which reduces training burden; and (3) 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 Excel spreadsheet 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 122.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Component A only (initial six-month submission) Interview
  • Worksheets
  • Performance Measure
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 3/60
  • 90/60
  • 30/60
  • Component A&B (initial six-month submission) Interview
  • Worksheets
  • Performance Measures
  • 6
  • 6
  • 6
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 3/60
  • 120/60
  • 42/60
  • Component A only (subsequent six-month and two-year submissions) Interview
  • Worksheets
  • Performance Measures
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 3/60
  • 60/60
  • 18/60
  • Component A&B (subsequent six-month and two-year submissions) Interview
  • Worksheets
  • Performance Measures
  • 6
  • 6
  • 6
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 3/60
  • 90/60
  • 30/60
  • 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. 2015-33092 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-359/360] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by March 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address:

    CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number ______, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Contents

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

    CMS-359/360 Comprehensive Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility (CORF) Eligibility and Survey Forms and Supporting Regulations

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

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved information collection; Title of Information Collection: Comprehensive Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility (CORF) Eligibility and Survey Forms and Supporting Regulations; Use: The form CMS-359 is used as the application for health care providers seeking to participate in the Medicare program as a Comprehensive Outpatient Rehabilitation Facility (CORF). This form initiates the process for facilities to become certified as a CORF and it provides the CMS Regional Office State Survey Agency staff identifying information regarding the applicant that is stored in the Automated Survey Processing Environment (ASPEN) system.

    The form CMS-360 is a survey tool used by the State Survey Agencies to record information in order to determine a provider's compliance with the CORF Conditions of Participation (CoPs) and to report this information to the Federal government. The form includes basic information on the CoP requirements, check boxes to indicate the level of compliance, and a section for recording notes. We have the responsibility and authority for certification decisions which are based on provider compliance with the CoPs and this form supports this process. Form Number: CMS-359/360 (OMB Control Number: 0938-0267); Frequency: Occasionally; Affected Public: Private Sector (Business or other for-profits); Number of Respondents: 50; Number of Responses: 50; Total Annual Hours: 123.

    (For questions regarding this collection contact James Cowher (410) 786-1948.) Dated: December 28, 2015. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32965 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Administration for Children and Families; HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Proposed Projects

    Title: ACF Performance Progress Reports—Program Indicators.

    OMB No.: 0970-0406.

    Description: The Office of Grants Management (OGM), in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) is proposing the continued collection of program performance data for ACF's discretionary grantees. The form developed by OGM was created from the basic template of the OMB-approved reporting format of the Program Performance Report. OGM uses this data to ensure grantees are proceeding in a satisfactory manner in meeting the approved goals and objectives of the project, and if funding should be continued for another budget period.

    The requirement for grantees to report on performance is OMB grants policy. Specific citations are contained in 45 CFR part 75 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards.

    Respondents: All ACF Discretionary Grantees. State governments, Native American Tribal governments, Native American Tribal Organizations, Local Governments, and Nonprofits with or without 501(c)(3) status with the IRS.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • ACF-OGM-SF-PPR-B 6000 1 1 6000

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 6000.

    In compliance with the requirements of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32969 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-D-4048] Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the draft guidance entitled “Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” This proposed guidance document is intended to outline the Agency's current thinking that for purposes of Unique Device Identification (UDI) labeling and data submission requirements, the term “convenience kit” applies solely to two or more different medical devices packaged together for the convenience of the user, where they are intended to remain packaged together and not replaced, substituted, repackaged, sterilized, or otherwise processed or modified before the devices are used by an end user. This draft guidance is not final nor is it in effect at this time. When finalized, this guidance document will constitute a change in policy.

    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 of 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 April 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2015-D-4048 for “Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    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 “Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; 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. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    UDI Regulatory Policy Support, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3303, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-5995, email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Section 226 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 and section 614 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to add and amend section 519(f) (21 U.S.C. 360i(f)), which directs FDA to publish regulations establishing a unique device identification system for medical devices. The UDI system final rule was published on September 24, 2013 (78 FR 58786) (the UDI Rule).

    The overarching objective of the UDI Rule, as required by section 519(f) of the FD&C Act, is to provide a system to adequately identify medical devices through distribution and use. We interpret this to mean that the form of a UDI should, in conformity with 21 CFR 801.40, be available to identify a device in both easily readable plain-text and in a form that can be entered into an electronic patient record or other computer system via an automated process when the device is used by an end user.

    The term “convenience kit” is defined at 21 CFR 801.3 as “two or more different medical devices packaged together for the convenience of the user.” Under 21 CFR 801.30(a)(11), individual devices packaged within a convenience kit are excepted from the UDI labeling requirements, provided the UDI is on the label of the immediate container of the convenience kit. The preamble to the UDI Rule expressed our thinking at the time that medical procedure kits, including orthopedic procedure kits, are convenience kits.

    Since the publication of the UDI Rule, we have determined that interpreting the term “convenience kit” at § 801.3 to include implantable devices and instruments that are provided by the labeler in sets or trays as non-sterile and repeatedly reconfigured and sterilized (or cleaned and sterilized) prior to use would be inconsistent with the purpose of the exceptions at § 801.30 and the UDI Rule generally. In this draft guidance, FDA proposes to interpret the term “convenience kit” at § 801.3 as applying solely to two or more different medical devices packaged together for the convenience of the user where they are intended to remain packaged together and not replaced, substituted, repackaged, sterilized, or otherwise processed or modified before the devices are used by an end user.

    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 Unique Device Identification for Convenience Kits. It does not establish any rights for any person is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    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 Center 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.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Unique Device Identification: Convenience Kits; 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 1500010 to identify the guidance you are requesting.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in part 801, subpart B have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0720.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33008 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-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; PAR15-306: Lymphatics in Health and Disease in the Digestive System, Kidney and Urinary Tract.

    Date: January 26, 2016.

    Time: 1:30 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: Patricia Greenwel, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2178, MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1169, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Mouse Models for Translational Research.

    Date: January 28, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Lambratu Rahman Sesay, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6214, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-3493, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 28, 2015. Sylvia Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32974 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-19936; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before December 5, 2015, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.

    DATES:

    Comments should be submitted by January 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye St. NW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before December 5, 2015. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

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

    ALABAMA Jefferson County Pinson Hills Historic District, Roughly Cedar, Church, Main, Mountain, Pinson & Walnut Sts., Pinewood & Leslie Drs., Center Point & Silver Lake Rds., Pinson, 15000975 Pinson Main Street Historic District, Roughly Clayton, Lane, Main & Spring Sts., Elm & Powell Aves., Marvin's Way, Old Bradford Rd. & Pinson Plz., Pinson, 15000976 DELAWARE New Castle County Grantham—Edwards—McComb House, 217 Park Ave., New Castle, 15000977 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia Lexington, The, (Apartment Buildings in Washington, DC, MPS) 1114 F St. NE., Washington, 15000978 ILLINOIS Johnson County Dupont, John, House, 130 W. 5th St., New Burnside, 15000979 MASSACHUSETTS Bristol County Berkley Common Historic District, N. Main, S. Main, Porter & Locust Sts., Berkley, 15000980 Middlesex County Six Moon Hill Historic District, (Mid-Century Modern Houses of Lexington, Massachusetts MPS) 4, 8 Bird Hill & 1-40 Moon Hill Rds, 16, 24 Swan Ln., Lexington, 15000981 MINNESOTA Waseca County Hoffman Apiaries, 4661 420th Ave., Janesville, 15000982 MISSISSIPPI Copiah County Brewer Place, (Copiah County MPS) 3101 Utica Rd., Crystal Springs, 15000983 Georgetown Methodist Church, (Copiah County MPS) 1002 Lane Ave., Georgetown, 15000984 Hancock County House at 5098 MS 604, 5098 MS 604, Pearlington, 15000985 Harrison County Central Gulfport Historic District, Roughly bounded by 24th & 17th Sts., 18th & 23rd Aves., Gulfport, 15000986 Second Street Historic District, Along 2nd St., Gulfport, 15000987 Holmes County Durant Illinois Central Railroad Depot, 436 E. Mulberry St., Durant, 15000988 WISCONSIN Winnebago County Equitable Fraternal Union Building, 116 S. Commercial St., Neenah, 15000989 Authority:

    60.13 of 36 CFR part 60

    Dated: December 8, 2015. J. Paul Loether, Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32999 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-51-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same, DN 3109; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing under section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.8(b)).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS,1 and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

    1 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at USITC.2 The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at EDIS.3 Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    2 United States International Trade Commission (USITC): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    3 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to section 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Advanced Silicon Technologies LLC on December 28, 2015. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain computing or graphics systems, components thereof, and vehicles containing same. The complaint names as respondents Bayerische Motoren Werke AG of Germany; BMW of North America, LLC of Woodcliff Lake, NJ; BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC of Greer, SC; Fujitsu Ten Limited of Japan; Fujitsu Ten Corp. of America, Inc. of Novi, MI; Harman International Industries Incorporated of Stamford, CT; Harman Becker Automotive Systems, Inc. of Farmington Hills, MI; Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH of Germany; Honda Motor Co., Ltd. of Japan; Honda North America, Inc. of Torrance, CA; American Honda Motor Co., Inc. of Torrance, CA; Honda Engineering North America, Inc. of Marysville, OH; Honda of America Mfg., Inc. of Marysville, OH; Honda Manufacturing of Alabama, LLC of Lincoln, AL; Honda Manufacturing of Indiana, LLC of Greensburg, IN; Honda R&D Americas, Inc. of Torrance, CA; NVIDIA Corporation of Santa Clara, CA; Renesas Electronics Corporation of Japan; Renesas Electronics America, Inc. of Santa Clara, CA; Texas Instruments Incorporated of Dallas, TX; Toyota Motor Corporation of Japan; Toyota Motor North America, Inc. of New York, NY; Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. of Torrance, CA; Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc. of Erlanger, KY; Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Indiana, Inc. of Princeton, IN; Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. of Georgetown, KY; Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Mississippi, Inc. of Blue Springs, MS; Volkswagen AG of Germany; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. of Herndon, VA; Volkswagen Group of America Chattanooga Operations, LLC of Chattanooga, TN; Audi AG of Germany; and Audi of America, LLC of Herndon, VA. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, issue permanent cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents' alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

    Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments, not to exceed five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments, on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

    In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

    (i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

    (ii) Identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

    (iii) Identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

    (iv) Indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

    (v) Explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

    Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation.

    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3109”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures.4 ) Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

    4 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf.

    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.5

    5 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): http://edis.usitc.gov.

    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

    By order of the Commission.

    Dated: December 28, 2015. William R. Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33050 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    FOREIGN CLAIMS SETTLEMENT COMMISSION U.S. Department of Justice [F.C.S.C. Meeting and Hearing Notice No. 1-16] Sunshine Act Meeting

    The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its regulations (45 CFR part 503.25) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of open meetings as follows:

    Tuesday, January 12, 2016: 10:00 a.m.—Issuance of Proposed Decisions in claims against Libya.

    Status: Open.

    All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be directed to: Patricia M. Hall, Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Suite 6002, Washington, DC 20579. Telephone: (202) 616-6975.

    Dated at Washington, DC. Brian M. Simkin, Chief Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33105 Filed 12-30-15; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4410-BA-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2015-0001] Sunshine Act Meeting Notice DATES:

    January 4, 11, 18, 25, February 1, 8, 2016.

    PLACE:

    Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    STATUS:

    Public and Closed.

    Week of January 4, 2016

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 4, 2016.

    Week of January 11, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 11, 2016.

    Week of January 18, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 18, 2016.

    Week of January 25, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 25, 2016.

    Week of February 1, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of February 1, 2016.

    Week of February 8, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of February 8, 2016.

    The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Denise McGovern at 301-415-0681 or via email at [email protected]

    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/schedule.html.

    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify Kimberly Meyer, NRC Disability Program Manager, at 301-287-0739, by videophone at 240-428-3217, or by email at [email protected] Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969), or email [email protected] or [email protected]

    Dated: December 30, 2015. Denise L. McGovern, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33130 Filed 12-30-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-302; NRC-2011-0024] Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Application for direct transfer of license; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is considering approval of an application filed by Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF) on July 28, 2015, as supplemented on September 22, 2015. The application seeks NRC approval of the direct transfer of Facility Operating License DPR-72 for Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3, from Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc., to DEF. The NRC is also considering amending the facility operating license for administrative purposes to reflect the proposed transfer.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by February 3, 2016. A request for a hearing must be filed by January 25, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject):

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2011-0024. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Email comments to: [email protected] If you do not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact us at 301-415-1677.

    Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301-415-1101.

    Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

    Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal workdays; telephone: 301-415-1677.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John B. Hickman, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-3017, email: [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2011-0024 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2011-0024.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The application for direct transfer of license is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15216A123.

    • NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0024 in the subject line of your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submissions. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

    II. Introduction

    The NRC is considering the issuance of an order under § 50.80 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) approving the direct transfer of interests in Facility Operating License DPR-72 for Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3, to the extent held by Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc., to DEF. The NRC is also considering amending the facility operating license for administrative purposes to reflect the proposed transfer.

    The DEF currently holds 98.3006 percent ownership interest in Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3. Following approval of the proposed direct transfer of control of the license, DEF would acquire the 1.6994 percent interest in the facility held by Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.

    No physical changes to Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3, or operational changes are being proposed in the application.

    The NRC's regulations at 10 CFR 50.80 state that no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license, unless the Commission gives its consent in writing. The Commission will approve an application for the direct transfer of a license if the Commission determines that the proposed transferee is qualified to hold the license, and that the transfer is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission.

    Before issuance of the proposed conforming license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.

    As provided in 10 CFR 2.1315, unless otherwise determined by the Commission with regard to a specific application, the Commission has determined that any amendment to the license of a utilization facility, which does no more than conform the license to reflect the transfer action, involves no significant hazards consideration. No contrary determination has been made with respect to this specific license amendment application. In light of the generic determination reflected in 10 CFR 2.1315, no public comments with respect to significant hazards considerations are being solicited, notwithstanding the general comment procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91.

    III. Opportunity To Comment

    Within 30 days from the date of publication of this notice, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted as described in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

    IV. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 20 days from the date of publication of this notice, any person(s) whose interest may be affected by the Commission's action on the application may request a hearing and intervention via electronic submission through the NRC's E-filing system. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene should be filed in accordance with the Commission's rules of practice set forth in Subpart C “Rules of General Applicability: Hearing Requests, Petitions to Intervene, Availability of Documents, Selection of Specific Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer Powers, and General Hearing Management for NRC Adjudicatory Hearings,” of 10 CFR part 2. In particular, such requests and petitions must comply with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The hearing request or petition must specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted, with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The hearing request or petition must also include the specific contentions that the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.

    For each contention, the requestor/petitioner must provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted, as well as a brief explanation of the basis for the contention. Additionally, the requestor/petitioner must demonstrate that the issue raised by each contention is within the scope of the proceeding and is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the granting of a license amendment in response to the application. The hearing request or petition must also include a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion that support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely at the hearing, together with references to those specific sources and documents. The hearing request or petition must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact, including references to specific portions of the application for amendment that the petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute. If the requestor/petitioner believes that the application for amendment fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the requestor/petitioner must identify each failure and the supporting reasons for the requestor's/petitioner's belief. Each contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who does not satisfy these requirements for at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses, consistent with NRC regulations, policies, and procedures. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will set the time and place for any prehearing conferences and evidentiary hearings, and the appropriate notices will be provided.

    Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file contentions after the deadline in 10 CFR 2.309(b) will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the new or amended filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1).

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian tribe, or agency thereof may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by January 25, 2016. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in Section IV of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions for leave to intervene set forth in this section, except that under § 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian tribe, or agency thereof may also have the opportunity to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who does not wish, or is not qualified, to become a party to the proceeding may, in the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Persons desiring to make a limited appearance are requested to inform the Secretary of the Commission by March 4, 2016.

    V. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.

    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System, users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.

    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. However, a request to intervene will require including information on local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the hearing.

    For further details with respect to this application, see the application dated July 28, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15216A123), as supplemented on September 22, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15265A590).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of December 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Theodore B Smith, Acting Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33024 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-609; NRC-2013-0235] Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Construction permit application; docketing.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has determined that the second and final part of the application for a construction permit, submitted by Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC (NWMI) is acceptable for docketing. NWMI proposes to build a medical radioisotope production facility located in Columbia, Missouri.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0235 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0235. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

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

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Balazik, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, telephone: 301-415-2856; email: [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By letter dated July 20, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15210A114), NWMI filed with the NRC, pursuant to Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), and part 50 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,” the second and final part of its two-part application for a construction permit for a medical radioisotope production facility. If granted, the construction permit would allow NWMI to construct a production facility in Columbia, Missouri. On June 8, 2015, the NRC published in the Federal Register its acceptance of part one of NWMI's application for a construction permit (80 FR 32418).

    The NRC has completed its acceptance review of part two of NWMI's application for a construction permit for a production facility as defined in 10 CFR 50.2, “Definitions.” The NRC has determined that part two was submitted in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.101(a)(5), completes the information required by 10 CFR 50.34(a), and is acceptable for docketing. NWMI's construction permit application, in its entirety, has been placed under Docket No. 50-609. Please reference this docket number in all future correspondence.

    The NRC expects that NWMI will submit an application for fabricating low enriched uranium targets under 10 CFR part 70, “Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Materials,” as stated in paragraph six (page 2) of NWMI's letter dated July 20, 2015.

    The NRC's staff has started a review of the NWMI construction permit application. The NRC's staff will provide NWMI with a schedule that identifies significant milestones and the expected review completion date. The schedule will include provisions for the NRC to request additional information, if necessary.

    A copy of the construction permit application will be referred to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards for a review and report consistent with 10 CFR 50.58, “Hearings and report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.”

    In support of the review of the NWMI construction permit application, a hearing will be conducted by the Commission or a Board designated by the Chief of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel in accordance with procedures in 10 CFR part 2, “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure.” A future Federal Register notice (FRN) will announce the opportunity to petition for leave to intervene in a hearing on the application as well as the time and place of the hearing.

    Additionally, in accordance with 10 CFR part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,” the NRC will also prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. The environmental impact statement will evaluate the environmental impacts for construction, operation and decommissioning of NWMI's radioisotope production facility. This review will cover all activities at NWMI's radioisotope production facility, including those under 10 CFR parts 50 and 70.

    The docketing of the application does not predict whether the NRC will grant or deny the requested construction permit. If the NRC finds that NWMI's construction permit application meets the applicable standards of the AEA and the NRC's regulations, and that required notifications to other agencies and bodies have been made, the NRC will issue a construction permit for a production facility under 10 CFR part 50, in the form and containing conditions and limitations that the NRC finds appropriate and necessary.

    This notice only addresses the start of a review to determine whether the NRC will issue a construction permit for the proposed NWMI facility. In order to operate and produce radioisotopes in its facility, a separate application must be submitted by NWMI for the NRC's review and approval, and, if docketed, would be the subject of a separate FRN.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24 day of December, 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Michael F. Balazik, Chief (Acting), Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33025 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-67 and CP2016-82; Order No. 2941] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 183 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 183 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 183 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-67 and CP2016-82 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 183 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-67 and CP2016-82 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32995 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-54 and CP2016-69; Order No. 2928] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 176 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 176 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 176 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-54 and CP2016-69 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 176 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-54 and CP2016-69 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32975 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-73 and CP2016-88; Order No. 2959] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of First-Class Package Service Contract 41 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add First-Class Package Service Contract 41 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add First-Class Package Service Contract 41 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-73 and CP2016-88 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed First-Class Package Service Contract 41 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-73 and CP2016-88 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33081 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-63 and CP2016-78; Order No. 2937] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 179 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 179 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 179 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-63 and CP2016-78 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 179 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-63 and CP2016-78 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32984 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-56 and CP2016-71; Order No. 2942] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 26 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 26 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 26 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-56 and CP2016-71 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 26 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-56 and CP2016-71 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32996 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-69 and CP2016-84; Order No. 2955] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 185 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 185 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 185 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-69 and CP2016-84 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 185 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-69 and CP2016-84 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33077 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-60 and CP2016-75; Order No. 2930] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 178 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 178 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 178 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-60 and CP2016-75 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 178 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-60 and CP2016-75 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32977 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-59 and CP2016-74; Order No. 2935] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 27 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 27 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 27 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-59 and CP2016-74 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 27 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-59 and CP2016-74 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32982 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-58 and CP2016-73; Order No. 2934] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 10 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 10 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 10 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-58 and CP2016-73 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 10 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-58 and CP2016-73 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32981 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-62 and CP2016-77; Order No. 2933] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 11 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 11 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 11 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-62 and CP2016-77 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 11 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-62 and CP2016-77 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32980 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-64 and CP2016-79; Order No. 2938] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 180 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 180 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 180 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-64 and CP2016-79 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 180 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-64 and CP2016-79 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32992 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-68 and CP2016-83; Order No. 2954] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 182 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 182 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 182 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-68 and CP2016-83 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 182 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Christopher C. Mohr to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-68 and CP2016-83 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Christopher C. Mohr is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33076 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-71 and CP2016-86; Order No. 2957] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 186 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 186 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 186 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-71 and CP2016-86 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 186 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-71 and CP2016-86 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33079 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-66 and CP2016-81; Order No. 2940] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 184 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 184 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 184 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-66 and CP2016-81 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 184 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-66 and CP2016-81 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32994 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-70 and CP2016-85; Order No. 2956] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 12 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 12 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 12 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-70 and CP2016-85 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 12 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-70 and CP2016-85 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33078 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-52 and CP2016-67; Order No. 2943] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Mail Contract 174 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 174 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 174 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-52 and CP2016-67 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 174 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 18, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-52 and CP2016-67 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 18, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32997 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-55 and CP2016-70; Order No. 2929] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 7 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 7 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 7 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-55 and CP2016-70 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Contract 7 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-55 and CP2016-70 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission. Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32976 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-53 and CP2016-68; Order No. 2931] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 175 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 175 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 175 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-53 and CP2016-68 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 175 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-53 and CP2016-68 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32978 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-65 and CP2016-80; Order No. 2939] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 181 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 181 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 181 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-65 and CP2016-80 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 181 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-65 and CP2016-80 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32993 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-72 and CP2016-87; Order No. 2958] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 8 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Contract 8 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 8 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 28, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-72 and CP2016-87 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Contract 8 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Derrick D. Dennis to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-72 and CP2016-87 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Derrick D. Dennis is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 6, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33080 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-61 and CP2016-76; Order No. 2936] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Express Contract 31 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Express Contract 31 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express Contract 31 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 24, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-61 and CP2016-76 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Express Contract 31 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-61 and CP2016-76 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth R. Moeller is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32983 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. MC2016-57 and CP2016-72; Order No. 2932] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning the addition of Priority Mail Contract 177 to the competitive product list. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 177 to the competitive product list.1

    1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 177 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors' Decision, Contract, and Supporting Data, December 23, 2015 (Request).

    The Postal Service contemporaneously filed a redacted contract related to the proposed new product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 CFR 3015.5. Request, Attachment B.

    To support its Request, the Postal Service filed a copy of the contract, a copy of the Governors' Decision authorizing the product, proposed changes to the Mail Classification Schedule, a Statement of Supporting Justification, a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and an application for non-public treatment of certain materials. It also filed supporting financial workpapers.

    II. Notice of Commission Action

    The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-57 and CP2016-72 to consider the Request pertaining to the proposed Priority Mail Contract 177 product and the related contract, respectively.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's filings in the captioned dockets are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as Public Representative in these dockets.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket Nos. MC2016-57 and CP2016-72 to consider the matters raised in each docket.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E. Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in these proceedings (Public Representative).

    3. Comments are due no later than January 5, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32979 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 24, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 11 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-62, CP2016-77.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33005 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 24, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 27 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-59, CP2016-74.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33004 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 174 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-52, CP2016-67.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33000 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria W. Votsch, 202-268-6525.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 24, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express Contract 31 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-61, CP2016-76.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33010 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria Votsch, 202-268-6525.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 26 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-56, CP2016-71.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33002 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Contract 7 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-55, CP2016-70.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33003 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria W. Votsch, 202-268-6525.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 177 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-57, CP2016-72.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33006 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria Votsch, 202-268-6525.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 175 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-53, CP2016-68.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33009 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 10 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-58, CP2016-73.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33001 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 4, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie J. Pelton, 202-268-3049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2015, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 176 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2016-54, CP2016-69.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33007 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [File No. 500-1] In the Matter of USA Graphite, Inc., Order of Suspension of Trading December 30, 2015.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of USA Graphite, Inc. (“USGT 1 ”) (CIK No. 1355420), a revoked Nevada corporation whose principal place of business is listed as Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia because it is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2013. On April 22, 2015, the Commission's Division of Corporation Finance sent a delinquency letter to USGT at the address shown in its then-most recent filing in the Commission's EDGAR system requesting compliance with its periodic filing requirements, which USGT received on April 25, 2015. To date, USGT has failed to cure its delinquencies. As of December 15, 2015, the common stock of USGT was quoted on OTC Link operated by OTC Markets Group, Inc. (formerly “Pink Sheets”) had seven market makers and was eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11(f)(3).

    1 The short form of the issuer's name is also its ticker symbol.

    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on December 30, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EST on January 13, 2016.

    By the Commission.

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33138 Filed 12-30-15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76780; File No. SR-Phlx-2015-111] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NASDAQ OMX PHLX Fee Schedule To Increase the Options Surcharge Fee for MNX and NDX December 28, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 18, 2015, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at Section II, entitled “Multiply Listed Options Fees (Includes options overlying equities, ETFs, ETNs and indexes which are Multiply Listed).” 3 The Exchange purposes to increase the Options Surcharge in MNX 4 and NDX.5

    3 The following symbols are assessed the fees in Section III for Singly Listed Options: SOX, HGX and OSX, and not Section II.

    4 MNX represents options on the one-tenth value of the Nasdaq 100 Index traded under the symbol MNX (“MNX”).

    5 NDX represents options on the Nasdaq 100 Index traded under the symbol NDX (“NDX”).

    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated the amendments to become operative on January 4, 2016.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to increase the Options Surcharge for transactions in MNX and NDX from $0.20 to $0.25 per contract for all non-Customers (Professionals,6 Market Makers,7 Specialists,8 Broker-Dealers 9 and Firms 10 ) in Section II of the Pricing Schedule. Customers 11 will continue not to be assessed an Options Surcharge in MNX and NDX. The Options Surcharge is assessed in addition to the Options Transactions Charges in Section II of the Pricing Schedule. This rule change applies to both electronic and floor transactions.

    6 The term “Professional” means any person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule 1000(b)(14).

    7 A “Market Maker” includes Registered Options Traders (Rule 1014(b)(i) and (ii)), which includes Streaming Quote Traders (see Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A)) and Remote Streaming Quote Traders (see Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B)). Directed Participants are also market makers.

    8 The term “Specialist” applies to transactions for the account of a Specialist as defined in Exchange Rule 1020(a).

    9 The term “Broker-Dealer” applies to any transaction that is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable within a particular category.

    10 The term “Firm” applies to any transaction that is identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the Firm range at The Options Clearing Corporation.

    11 The term “Customer” applies to any transaction that is identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the Customer range at the Options Clearing Corporation and that is not for the account of a broker or dealer or for the account of a “Professional” as that term is defined in Rule 1000(b)(14).

    The Exchange believes that these surcharges will assist the Exchange in remaining competitive in these options by recouping certain fees.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 12 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act 13 in particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the Exchange operates or controls, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, for example, the Commission indicated that market forces should generally determine the price of non-core market data because national market system regulation “has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.” 14 Likewise, in NetCoalition v. NYSE Arca, Inc. 15 (“NetCoalition”) the D.C. Circuit upheld the Commission's use of a market-based approach in evaluating the fairness of market data fees against a challenge claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based approach.16 As the court emphasized, the Commission “intended in Regulation NMS that `market forces, rather than regulatory requirements' play a role in determining the market data . . . to be made available to investors and at what cost.” 17

    14 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 at 37499 [sic] (June 9, 2005) (“Regulation NMS Adopting Release”).

    15NetCoalition v. NYSE Arca, Inc. 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010).

    16See NetCoalition, at 534.

    17Id. at 537.

    Further, “[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker dealers'. . . .” 18 Although the court and the SEC were discussing the cash equities markets, the Exchange believes that these views apply with equal force to the options markets.

    18Id. at 539 (quoting ArcaBook Order, 73 FR at 74782-74783).

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Options Surcharge for transactions in MNX and NDX from $0.20 to $0.25 per contract for all non-Customer market participants is reasonable because all non-Customer market participants will be assessed the same increased Options Surcharge of $0.25 per contract. Customers will continue not to be assessed an Options Surcharge. Customer liquidity benefits the Exchange in offering other market participants an opportunity to interact with this order flow on the Exchange. Also, the Options Surcharge remains competitive with fees at other options exchanges.19

    19See NYSE MKT LLC's (“NYSE Amex”) Fee Schedule. NYSE Amex assesses a Royalty Fee of $0.22 per contract for transactions in MNX and NDX. See also NYSE Arca Inc.'s (“NYSE Arca”) Fees and Charges. NYSE Arca, Inc. assesses a Royalty Fee of $0.22 per contract for transactions in MNX and NDX.

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Options Surcharge for transactions in MNX and NDX from $0.20 to $0.25 per contract for all non-Customer market participants is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange will continue to assess all non-Customer market participants a uniform Options Surcharge. Customers are not assessed an Options Surcharge. Customer order flow is unique because Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants. Finally, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory for non-Customer market participants who trade these products to pay the Options Surcharge as the Exchange has entered into a licensing agreement to obtain intellectual property rights to list these products and seeks to recoup a portion of its costs.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Options Surcharge for transactions in MNX and NDX from $0.20 to $0.25 per contract for all non-Customer market participants does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all non-Customer market participants will continue to be assessed a uniform Options Surcharge for transactions in MNX and NDX, in addition to other transaction fees. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.20

    20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2015-111 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2015-111. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2015-111 and should be submitted on or before January 25, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.21

    21 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32990 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [File No. 500-1] In the Matter of Changda International Holdings, Inc.: Order of Suspension of Trading December 29, 2015.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of Changda International Holdings, Inc. (“CIHD 1 ”) (CIK No. 1417624), a revoked Nevada corporation whose principal place of business is listed as Weifang, Shandong, China because it is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012. On April 28, 2015, the Commission's Division of Corporation Finance sent a delinquency letter to CIHD at the address shown in its then-most recent filing in the Commission's EDGAR system requesting compliance with its periodic filing requirements, . To date, CIHD has failed to cure its delinquencies. As of December 15, 2015, the common stock of CIHD was quoted on OTC Link operated by OTC Markets Group, Inc. (formerly “Pink Sheets”) had seven market makers and was eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11(f)(3).

    1 The short form of the issuer's name is also its ticker symbol.

    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on December 29, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EST on January 12, 2016.

    By the Commission.

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33029 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76778; File No. SR-EDGX-2015-61] Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of EDGX Exchange, Inc. December 28, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 15, 2015, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,4 which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable to Members 5 and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to EDGX Rules 15.1(a) and (c) (“Fee Schedule”) to adopt fees for the recently adopted ALLB routing strategy.

    5 The term “Member” is defined as “any registered broker or dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.” See Exchange Rule 1.5(n).

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to adopt fees for the ALLB routing strategy. In sum, ALLB is a routing option under which the order checks the System 6 for available shares and is then sent to the BATS Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”), BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (“BYX”), and the EDGA Exchange, Inc. (“EDGA” collectively with the Exchange, BZX, and BYX, the “BGM Affiliated Exchanges”).7 Specifically, an order subject to the ALLB routing option would execute first against liquidity on the EDGX Book.8 Any remainder would then be routed to BZX, BYX, and/or EDGA in accordance with the System routing table.9

    6 The term “System” is defined as “the electronic communications and trading facility designated by the Board through which securities orders of Users are consolidated for ranking, execution and, when applicable, routing away.” See Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).

    7See Exchange Rule 11.11(g)(7). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76456 (November 17, 2015), 80 FR 73032 (November 23, 2015) (SR-EDGX-2015-53).

    8 The term “EDGX Book” is defined as “the System's electronic file of orders.” See Exchange Rule 1.5(d).

    9 The term “System routing table” refers to the proprietary process for determining the specific trading venues to which the System routes orders and the order in which it routes them. See Exchange Rule 11.11(g).

    The Exchange now proposes to adopt three new fee codes, AA, AY, and AZ and related fees for the ALLB routing strategy. These fee codes would enable the Exchange to pass through the rate that BATS Trading, Inc. (“BATS Trading”), the Exchange's affiliated routing broker-dealer, would be charged for routing orders to BZX, BYX, and EDGA.10 Each of the proposed fee codes are described as follows:

    10 Orders using the ALLB routing option that execute on the Exchange would be subject to the Exchange's standard fees and rebates, unless the Member achieves a volume tiered reduced fee or enhanced rebate.

    Fee Code AA. Order routed to EDGA using the ALLB routing strategy would yield fee code AA and receive a rebate of $0.00200 [sic] per share in securities priced at or above $1.00. Orders yielding fee code AA in securities priced below $1.00 would be charged no fee nor would they receive a rebate.

    Fee Code AY. Order routed to BYX using the ALLB routing strategy would yield fee code AY and receive a rebate of $0.00150 per share in securities priced at or above $1.00. Orders yielding fee code AY in securities priced below $1.00 would be charged a fee of 0.10% of the transaction's dollar value.

    Fee Code AZ. Order routed to BZX using the ALLB routing strategy would yield fee code AZ and be charged a fee of $0.00300 per share in securities priced at or above $1.00. Orders yielding fee code AZ in securities priced below $1.00 would be charged a fee of 0.30% of the transaction's dollar value.

    BATS Trading will pass through the above rates to the Exchange and the Exchange, in turn, will pass through that exact rate to its Members. The proposed rates would enable the Exchange to equitably allocate its costs among all Members utilizing the ALLB routing strategy.

    Implementation Date

    The Exchange proposes to implement this amendment to its Fee Schedule on January 4, 2016, but the proposed fee codes and their associated rates will not be available until January 8, 2016, the date upon which it announced to Members that it would implement the ALLB routing strategy.11

    11See BATS Announces ALLB Routing Option, available at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/release_notes/2015/BATS-ALL-BATS-Routing-Strategy-Release-Schedule-Updated.pdf. The Exchange notes that the Fee Schedule's date was amended to January 4, 2016 in file no. SR-EDGX-2015-62 (December 8, 2015).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,12 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),13 in particular, as it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange believes that its proposed rates represent an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Members and other persons using its facilities because the Exchange does not levy additional fees or offer additional rebates for orders that it routes to BZX, BYX, and EDGA through BATS Trading. The Exchange believes that its proposed pass through rate for orders that yield fee codes AA, AY or AZ is equitable and reasonable because it accounts for the rate that BATS Trading would be subject to for orders it routes and are executed on EDGA, BYX, and BZX. In addition, the proposal allows the Exchange to pass-through to its Members the rate for orders that are routed to EDGA, BYX, and BZX using the ALLB routing strategy. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that routing through BATS Trading is voluntary. Lastly, the Exchange also believes that the proposed amendment is non-discriminatory because it applies uniformly to all Members.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    This proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe that this change represents a significant departure from previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing offered by the Exchange's competitors. Additionally, Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of Members or competing venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets. The Exchange believes that its proposal to pass through the rates that BATS Trading would be subject to for orders routing to EDGA, BYX, and BZX using the ALLB routing strategy to Members would increase intermarket competition because it offers customers an alternative means to route orders to those venues. In addition, the proposed pricing would not provide any advantage to Users when routing to EDGA, BYX or BYX as compared to other methods of routing or connectivity available to Users by the Exchange because the proposed rates are identical to what the Member would be subject to if it routed to those venues directly. The Exchange believes that its proposal would not burden intramarket competition because the proposed rate would apply uniformly to all Members.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any written comments from members or other interested parties.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 14 and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.15 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

    14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File No. SR-EDGX-2015-61 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File No. SR-EDGX-2015-61. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-EDGX-2015-61 and should be submitted on or before January 25, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.16

    16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32988 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76776; File No. SR-BATS-2015-105] Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule 14.11(i), Managed Fund Shares, To List and Trade the Shares of the Elkhorn S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Commodity ETF of Elkhorn ETF Trust December 28, 2015.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 18, 2015, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BATS”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is proposing a rule change to list and trade the shares of the Elkhorn S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Commodity ETF (the “Fund”) of Elkhorn ETF Trust (the “Trust”) under BATS Rule 14.11(i) (“Managed Fund Shares”). The shares of the Fund are collectively referred to herein as (the “Shares”).

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares under BATS Rule 14.11(i), which governs the listing and trading of Managed Fund Shares on the Exchange.3 The Fund will be an actively managed fund. The Shares will be offered by the Trust, which was established as a Massachusetts business trust on December 12, 2013.4 The Trust is registered with the Commission as an open-end investment company and has filed a registration statement on behalf of the Fund on Form N-1A (“Registration Statement”) with the Commission.5 The Fund will be a series of the Trust. The Fund will invest in, among other things, exchange-traded commodity futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments held indirectly through a wholly-owned subsidiary controlled by the Fund and organized under the laws of the Cayman Islands (referred to herein as the “Subsidiary”).

    3 The Commission approved BATS Rule 14.11(i) in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August 30, 2011), 76 FR 55148 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-018).

    4 The Trust has obtained from the Commission an order granting certain exemptive relief to the Trust under the 1940 Act (File No. 812-14262). In compliance with BATS Rule 14.11(i)(2)(E), which applies to Managed Fund Shares based on an international or global portfolio, the Trust's application for exemptive relief under the 1940 Act states that the Fund will comply with the federal securities laws in accepting securities for deposits and satisfying redemptions with redemption securities, including that the securities accepted for deposits and the securities used to satisfy redemption requests are sold in transactions that would be exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a).

    5See Registration Statement on Form N-1A for the Trust, dated November 10, 2015 (File Nos. 333-201473 and 811-22926). The descriptions of the Fund and the Shares contained herein are based, in part, on information in the Registration Statement.

    Description of the Shares and the Fund

    Elkhorn Investments, LLC will be the investment adviser (the “Adviser”) to the Fund and will monitor the Fund's investment portfolio. It is currently anticipated that day-to-day portfolio management for the Fund will be provided by the Adviser. However, the Fund and the Adviser may contract with an investment sub-adviser (a “Sub-Adviser”) to provide day-to-day portfolio management for the Fund. ALPS Distributors, Inc. (the “Distributor”) will be the principal underwriter and distributor of the Fund's Shares. The Fund will contract with unaffiliated third parties to provide administrative, custodial and transfer agency services to the Fund.

    Rule 14.11(i)(7) provides that, if the investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, such investment adviser shall erect a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio.6 In addition, Rule 14.11(i)(7) further requires that personnel who make decisions on the investment company's portfolio composition must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material, non-public information regarding the applicable investment company portfolio. Rule 14.11(i)(7) is similar to BATS Rule 14.11(b)(5)(A)(i), however, Rule 14.11(i)(7) in connection with the establishment of a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer reflects the applicable open-end fund's portfolio, not an underlying benchmark index, as is the case with index-based funds. The Adviser is not a broker-dealer, although it is affiliated with a broker-dealer. The Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its broker-dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's portfolio. In addition, personnel who make decisions regarding the Fund's portfolio composition will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding the Fund's portfolio. In the event that (a) the Adviser or a Sub-Adviser becomes, or becomes newly affiliated with, a broker-dealer or registers as a broker-dealer, or (b) any new adviser or sub-adviser is a registered broker-dealer or becomes affiliated with a broker-dealer, it will implement a fire wall with respect to its relevant personnel and/or such broker-dealer affiliate, as applicable, regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the portfolio and will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding such portfolio.

    6 An investment adviser to an open-end fund is required to be registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). As a result, the Adviser and any Sub-Adviser and their related personnel are subject to the provisions of Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act relating to codes of ethics. This Rule requires investment advisers to adopt a code of ethics that reflects the fiduciary nature of the relationship to clients as well as compliance with other applicable securities laws. Accordingly, procedures designed to prevent the communication and misuse of non-public information by an investment adviser must be consistent with Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act. In addition, Rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act makes it unlawful for an investment adviser to provide investment advice to clients unless such investment adviser has (i) adopted and implemented written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation, by the investment adviser and its supervised persons, of the Advisers Act and the Commission rules adopted thereunder; (ii) implemented, at a minimum, an annual review regarding the adequacy of the policies and procedures established pursuant to subparagraph (i) above and the effectiveness of their implementation; and (iii) designated an individual (who is a supervised person) responsible for administering the policies and procedures adopted under subparagraph (i) above.

    Elkhorn S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Commodity ETF Portfolio

    According to the Registration Statement, the Fund's investment objective will be to provide total return which exceeds that of the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index (the “Benchmark”) 7 consistent with prudent investment management. The Fund will seek excess return above the Benchmark through the active management of a short duration portfolio of highly liquid, high quality bonds.

    7 The Benchmark is developed, maintained and sponsored by S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC (“S&P Indices”).

    The Fund will be an actively managed fund that seeks to achieve its investment objective by, under normal market conditions,8 investing in exchange-traded commodity futures contracts, centrally cleared and non-centrally cleared swaps,9 exchange-traded options on futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments 10 (collectively, “Commodities”) through the Subsidiary, thereby obtaining exposure to the commodities markets, and directly investing, as further described below, in short-term investment grade fixed income securities, money market instruments, exchange-traded and non-exchange-traded investment companies, certain bank instruments, and cash and other cash equivalents.

    8 The term “under normal market conditions” includes, but is not limited to, the absence of extreme volatility or trading halts in the fixed income markets, futures markets or the financial markets generally; operational issues causing dissemination of inaccurate market information; or force majeure type events such as systems failure, natural or man-made disaster, act of God, armed conflict, act of terrorism, riot or labor disruption or any similar intervening circumstance.

    9 Investments in non-centrally cleared swaps (through the Subsidiary) will not represent more than 20% of the Fund's net assets. When investing in non-centrally cleared swaps, the Subsidiary will seek, where possible, to use counterparties, as applicable, whose financial status is such that the risk of default is reduced; however, the risk of losses resulting from default is still possible. The Adviser and/or a Sub-Adviser will evaluate the creditworthiness of counterparties on an ongoing basis. In addition to information provided by credit agencies, the Adviser's and/or a Sub-Adviser's analysis will evaluate each approved counterparty using various methods of analysis and may consider such factors as the counterparty's liquidity, its reputation, the Adviser's and/or a Sub-Adviser's past experience with the counterparty, its known disciplinary history and its share of market participation.

    10 Exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments include only the following: (1) Funds that provide exposure to commodities as would be listed under Rules 14.11(b), (c), and (i); and (2) pooled investment vehicles that invest primarily in commodities and commodity-linked instruments as would be listed under Rules 14.11(d) and 14.11(e)(2), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10). Such pooled investment vehicles are commonly referred to as “exchange-traded funds” but they are not registered as investment companies because of the nature of their underlying investments.

    The Fund's Commodities investments, in part, will be comprised of exchange-traded futures contracts on commodities that comprise the Benchmark. Although the Fund, through the Subsidiary, will generally hold many of the futures contracts included in the Benchmark, the Fund and the Subsidiary will be actively managed and will not be obligated to invest in all of (or to limit investments solely to) such futures contracts. In addition, with respect to investments in exchange-traded futures contracts, the Fund and the Subsidiary will not be obligated to invest in the same amount or proportion as the Benchmark, or be obligated to track the performance of the Benchmark. There can be no assurance that the Fund's performance will exceed the performance of the Benchmark at any time. In addition to exchange-traded futures contracts, the Fund's Commodities investments will also be comprised of the following: Centrally cleared and non-centrally-cleared swaps on commodities, exchange-traded options on futures contracts that provide exposure to the investment returns of the commodities markets, and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments, without investing directly in physical commodities.

    The Fund will invest in Commodities through investments in the Subsidiary and will not invest directly in physical commodities. The Fund's investment in the Subsidiary may not exceed 25% of the Fund's total assets. In addition to Commodities, the Fund's assets will be invested in: (1) Short-term investment grade fixed income securities that include only the following instruments: U.S. government and agency securities,11 corporate debt obligations 12 and repurchase agreements; 13 (2) money market instruments; 14 (3) investment companies (other than those that are commodity-linked instruments),15 including both exchange-traded and non-exchange-traded investment companies, that provide exposure to commodities, equity securities and fixed income securities to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act and any applicable exemptive relief; 16 (4) certain bank instruments 17 ; and (5) cash and other cash equivalents (collectively, “Other Investments”). The Fund will use the Other Investments as investments, to provide liquidity and to collateralize the Subsidiary's commodity exposure on a day-to-day basis.

    11 Such securities are securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities, which have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury obligations are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. government. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

    12 At least 75% of corporate debt obligations will have a minimum principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more.

    13 The Fund intends to enter into repurchase agreements only with financial institutions and dealers believed by the Adviser and/or a Sub-Adviser to present minimal credit risks in accordance with criteria approved by the Trust's Board of Trustees (the “Board”). The Adviser and/or a Sub-Adviser will review and monitor the creditworthiness of such institutions. The Adviser and/or a Sub-Adviser will monitor the value of the collateral at the time the transaction is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement.

    14 For the Fund's purposes, money market instruments will include only the following instruments: short-term, high-quality securities issued or guaranteed by non-U.S. governments, agencies and instrumentalities; non-convertible corporate debt securities with remaining maturities of not more than 397 days that satisfy ratings requirements under Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act; money market mutual funds; and deposits and other obligations of U.S. and non-U.S. banks and financial institutions. In addition, the Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes. The Fund may additionally invest in commercial paper only if it has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, has been judged by the Adviser and/or a Sub-Adviser to be of comparable quality.

    15 The Fund may invest in the securities of certain other investment companies in excess of the limits imposed under the 1940 Act pursuant to an exemptive order obtained by the Trust and the Adviser from the Commission. See Investment Company Act Release No. 31401 (December 29, 2014) (File No. 812-14264). The exchange-traded investment companies in which the Fund may invest include Index Fund Shares (as described in Rule 14.11(c)), Portfolio Depository Receipts (as described in Rule 14.11(b)), and Managed Fund Shares (as described in Rule 14.11(i)). While the Fund and the Subsidiary may invest in inverse commodity-linked instruments, the Fund and the Subsidiary will not invest in leveraged or inverse leveraged (e.g., 2X or -3X) commodity-linked instruments.

    16 The exchange-traded investment companies in which the Fund invests will be listed and traded in the U.S. on registered exchanges.

    17 The term “certain bank instruments” includes only the following instruments: certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association; bankers' acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions; and bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest.

    The Fund's investment in the Subsidiary will be designed to help the Fund achieve exposure to commodity returns in a manner consistent with the federal tax requirements applicable to the Fund and other regulated investment companies.

    The Fund intends to qualify for and to elect to be treated as a separate regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code.18

    18 26 U.S.C. 851.

    Subsidiary's Investments

    The Subsidiary will generally seek to make investments in Commodities and its portfolio will be managed by the Adviser or a Sub-Adviser.19 The Adviser or a Sub-Adviser will use its discretion to determine the percentage of the Fund's assets allocated to the Commodities held by the Subsidiary that will be invested in exchange-traded commodity futures contracts, centrally cleared and non-centrally cleared swaps, exchange-traded options on futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments. In this regard, under normal market conditions, the Subsidiary is expected, as a general matter, to invest in futures contracts in proportional weights and allocations that are similar to the Benchmark, as well as in the other Commodities. Additionally, the Subsidiary, like the Fund, may invest in Other Investments (e.g., as investments or to serve as margin or collateral or otherwise support the Subsidiary's positions in Commodities).

    19 The Subsidiary will not be registered under the 1940 Act and will not be directly subject to its investor protections, except as noted in the Registration Statement. However, the Subsidiary will be wholly-owned and controlled by the Fund. Therefore, the Fund's ownership and control of the Subsidiary will prevent the Subsidiary from taking action contrary to the interests of the Fund or its shareholders. The Board will have oversight responsibility for the investment activities of the Fund, including its expected investment in the Subsidiary, and the Fund's role as the sole shareholder of the Subsidiary. The Subsidiary will also enter into separate contracts for the provision of custody, transfer agency, and accounting agent services with the same or with affiliates of the same service providers that provide those services to the Fund.

    The Fund's investment in the Subsidiary is intended to provide the Fund with exposure to commodity markets within the limits of current federal income tax laws applicable to investment companies such as the Fund, which limit the ability of investment companies to invest directly in the derivative instruments. The Subsidiary will have the same investment objective as the Fund, but unlike the Fund, it may invest without limitation in Commodities. The Subsidiary's investments will provide the Fund with exposure to domestic and international markets.

    The Benchmark is a version of the S&P GSCI Index that aims to mitigate the effects of “contango” (which means that futures contracts with distant delivery months are priced higher than those with nearer delivery months) on index performance. The S&P GSCI Index is a broad-based, production-weighted index that is designed to be representative of global commodity market performance and to reflect general levels of price movements and inflation in the world economy. The S&P GSCI Index consists of twenty-four commodity futures on physical commodities across five sectors: energy; agriculture; livestock; industrial metals; and precious metals. The following table describes each of the commodities underlying the futures contracts included in the Benchmark as of October 31, 2015. The table also provides each instrument's trading hours, exchange and ticker symbol. The table is subject to change (and the Subsidiary will not in all cases invest in the futures contracts included in the Benchmark).

    20 All of the exchanges are Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) members except for the London Metal Exchange (“LME”), ICE Futures Europe and Commodity Exchange, Inc. (“COMEX”). The LME falls under the jurisdiction of the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). The FCA is responsible for ensuring the financial stability of the exchange members' businesses, whereas the LME is largely responsible for the oversight of day-to-day exchange activity, including conducting the arbitration proceedings under the LME arbitration regulations. With respect to the futures contracts in which the Subsidiary invests, not more than 10% of the weight (to be calculated as the value of the contract divided by the total absolute notional value of the Subsidiary's futures contracts) of the futures contracts held by the Subsidiary in the aggregate shall consist of instruments whose principal trading market is a market from which the Exchange may not obtain information regarding trading in the futures contracts by virtue of: (a) Its membership in ISG; or (b) a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, at least 90% of the Fund's net assets that are invested in exchange-traded options on futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments (in the aggregate) will be invested in instruments that trade in markets that are members of ISG or are parties to a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement with the Exchange.

    Commodity Exchange code Exchange name 20 Trading hours electronic (E.T.) Contract
  • symbol(s)
  • Corn CBT Chicago Board of Trade Sun-F 20:00-08:45 M-F 09:30-14:15 C; ZC. Cocoa NYB ICE Futures US 04:45-13:30 CC. WTI Crude Oil NYM New York Mercantile Exchange 18:00-17:15 CL. Brent Crude Oil ICE ICE Futures Europe 20:00-18:00 B. Cotton NYB ICE Futures US 21:00-14:20 CT. Feeder Cattle CME Chicago Mercantile Exchange M 10:05-F 14:55 (Halts 17:00-18:00) FC; GF. Gold CMX COMEX 18:00-17:15 GC. NY Harbor ULSD NYM New York Mercantile Exchange 18:00-17:15 HO. Coffee “C” Arabica NYB ICE Futures US 04:15-13:30 KC. HRW Wheat CBT Chicago Board of Trade Sun-F 20:00-08:45 M-F 9:30-14:15 KW; KE. Aluminium primary LME London Metal Exchange 20:00-14:00 AH. Live Cattle CME Chicago Mercantile Exchange M 10:05-F 14:55 (Halts 17:00-18:00) LC; LE. Lean Hogs CME Chicago Mercantile Exchange M 10:05-F 14:55 (Halts 17:00-18:00) LH; HE. Lead standard LME London Metal Exchange 20:00-14:00 PB. Nickel primary LME London Metal Exchange 20:00-14:00 NI. Copper grade A LME London Metal Exchange 20:00-14:00 CA. Zinc high grade LME London Metal Exchange 20:00-14:00 ZS. Natural Gas NYM New York Mercantile Exchange 18:00-17:15 NG. Gasoil ICE ICE Futures Europe 20:00-18:00 G. Soybeans CBT Chicago Board of Trade Sun-F 20:00-08:45 M-F 09:30-14:15 S; ZS. Sugar #11 NYB ICE Futures US 03:30-13:00 SB. Silver CMX COMEX 18:00-17:15 SI. SRW Wheat CBT Chicago Board of Trade Sun-F 20:00-08:45 M-F 09:30-14:15 W; ZW. RBOB Gasoline NYM New York Mercantile Exchange 18:00-17:15 RB.

    As the U.S. and foreign exchanges noted above list additional contracts, as currently listed contracts on those exchanges gain sufficient liquidity, or as other exchanges list sufficiently liquid contracts, the Adviser and/or any Sub-Adviser will include those contracts in the list of possible investments of the Subsidiary. The list of commodities futures and commodities markets considered for investment can and will change over time.

    Commodities Regulation

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) has adopted substantial amendments to CFTC Rule 4.5 relating to the permissible exemptions and conditions for reliance on exemptions from registration as a commodity pool operator. As a result of the instruments that will be indirectly held by the Fund, the Adviser will register as a commodity pool operator 21 and will also be a member of the National Futures Association (“NFA”). Any Sub-Adviser will register as a commodity pool operator or commodity trading adviser, as required by CFTC regulations. The Fund and the Subsidiary will be subject to regulation by the CFTC and NFA and additional disclosure, reporting and recordkeeping rules imposed upon commodity pools.

    21 As defined in Section 1a(11) of the Commodity Exchange Act.

    Investment Restrictions

    While the Fund will be permitted to borrow as permitted under the 1940 Act, the Fund's investments will not be used to seek performance that is the multiple or inverse multiple (i.e., 2X and -3X) of the Benchmark.

    The Fund may not invest more than 25% of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry or group of industries. This restriction will not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, or securities of other investment companies.22

    22See Form N-1A, Item 9. The Commission has taken the position that a fund is concentrated if it invests more than 25% of the value of its total assets in any one industry. See, e.g., Investment Company Act Release No. 9011 (October 30, 1975), 40 FR 54241 (November 21, 1975).

    The Subsidiary's shares will be offered only to the Fund and the Fund will not sell shares of the Subsidiary to other investors. The Fund and the Subsidiary will not invest in any non-U.S. equity securities (other than shares of the Subsidiary). The Fund will not purchase securities of open-end or closed-end investment companies except in compliance with the 1940 Act or any applicable exemptive relief.23

    23See supra note 15.

    The Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment), including securities deemed illiquid by the Adviser.24 The Fund will monitor its portfolio liquidity on an ongoing basis to determine whether, in light of current circumstances, an adequate level of liquidity is being maintained, and will consider taking appropriate steps in order to maintain adequate liquidity if, through a change in values, net assets, or other circumstances, more than 15% of the Fund's net assets are held in illiquid assets. Illiquid assets include securities subject to contractual or other restrictions on resale and other instruments that lack readily available markets as determined in accordance with Commission staff guidance.25

    24 In reaching liquidity decisions, the Adviser may consider the following factors: The frequency of trades and quotes for the security; the number of dealers wishing to purchase or sell the security and the number of other potential purchasers; dealer undertakings to make a market in the security; and the nature of the security and the nature of the marketplace trades (e.g., the time needed to dispose of the security, the method of soliciting offers, and the mechanics of transfer).

    25 The Commission has stated that long-standing Commission guidelines have required open-end funds to hold no more than 15% of their net assets in illiquid securities and other illiquid assets. See Investment Company Act Release No. 28193 (March 11, 2008), 73 FR 14618 (March 18, 2008), footnote 34. See also Investment Company Act Release No. 5847 (October 21, 1969), 35 FR 19989 (December 31, 1970) (Statement Regarding “Restricted Securities”); Investment Company Act Release No. 18612 (March 12, 1992), 57 FR 9828 (March 20, 1992) (Revisions of Guidelines to Form N-1A). A fund's portfolio security is illiquid if it cannot be disposed of in the ordinary course of business within seven days at approximately the value ascribed to it by the fund. See Investment Company Act Release No. 14983 (March 12, 1986), 51 FR 9773 (March 21, 1986) (adopting amendments to Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act); Investment Company Act Release No. 17452 (April 23, 1990), 55 FR 17933 (April 30, 1990) (adopting Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933).

    Net Asset Value

    The Fund's net asset value (“NAV”) will be determined as of the close of trading (normally 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time (“E.T.”)) on each day the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) is open for business. The NAV of the Fund will be calculated by dividing the value of the net assets of such Fund (i.e., the value of its total assets, less total liabilities) by the total number of outstanding Shares, generally rounded to the nearest cent.

    The Fund's and the Subsidiary's investments will be generally valued using market valuations. A market valuation generally means a valuation (i) obtained from an exchange, a pricing service, or a major market maker (or dealer), (ii) based on a price quotation or other equivalent indication of value supplied by an exchange, a pricing service, or a major market maker (or dealer), or (iii) based on amortized cost. The Fund and the Subsidiary may use various pricing services or discontinue the use of any pricing service. A price obtained from a pricing service based on such pricing service's valuation matrix may be considered a market valuation.

    If available, debt securities and money market instruments with maturities of more than 60 days will typically be priced based on valuations provided by independent, third-party pricing agents. Such values will generally reflect the last reported sales price if the security is actively traded. The third-party pricing agents may also value debt securities at an evaluated bid price by employing methodologies that utilize actual market transactions, broker-supplied valuations, or other methodologies designed to identify the market value for such securities. Debt obligations with remaining maturities of 60 days or less may be valued on the basis of amortized cost, which approximates market value. If such prices are not available, the security will be valued based on values supplied by independent brokers or by fair value pricing, as described below.

    Futures contracts will be valued at the settlement price established each day by the board or exchange on which they are traded.

    Exchange-traded options will be valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded.

    Swaps will be valued based on valuations provided by independent, third-party pricing agents.

    Securities of non-exchange-traded investment companies will be valued at NAV. Equity securities listed on a securities exchange (including exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments and exchange-traded investment companies), market or automated quotation system for which quotations are readily available (except for securities traded on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ”) and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (“LSE AIM”)) will be valued at the last reported sale price on the primary exchange or market on which they are traded on the valuation date (or at approximately 4:00 p.m., E.T. if a security's primary exchange is normally open at that time). For a security that trades on multiple exchanges, the primary exchange will generally be considered to be the exchange on which the security generally has the highest volume of trading activity. If it is not possible to determine the last reported sale price on the relevant exchange or market on the valuation date, the value of the security will be taken to be the most recent mean between the bid and asked prices on such exchange or market on the valuation date. Absent both bid and asked prices on such exchange, the bid price may be used. For securities traded on the NASDAQ or LSE AIM, the official closing price will be used. If such prices are not available, the security will be valued based on values supplied by independent brokers or by fair value pricing, as described below.

    The prices for foreign instruments will be reported in local currency and converted to U.S. dollars using currency exchange rates. Exchange rates will be provided daily by recognized independent pricing agents.

    In the event that current market valuations are not readily available or such valuations do not reflect current market values, the affected investments will be valued using fair value pricing pursuant to the pricing policy and procedures approved by the Board in accordance with the 1940 Act. Fair value pricing may require subjective determinations about the value of an asset and may result in prices that differ from the value that would be realized if the asset was sold.

    Creation and Redemption of Shares

    The Fund will issue and redeem Shares on a continuous basis at NAV26 only in large blocks of Shares (“Creation Units”) in transactions with authorized participants, generally including broker-dealers and large institutional investors (“Authorized Participants”). Creation Units are not expected to consist of less than 25,000 Shares. The Fund will issue and redeem Creation Units in exchange for an in-kind portfolio of instruments and/or cash in lieu of such instruments (the “Creation Basket”).27 In addition, if there is a difference between the NAV attributable to a Creation Unit and the market value of the Creation Basket exchanged for the Creation Unit, the party conveying instruments with the lower value will pay to the other an amount in cash equal to the difference (referred to as the “Cash Component”).

    26 The NAV of the Fund's Shares generally will be calculated once daily Monday through Friday as of the close of regular trading on the NYSE, generally 4:00 p.m., E.T. (the “NAV Calculation Time”). NAV per Share will be calculated by dividing the Fund's net assets by the number of Fund Shares outstanding.

    27 The Adviser represents that, to the extent that the Trust permits or requires a “cash in lieu” amount, such transactions will be effected in the same or equitable manner for all Authorized Participants.

    Creations and redemptions must be made by or through an Authorized Participant that has executed an agreement that has been agreed to by the Distributor with respect to creations and redemptions of Creation Units. All standard orders to create Creation Units must be received by the Distributor no later than the closing time of the regular trading session on the NYSE (ordinarily 4:00 p.m., E.T.) (the “Closing Time”) in each case on the date such order is placed in order for the creation of Creation Units to be effected based on the NAV of Shares as next determined on such date after receipt of the order in proper form. Shares may be redeemed only in Creation Units at their NAV next determined after receipt not later than the Closing Time of a redemption request in proper form by the Fund through the Distributor and only on a business day.

    On each business day, prior to the opening of business of the Exchange, the Fund will cause to be published through the National Securities Clearing Corporation the list of the names and quantities of the instruments comprising the Creation Basket, as well as the estimated Cash Component (if any), for that day. The published Creation Basket will apply until a new Creation Basket is announced on the following business day.

    Availability of Information

    The Fund's Web site (www.elkhorn.com), which will be publicly available prior to the public offering of Shares, will include a form of the prospectus for the Fund that may be downloaded. The Web site will include the Shares' ticker, CUSIP and exchange information along with additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, for the Fund: (1) Daily trading volume, the prior business day's reported NAV and closing price, mid-point of the bid/ask spread at the time of calculation of such NAV (the “Bid/Ask Price”) 28 and a calculation of the premium and discount of the Bid/Ask Price against the NAV; and (2) data in chart format displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the daily Bid/Ask Price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges, for each of the four previous calendar quarters. Daily trading volume information for the Fund will also be available in the financial section of newspapers, through subscription services such as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters, and International Data Corporation, which can be accessed by Authorized Participants and other investors, as well as through other electronic services, including major public Web sites. On each business day, before commencement of trading in Shares during Regular Trading Hours29 on the Exchange, the Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the portfolio of securities, Commodities and other assets (the “Disclosed Portfolio” as defined in Rule 14.11(i)(3)(B)) held by the Fund and the Subsidiary that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the business day.30 The Fund's disclosure of derivative positions in the Disclosed Portfolio will include information that market participants can use to value these positions intraday. On a daily basis, the Disclosed Portfolio displayed on the Fund's Web site the following information regarding each portfolio holding, as applicable to the type of holding: Ticker symbol, CUSIP number or other identifier, if any; a description of the holding (including the type of holding such as the type of swap), the identity of the security, commodity or other asset or instrument underlying the holding, if any; for options, the option strike price; quantity held (as measured by, for example, par value, notional value or number of shares, contracts or units); maturity date, if any; coupon rate, if any; effective date, if any; market value of the holding; and percentage weighting of the holding in the Fund's portfolio. The Web site and information will be publicly available at no charge.

    28 The Bid/Ask Price of the Fund will be determined using the mid-point of the highest bid and the lowest offer on the Exchange as of the time of calculation of the Fund's NAV. The records relating to Bid/Ask Prices will be retained by the Fund and its service providers.

    29 Regular Trading Hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    30 Under accounting procedures to be followed by the Fund, trades made on the prior business day (“T”) will be booked and reflected in NAV on the current business day (“T+1”). Accordingly, the Fund will be able to disclose at the beginning of the business day the portfolio that will form the basis for the NAV calculation at the end of the business day.

    In addition, for the Fund, an estimated value, defined in BATS Rule 14.11(i)(3)(C) as the “Intraday Indicative Value,” that reflects an estimated intraday value of the Fund's portfolio (including the Subsidiary's portfolio), will be disseminated. Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value will be based upon the current value for the components of the Disclosed Portfolio and will be updated and widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors and broadly displayed at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Regular Trading Hours.31

    31 Currently, it is the Exchange's understanding that several major market data vendors display and/or make widely available Intraday Indicative Values published via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) or other data feeds.

    The dissemination of the Intraday Indicative Value, together with the Disclosed Portfolio, will allow investors to determine the value of the underlying portfolio of the Fund on a daily basis and will provide a close estimate of that value throughout the trading day.

    Intra-day executable price quotations on the securities and other assets held by the Fund and the Subsidiary will be available from major broker-dealer firms or on the exchange on which they are traded, as applicable. Intra-day price information on the securities and other assets held by the Fund and the Subsidiary will also be available through subscription services, such as Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters, which can be accessed by Authorized Participants and other investors. More specifically, pricing information for exchange-traded commodity futures contracts, exchange-traded options on futures contracts, exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments, securities of exchange-traded investment companies other than exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments will be available on the exchanges on which they are traded and through subscription services. Pricing information for securities of non-exchange-traded investment companies will be available through the applicable fund's Web site or major market data vendors. Pricing information for swaps, fixed income securities and money market instruments will be available through subscription services and/or broker-dealer firms and/or pricing services. Additionally, the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”) of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) will be a source of price information for certain fixed income securities held by the Fund.

    Investors will also be able to obtain the Fund's Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), the Fund's annual and semi-annual reports (together, “Shareholder Reports”), and its Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR, filed twice a year. The Fund's SAI and Shareholder Reports will be available free upon request from the Fund, and those documents and the Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's Web site at www.sec.gov. Information regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. The previous day's closing price and trading volume information for the Shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the Shares will be available on the facilities of the CTA.

    Information relating to the Benchmark, including its constituents, weightings and changes to its constituents, will be available on the Web site of S&P Indices.

    Initial and Continued Listing

    The Shares will be subject to BATS Rule 14.11(i), which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable to Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange represents that, for initial and/or continued listing, the Fund and the Subsidiary must be in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act.32 A minimum of 100,000 Shares will be outstanding at the commencement of trading on the Exchange. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily and that the NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio will be made available to all market participants at the same time.

    32See 17 CFR 240.10A-3.

    Trading Halts

    With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares of the Fund. The Exchange will halt trading in the Shares under the conditions specified in BATS Rule 11.18. Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. These may include: (1) The extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities, Commodities and other assets constituting the Disclosed Portfolio of the Fund and the Subsidiary; or (2) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. Trading in the Shares also will be subject to Rule 14.11(i)(4)(B)(iv), which sets forth circumstances under which Shares of the Fund may be halted.

    Trading Rules

    The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. BATS will allow trading in the Shares from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Shares during all trading sessions. As provided in BATS Rule 11.11(a), the minimum price variation for quoting and entry of orders in Managed Fund Shares traded on the Exchange is $0.01, with the exception of securities that are priced less than $1.00, for which the minimum price variation for order entry is $0.0001.

    Surveillance

    The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. Trading of the Shares through the Exchange will be subject to the Exchange's surveillance procedures for derivative products, including Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying shares in exchange traded investment companies, futures, and options on futures via the ISG, from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG, or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, the Exchange is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income instruments reported to TRACE. With respect to the futures contracts in which the Subsidiary invests, not more than 10% of the weight (to be calculated as the value of the contract divided by the total absolute notional value of the Subsidiary's futures contracts) of the futures contracts held by the Subsidiary in the aggregate shall consist of instruments whose principal trading market is a market from which the Exchange may not obtain information regarding trading in the futures contracts by virtue of: (a) Its membership in ISG; or (b) a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, at least 90% of the Fund's net assets that are invested in exchange-traded options on futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments (in the aggregate), will be invested in instruments that trade in markets that are members of ISG or are parties to a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement with the Exchange. Investments in non-centrally cleared swaps (through the Subsidiary) will not represent more than 20% of the Fund's net assets.

    In addition, the Exchange prohibits the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.

    Information Circular

    Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Circular will discuss the following: (1) The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Units (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) BATS Rule 3.7, which imposes suitability obligations on Exchange members with respect to recommending transactions in the Shares to customers; (3) how information regarding the Intraday Indicative Value and the Disclosed Portfolio is disseminated; (4) the risks involved in trading the Shares during the Pre-Opening33 and After Hours Trading Sessions34 when an updated Intraday Indicative Value will not be calculated or publicly disseminated; (5) the requirement that members deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (6) trading information.

    33 The Pre-Opening Session is from 8:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time.

    34 The After Hours Trading Session is from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    In addition, the Information Circular will advise members, prior to the commencement of trading, of the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Fund. Members purchasing Shares from the Fund for resale to investors will deliver a prospectus to such investors. The Information Circular will also discuss any exemptive, no-action and interpretive relief granted by the Commission from any rules under the Act.

    Additionally, the Information Circular will reference that the Fund is subject to various fees and expenses described in the Registration Statement. The Information Circular will also disclose the trading hours of the Shares of the Fund and the applicable NAV Calculation Time for the Shares. The Information Circular will disclose that information about the Shares of the Fund will be publicly available on the Fund's Web site. In addition, the Information Circular will reference that the Trust is subject to various fees and expenses described in the Fund's Registration Statement.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 35 in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 36 in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    35 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    36 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in BATS Rule 14.11(i). The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. If the investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, such investment adviser to the investment company shall erect a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio. The Adviser is not registered as a broker-dealer, although it is affiliated with a broker-dealer, and is therefore required to implement a “fire wall” with respect to such broker-dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the Fund's portfolio. In addition, Rule 14.11(i)(7) further requires that personnel who make decisions on the open-end fund's portfolio composition must be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding the Fund's portfolio. The Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying shares in investment companies, futures, and options on futures via the ISG, from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG, or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. The Exchange represents that trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.

    The Exchange will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares and in the exchange-traded Commodities and exchange-traded investment companies not included within the definition of Commodities (together, “Exchange-Traded Instruments”) held by the Fund and the Subsidiary with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG and may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and in the Exchange-Traded Instruments held by the Fund and the Subsidiary from such markets and other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and in the Exchange-Traded Instruments held by the Fund and the Subsidiary from markets and other entities that are members of ISG, which includes securities and futures exchanges, or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. The Exchange will be able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income securities held by the Fund reported to FINRA's TRACE.

    With respect to the futures contracts in which the Subsidiary invests, not more than 10% of the weight (to be calculated as the value of the contract divided by the total absolute notional value of the Subsidiary's futures contracts) of the futures contracts held by the Subsidiary in the aggregate shall consist of instruments whose principal trading market is a market from which the Exchange may not obtain information regarding trading in the futures contracts by virtue of: (a) Its membership in ISG; or (b) a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, at least 90% of the Fund's net assets that are invested in exchange-traded options on futures contracts and exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments (in the aggregate) will be invested in instruments that trade in markets that are members of ISG or are parties to a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement with the Exchange. Investments in non-centrally cleared swaps (through the Subsidiary) will not represent more than 20% of the Fund's net assets.

    The Fund's investment objective will be to provide total return which exceeds that of the Benchmark, consistent with prudent investment management. The Fund will invest in Commodities through investments in the Subsidiary and will not invest directly in physical commodities. The Fund's investment in the Subsidiary may not exceed 25% of the Fund's total assets. While the Fund will be permitted to borrow as permitted under the 1940 Act, the Fund's investments will not be used to seek performance that is the multiple or inverse multiple (i.e., 2X and -3X) of the Benchmark. The Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment), including securities deemed illiquid by the Adviser. The Fund and the Subsidiary will not invest in any non-U.S. equity securities (other than shares of the Subsidiary).

    The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest in that the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily and that the NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio will be made available to all market participants at the same time. In addition, a large amount of information will be publicly available regarding the Fund and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency. Moreover, the Intraday Indicative Value will be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors and broadly displayed at least every 15 seconds during Regular Trading Hours. On each business day, before commencement of trading in Shares during Regular Trading Hours, the Fund will disclose on its Web site the Disclosed Portfolio of the Fund and the Subsidiary that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the business day. Pricing information will be available on the Fund's Web site including: (1) The prior business day's reported NAV, the Bid/Ask Price of the Fund, and a calculation of the premium and discount of the Bid/Ask Price against the NAV; and (2) data in chart format displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the daily Bid/Ask Price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges, for each of the four previous calendar quarters. Additionally, information regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares will be available on the facilities of the CTA.

    Intra-day executable price quotations on the securities and other assets held by the Fund and the Subsidiary will be available from major broker-dealer firms or on the exchange on which they are traded, as applicable. Intra-day price information on the securities and other assets held by the Fund and the Subsidiary will also be available through subscription services, such as Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters, which can be accessed by Authorized Participants and other investors. More specifically, pricing information for exchange-traded commodity futures contracts, exchange-traded options on futures contracts, exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments, and exchange-traded investment companies other than exchange-traded commodity-linked instruments will be available on the exchanges on which they are traded and through subscription services. Pricing information for non-exchange-traded investment companies will be available through the applicable fund's Web site or major market data vendors. Pricing information for swaps, fixed income securities and money market instruments will be available through subscription services and/or broker-dealer firms and/or pricing services. Additionally, FINRA's TRACE will be a source of price information for certain fixed income securities held by the Fund.

    The Fund's Web site will include a form of the prospectus for the Fund and additional data relating to NAV and other applicable quantitative information. Trading in Shares of the Fund will be halted under the conditions specified in BATS Rule 11.18. Trading may also be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. Finally, trading in the Shares will be subject to BATS Rule 14.11(i)(4)(B)(iv), which sets forth circumstances under which Shares of the Fund may be halted. In addition, the Exchange is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income instruments reported to FINRA's TRACE. As noted above, investors will also have ready access to information regarding the Fund's holdings, the Intraday Indicative Value, the Disclosed Portfolio, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.

    The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that it will facilitate the listing and trading of an additional type of actively-managed exchange-traded product that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace. As noted above, the Exchange has in place surveillance procedures relating to trading in the Shares and in the Exchange-Traded Instruments held by the Fund and the Subsidiary with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG and may obtain information via ISG from other exchanges that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, as noted above, investors will have ready access to information regarding the Fund's holdings, the Intraday Indicative Value, the Disclosed Portfolio, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.

    For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the listing and trading of an additional actively-managed exchange-traded product that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will: (a) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-BATS-2015-105 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2015-105. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2015-105, and should be submitted on or before January 25, 2016.

    37 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.37

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2015-32986 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [File No. 500-1] In the Matter of China Domestica Bio-Technology Holdings, Inc., Order of Suspension of Trading December 30, 2015.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of Changda International Holdings, Inc. (“CDBH 1 ”) (CIK No. 1380706), a defaulted Nevada corporation whose principal place of business is listed as LungFung District, Shenzhen, China because it is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2012. As of December 15, CDBH's common stock was quoted on OTC Link (previously “Pink Sheets”) operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. On April 28, 2015, the Commission's Division of Corporation Finance sent a delinquency letter to CDBH at the address shown in its then-most recent filing in the Commission's EDGAR system requesting compliance with its periodic filing requirements. To date, CDBH has failed to cure its delinquencies.

    1 The short form of the issuer's name is also its ticker symbol.

    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. Therefore, it is or