Federal Register Vol. 81, No.140,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 140 (July 21, 2016)

Page Range47285-47687
FR Document

81_FR_140
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 47687 - Honoring the Victims of the Attack in Baton Rouge, LouisianaPDF
81 FR 47685 - Captive Nations Week, 2016PDF
81 FR 47393 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 47487 - Northern Lines Railway Company, LLC-Discontinuance of Service Exemption-in Stearns and Benton Counties, Minn.PDF
81 FR 47490 - Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of DirectorsPDF
81 FR 47291 - Safety Zone; Tennessee River 385.0-387.0; Scottsboro, ALPDF
81 FR 47293 - Safety Zone; Hudson River, Edgewater, NJ.PDF
81 FR 47376 - National Assessment Governing Board Quarterly Board MeetingPDF
81 FR 47442 - Reno Creek in Situ Uranium Recovery Project in Campbell County, WyomingPDF
81 FR 47443 - NRC Vision and Strategy for Non-Light Water Reactor Mission ReadinessPDF
81 FR 47344 - Newspapers Used for Publication of Legal Notices in the Southwestern Region, Which Includes Arizona, New Mexico, and Parts of Oklahoma and TexasPDF
81 FR 47366 - Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities and Technical Assistance on State Data Collection-National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide AssessmentsPDF
81 FR 47296 - Final Priority and Requirements-Technical Assistance on State Data Collection Program-Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data To Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s)PDF
81 FR 47485 - California Disaster #CA-00249 Declaration of Economic InjuryPDF
81 FR 47484 - West Virginia Disaster Number WV-00044PDF
81 FR 47355 - Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Turkey: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
81 FR 47349 - Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Turkey: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty DeterminationPDF
81 FR 47352 - Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
81 FR 47347 - Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
81 FR 47489 - Fourth Meeting Special Committee 235, Non-Rechargeable Lithium Battery and BatteriesPDF
81 FR 47346 - Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Malaysia: Notice of Correction to Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015PDF
81 FR 47346 - Production Activity not Authorized, Foreign-Trade Zone 87-Lake Charles, Louisiana, Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC, Subzone 87E, (Assembly of Ethylene Distillation/Rectification Plant and Ethane Cracker/Reaction Unit; Production of Polyethylene) Westlake and Sulphur, LouisianaPDF
81 FR 47347 - Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative ReviewPDF
81 FR 47314 - Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5PDF
81 FR 47489 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Operations Specifications, Part 129 ApplicationPDF
81 FR 47404 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Promise Zones ReportingPDF
81 FR 47402 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Family Self-Sufficiency Program DemonstrationPDF
81 FR 47325 - Clean Energy Incentive Program Design Details; Extension of Comment PeriodPDF
81 FR 47389 - Notification of a Teleconference of the Science Advisory Board Biogenic Carbon Emissions PanelPDF
81 FR 47311 - Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right-to-Know; Revisions to Hazard Categories and Minor Corrections; CorrectionPDF
81 FR 47381 - Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Notification of Public Advisory Committee TeleconferencePDF
81 FR 47309 - Isaria fumosorosea Strain FE 9901; Exemption From the Requirement of a TolerancePDF
81 FR 47289 - Establishment of the Tip of the Mitt Viticultural AreaPDF
81 FR 47394 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 47288 - Indian Child Welfare Act ProceedingsPDF
81 FR 47304 - Cyprodinil; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
81 FR 47409 - Notice of Meetings, Northwest Resource Advisory Council White River Field Office Travel Management SubgroupPDF
81 FR 47381 - Notice of Receipt of Requests To Voluntarily Cancel Certain Pesticide RegistrationsPDF
81 FR 47408 - Notice of Public Meetings, Southwest Resource Advisory CouncilPDF
81 FR 47409 - Nicholas J. Nardacci, M.D.; Decision and OrderPDF
81 FR 47408 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance-Technical SubmissionPDF
81 FR 47406 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Public Housing Agency Executive Compensation InformationPDF
81 FR 47406 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Emergency Solutions Grant Data CollectionPDF
81 FR 47403 - Privacy Act of 1974; Notice of a Computer Matching Program Between the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Education (ED)PDF
81 FR 47416 - James Dustin Chaney, D.O.; Decision and OrderPDF
81 FR 47418 - Service Contract Inventory; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 47440 - Asbestos in General Industry; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Collections of InformationPDF
81 FR 47287 - Establishment of Class D Airspace: Destin, FL; Duke Field, Eglin AFB, FL; Revocation of Class D Airspace; Eglin AF Aux No 3 Duke Field, FL; and Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Eglin Air Force Base, FL; Eglin Hurlburt Field, FL; and Crestview, FLPDF
81 FR 47411 - Turning Tide, Inc. Decision and Order; Procedural HistoryPDF
81 FR 47438 - SGS North America, Inc.: Applications for Expansion of RecognitionPDF
81 FR 47401 - Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee; VacanciesPDF
81 FR 47446 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 47394 - Notice of Agreement FiledPDF
81 FR 47486 - 60-Day Notice of Intent To Seek Extension of Approval: Class I Railroad Annual ReportPDF
81 FR 47394 - Notice of Availability of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Filing Instructions Guides for HMDA Data Collected in 2017 and 2018PDF
81 FR 47378 - National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity MeetingPDF
81 FR 47359 - Order Extending the Designation of the Provider of Legal Entity Identifiers To Be Used in Recordkeeping and Swap Data Reporting Pursuant to the Commission's RegulationsPDF
81 FR 47485 - Silverado Stages, Inc.-Acquisition of Control-Michelangelo Leasing, Inc. and Ryan's Express Transportation Services, Inc.PDF
81 FR 47437 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Numbers Under the Paperwork Reduction ActPDF
81 FR 47445 - Submission for Review: 3206-0204, Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits, 5 CFR 838.221, 838.421, and 838.721PDF
81 FR 47312 - Inspection of Towing VesselsPDF
81 FR 47444 - Submission for Review: 3206-0233, Civil Service Retirement System Survivor Annuitant Express Pay Application for Death Benefits, RI 25-051PDF
81 FR 47345 - New Mexico Collaborative Forest Restoration Program Technical Advisory PanelPDF
81 FR 47380 - Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund IV, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
81 FR 47380 - Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
81 FR 47379 - Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 47494 - Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 47357 - Evaluation of State Coastal Management ProgramsPDF
81 FR 47358 - National Estuarine Research Reserve SystemPDF
81 FR 47365 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request-Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act; Compliance FormPDF
81 FR 47359 - Threatened Species; Take of SteelheadPDF
81 FR 47445 - Notice of Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program Enrollee Decision Period for Current EnrolleesPDF
81 FR 47393 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10373, Colorado Capital Bank, Castle Rock, ColoradoPDF
81 FR 47375 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Upward Bound and Upward Bound Math Science Annual Performance ReportPDF
81 FR 47418 - Privacy Act of 1974; Publication in Full of All Notices of Systems of Records, Including Several New Systems, Substantive Amendments to Existing Systems, Decommissioning of Obsolete Legacy Systems, and Publication of Proposed Routines UsesPDF
81 FR 47362 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Revised Collection, Comment Request: Amendments To Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Final RulePDF
81 FR 47351 - Magnesium Metal From the People's Republic of China: Continuation of Antidumping Duty OrderPDF
81 FR 47354 - Correction to Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative ReviewsPDF
81 FR 47354 - Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC), Request for NominationsPDF
81 FR 47446 - New Hazardous Materials Packaging ProvisionsPDF
81 FR 47488 - Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Results of the 2015/2016 Annual GSP ReviewPDF
81 FR 47469 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Certain Rules Related to Flexible Exchange OptionsPDF
81 FR 47466 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Describe the Blackout Period Exposure Charge That May Be Imposed on GCF Repo ParticipantsPDF
81 FR 47475 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to BZX Rule 14.11(i), Managed Fund Shares, To List and Trade Shares of the ProShares Crude Oil Strategy ETF, a Series of ProSharesPDF
81 FR 47447 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.700 and To List and Trade Shares of the Managed Emerging Markets Trust Under Proposed Amended NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.700PDF
81 FR 47459 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Price Improvement Mechanism Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 47483 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Price Improvement Mechanism Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 47481 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Mercury, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Extend the Price Improvement Mechanism Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 47461 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Functionality Offered by the Exchange's Options Platform To: Modify Various Rules To Eliminate the Display-Price Sliding Option; Modify Various Rules To Eliminate Price Improving Orders; and Adopt the Step Up MechanismPDF
81 FR 47458 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.PDF
81 FR 47491 - Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for ImportationPDF
81 FR 47490 - Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 1995 Lamborghini Diablo SE30 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for ImportationPDF
81 FR 47493 - Spartan Motors USA, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
81 FR 47397 - General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs Used in Food-Producing Animals; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 47399 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; QUTENZAPDF
81 FR 47288 - Administrative Actions for Noncompliance; Lesser Administrative Actions; Confirmation of Effective DatePDF
81 FR 47398 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Evaluation of the Program for Enhanced Review Transparency and Communication for New Molecular Entity New Drug Applications and Original Biologics License Applications in Prescription Drug User Fee ActsPDF
81 FR 47396 - Advisory Committee; Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration, RenewalPDF
81 FR 47389 - Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and BudgetPDF
81 FR 47391 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 47392 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 47300 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management DistrictPDF
81 FR 47401 - Center for Scientific Review Amended; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 47400 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 47419 - Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety StandardsPDF
81 FR 47422 - Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety StandardsPDF
81 FR 47324 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management DistrictPDF
81 FR 47302 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control DistrictPDF
81 FR 47395 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
81 FR 47324 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control DistrictPDF
81 FR 47357 - Determination of Overfishing or an Overfished ConditionPDF
81 FR 47313 - Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG Turbofan EnginesPDF
81 FR 47325 - International Affairs; Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention ActPDF
81 FR 47285 - Petitions for Rulemaking, Amendment, or RepealPDF
81 FR 47534 - Proposed Revision of Annual Information Return/ReportsPDF
81 FR 47496 - Annual Reporting and DisclosurePDF

Issue

81 140 Thursday, July 21, 2016 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Forest Service

Alcohol Tobacco Tax Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau RULES Viticultural Areas: Tip of the Mitt; Establishment, 47289-47291 2016-17274 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 47395-47396 2016-17170 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Inspection of Towing Vessels; Correction, 47312 2016-17224 Safety Zones: Hudson River, Edgewater, NJ, 47293-47295 2016-17332 Tennessee River 385.0-387.0; Scottsboro, AL, 47291-47293 2016-17333 NOTICES Requests for Applications: Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee, 47401 2016-17239 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 47362-47365 2016-17208 Order Extending the Designation of the Provider of Legal Entity Identifiers to be Used in Recordkeeping and Swap Data Reporting, 47359-47361 2016-17229 Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act; Compliance Form, 47365-47366 2016-17215 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Decisions and Orders: James Dustin Chaney, 47416-47418 2016-17250 Nicholas J. Nardacci, 47409-47411 2016-17264 Turning Tide, Inc., 47411-47416 2016-17245 Education Department Education Department RULES Final Priority and Requirements: Technical Assistance on State Data Collection Program—Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s), 47296-47300 2016-17323 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Upward Bound and Upward Bound Math Science Annual Performance Report, 47375-47376 2016-17210 Applications for New Awards: Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities and Technical Assistance on State Data Collection--National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments, 47366-47375 2016-17324 Meetings: National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, 47378-47379 2016-17233 National Assessment Governing Board Quarterly Board Meeting, 47376-47378 2016-17331 Employee Benefits Employee Benefits Security Administration PROPOSED RULES Annual Information Return/Reports, 47534-47681 2016-14893 Annual Reporting and Disclosure, 47496-47532 2016-14892 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management District, 47300-47302 2016-17177 Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District, 47302-47304 2016-17171 Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance: Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901, 47309-47311 2016-17275 Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right-to-Know; Revisions to Hazard Categories and Minor Corrections; Correction, 47311-47312 2016-17277 Pesticide Tolerances: Cyprodinil, 47304-47309 2016-17268 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management District, 47324 2016-17172 California; Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District, 47324 2016-17169 North Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 47314-47323 2016-17301 Clean Energy Incentive Program Design Details, 47325 2016-17279 NOTICES Meetings: Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Teleconferences, 47381 2016-17276 Science Advisory Board Biogenic Carbon Emissions Panel; Teleconferences, 47389 2016-17278 Requests to Voluntarily Cancel Certain Pesticide Registrations, 47381-47388 2016-17266 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Establishment of Class D Airspace: Destin, FL; Duke Field, Eglin AFB, FL; Revocation of Class D Airspace; Eglin AF Aux No 3 Duke Field, FL; and Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Eglin Air Force Base, FL; Eglin Hurlburt Field, FL; and Crestview, FL, 47287 2016-17246 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: International Aero Engines AG Turbofan Engines, 47313-47314 2016-17159 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Operations Specifications, Part 129 Application, 47489-47490 2016-17300 Meetings: Special Committee 235, Non-Rechargeable Lithium Battery and Batteries, 47489 2016-17309 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 47389-47393 2016-17178 2016-17179 2016-17180 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 47393 2016-17401 Terminations of Receiverships: Colorado Capital Bank, Castle Rock, CO, 47393-47394 2016-17211 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Pacific Gas and Electric Co., 47380-47381 2016-17220 Preliminary Permit Applications: Lockplus Hydro Friends Fund IV, LLC, 47380 2016-17221 Requests under Blanket Authorization: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 47379-47380 2016-17219 Federal Financial Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council NOTICES Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Filing Instructions Guides for HMDA Data Collected in 2017 and 2018, 47394 2016-17234 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 47394 2016-17237 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 47490 2016-17355 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 47394-47395 2016-17271 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Administrative Actions for Noncompliance; Lesser Administrative Actions; Confirmation of Effective Date, 47288 2016-17186 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Evaluation of the Program for Enhanced Review Transparency and Communication for New Molecular Entity New Drug Applications, etc., in Prescription Drug User Fee Acts, 47398-47399 2016-17185 Charter Renewals: Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration, 47396-47397 2016-17182 Draft Guidance: General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs Used in Food-Producing Animals, 47397-47398 2016-17188 Regulatory Review Periods for Patent Extensions: QUTENZA, 47399-47400 2016-17187 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Poposed Production Activities: Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC; Foreign-Trade Zone 87, Lake Charles, LA;, 47346 2016-17304 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: New Mexico Collaborative Forest Restoration Program Technical Advisory Panel, 47345-47346 2016-17222 Newspapers Used for Publication of Legal Notices: Southwestern Region: Arizona, New Mexico, and Parts of Oklahoma and Texas, 47344-47345 2016-17325 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

RULES Petitions for Rulemaking, Amendment, or Repeal, 47285-47287 2016-16984
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance; Technical Submission, 47408 2016-17258 Emergency Solutions Grant Data Collection, 47406-47407 2016-17256 Family Self-Sufficiency Program Demonstration, 47402-47403 2016-17294 Promise Zones Reporting, 47404-47406 2016-17299 Public Housing Agency Executive Compensation Information, 47406 2016-17257 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 47403-47404 2016-17255 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau RULES Indian Child Welfare Act Proceedings, 47288-47289 2016-17269 Interior Interior Department See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Annual Information Return/Reports, 47534-47681 2016-14893 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China, 47347 2016-17302 Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Mexico, 47352-47354 2016-17314 Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Korea, 47347-47349 2016-17313 Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey, 47349-47351, 47355-47357 2016-17315 2016-17316 Magnesium Metal from the People's Republic of China, 47351-47352 2016-17206 Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia, 47346-47347 2016-17307 Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews; Correction, 47354 2016-17205 Requests for Nominations: Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee, 47354-47355 2016-17204 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

NOTICES Service Contract Inventory, 47418 2016-17248
Labor Department Labor Department See

Employee Benefits Security Administration

See

Mine Safety and Health Administration

See

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 47418-47419 2016-17209
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Northwest Resource Advisory Council White River Field Office Travel Management Subgroup, 47409 2016-17267 Southwest Resource Advisory Council, 47408-47409 2016-17265 Mine Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety Standards, 47419-47437 2016-17173 2016-17174 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Importation Eligibility; Petitions: Model Year 1995 Lamborghini Diablo SE30 Passenger Cars, 47490-47491 2016-17190 Model Year 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 Passenger Cars, 47491-47493 2016-17191 Petitions for Inconsequential Noncompliance: Spartan Motors USA, Inc., 47493-47494 2016-17189 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 47400-47401 2016-17175 2016-17176 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PROPOSED RULES International Affairs: Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act, 47325-47343 2016-17129 NOTICES Determination of Overfishing or an Overfished Condition, 47357-47358 2016-17163 Endangered and Threatened Species: Take of Steelhead, 47359 2016-17214 Evaluation of State Coastal Management Programs, 47357 2016-17217 National Estuarine Research Reserve System, 47358 2016-17216 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Reno Creek in Situ Uranium Recovery Project in Campbell County, WY, 47442-47443 2016-17329 NRC Vision and Strategy for Non-Light Water Reactor Mission Readiness, 47443-47444 2016-17327 Occupational Safety Health Adm Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 47437-47438 2016-17226 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Asbestos in General Industry, 47440-47442 2016-17247 Expansions of Recognition; Applications: SGS North America, Inc., 47438-47440 2016-17241 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation PROPOSED RULES Annual Information Return/Reports, 47534-47681 2016-14893 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Civil Service Retirement System Survivor Annuitant Express Pay Application for Death Benefits, 47444 2016-17223 Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits, 47445-47446 2016-17225 Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program Enrollee Decision Period for Current Enrollees, 47445 2016-17212 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 47446 2016-17238 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES New Hazardous Materials Packaging Provisions, 47446-47447 2016-17203 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Captive Nations Week (Proc. 9469), 47683-47686 2016-17438 Honoring the Victims of the Attack in Baton Rouge, LA (Proc. 9470), 47687 2016-17439 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 47458-47459, 47475-47481 2016-17193 2016-17199 Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., 47461-47466 2016-17194 Fixed Income Clearing Corp., 47466-47469 2016-17200 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 47459-47461 2016-17197 ISE Gemini, LLC, 47483-47484 2016-17196 ISE Mercury, LLC, 47481-47483 2016-17195 NYSE Arca, Inc., 47447-47457 2016-17198 NYSE MKT LLC, 47469-47475 2016-17201 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: California, 47485 2016-17321 West Virginia, 47484 2016-17320 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Acquisition of Controls: Silverado Stages, Inc.; Michelangelo Leasing, Inc. And Ryan's Express Transportation Services, Inc., 47485-47486 2016-17228 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals Class I Railroad Annual Report, 47486-47487 2016-17235 Discontinuance of Service Exemptions: Northern Lines Railway Co., LLC; Stearns and Benton Counties, MN, 47487-47488 2016-17368 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Generalized System of Preferences: Results of the 2015/2016 Annual GSP Review, 47488-47489 2016-17202 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NOTICES Meetings: Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee, 47494 2016-17218
Treasury Treasury Department See

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

See

Internal Revenue Service

Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Labor Department, Employee Benefits Security Administration, 47496-47532 2016-14892 Part III Labor Department, Employee Benefits Security Administration, 47534-47681 2016-14893 Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 47534-47681 2016-14893 Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, 47534-47681 2016-14893 Part IV Presidential Documents, 47683-47687 2016-17438 2016-17439 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.

81 140 Thursday, July 21, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary 6 CFR Part 3 [Docket No. DHS-2009-0009] RIN 1601-AA56 Petitions for Rulemaking, Amendment, or Repeal AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, DHS.

ACTION:

Interim final rule.

SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) is adopting a process under which interested persons may petition the Department to issue, amend, or repeal a rule.

DATES:

This rule is effective August 22, 2016. Comments must be submitted on or before September 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2009-0009, by one of the following methods:

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

(2) Fax: 202-343-4011.

(3) Mail: Danny Fischler, OGC, Mail Stop 0485, 245 Murray Lane SW., Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528-0485.

Instructions: In your submission, please include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. We will post all comments, without any change and including any personal information contained in the comment, to the public docket. All comments may be read at http://www.reguations.gov. We strongly encourage commenters to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as it is the best way to ensure that we timely receive your comment.

Docket: For access to the docket or to read background documents or comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Danny Fischler, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 202-282-9822.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires that each agency give interested persons the right to petition the agency for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(e). Such a petition is known as a “rulemaking petition.” DHS is adopting this rule to describe its procedures for receiving and responding to rulemaking petitions. Other federal agencies have adopted similar petition procedures. See, e.g., 49 CFR 5.11, 5.13 (Department of Transportation); 24 CFR 10.20 (Department of Housing and Urban Development).

Two components of DHS have component-specific regulations governing rulemaking petitions. See 33 CFR 1.05-20 (U.S. Coast Guard); 44 CFR 1.17, 1.18 (Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)). This rule leaves those regulations in place. This rule, however, will cover petitions related to all other components of the Department.

II. Discussion of the Rule

The discussion below provides a section-by-section description of the rule's provisions.

§ 3.1 Definitions

This section includes definitions that apply throughout the rule.

§ 3.3 Applicability

This section describes the applicability of this rule. Interested persons who wish to submit a rulemaking petition to DHS 1 must use the process outlined in this rule, except as follows:

1 Except as provided below, reference to DHS in this rule also includes reference to DHS components.

(1) Interested persons who wish to submit a rulemaking petition on a matter related to the U.S. Coast Guard must submit their request to the U.S. Coast Guard pursuant to 33 CFR 1.05-20.

(2) Interested persons who wish to submit a rulemaking petition on a matter related to FEMA must submit their request to FEMA pursuant to 44 CFR 1.18.

In summary, the procedures described in this rule cover rulemaking petitions related to the rulemaking functions of all Department components, except for the U.S. Coast Guard and FEMA. Accordingly, the procedures described in this rule are the exclusive procedures for submitting a rulemaking petition related to the programs and authorities of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (except for customs-revenue functions retained by the Department of the Treasury under sections 412 and 415 of the Homeland Security Act and Treasury Department Order No. 100-16 2 ), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the National Protection and Programs Directorate, and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) among other Department components.

2 In November 2002, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act, and DHS formally came into being as a stand-alone, Cabinet-level department. The Homeland Security Act transferred the Customs Service to DHS, but did not transfer authority related to customs-revenue functions to DHS. Section 412 of the Homeland Security Act provided that the Treasury Department retained customs-revenue function authority, but that the Treasury Department could delegate this authority to DHS. By Treasury Department Order 100-16, Treasury delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority related to the customs revenue functions subject to certain exceptions. One of the exceptions provides that the Secretary of the Treasury retains the sole authority to approve regulations concerning certain specified customs-revenue subject matters. For further discussion of custom-revenue function authority, see the Appendix to 19 CFR part 0.

§ 3.5 Format and Mailing Instructions.

This section provides instructions for how to submit a rulemaking petition to the Department. The petitioner must clearly mark the rulemaking petition itself as a rulemaking petition. In addition, the petitioner must provide essential contact information—including a name and mailing address—so that the Department is able to reply to the petitioner. A petitioner may also submit additional information, such as telephone numbers, a fax number, and/or an email address.

The Department will accept petitions by mail (no courier service accepted) to the address(es) designated in the regulation. The Department will accept most petitions for rulemaking at a single address, however, petitioners may also submit petitions related to TSA-specific authorities directly to TSA, at the address in the regulation.

Section 3.5 contains the minimum procedural requirements for formatting and submitting a rulemaking petition under this regulation. In the interest of efficiency and sound public administration, DHS may decline to accept as a rulemaking petition any correspondence that does not meet these basic requirements.

§ 3.7 Content of a Rulemaking Petition

This section discusses the substantive content of a rulemaking petition. DHS encourages petitioners to submit rulemaking petitions that clearly explain what the petitioner is requesting, identify specific regulations, and include actionable data. DHS is better positioned to understand and respond to a rulemaking petition if it describes with reasonable particularity the rule that the petitioner is asking DHS to issue, amend, or repeal, as well as the factual and legal basis for the petition. The regulatory text highlights some items that would help DHS to understand and respond to a petition. DHS may deny the petition if it does not adequately describe what the petition is requesting and provide adequate support for the request.

§ 3.9 Responding to a Rulemaking Petition

The regulation describes DHS's process for responding to rulemaking petitions. This section states that DHS, in its discretion, may solicit public comment on a rulemaking petition. Following appropriate consideration of a rulemaking petition, DHS responds to the petition by letter or by Federal Register publication. The responsible official may grant or deny the petition, in whole or in part. Granting the petition means that DHS is initiating regulatory action.

By contrast to the final disposition outcomes described immediately above, DHS may also deny or summarily dismiss without prejudice any petition that is moot, premature, repetitive, frivolous, or which plainly does not warrant further consideration.

III. Regulatory Analyses A. Administrative Procedure Act

This is a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). Although the Administrative Procedure Act does not require DHS to provide a period of advance notice and opportunity for public comment, DHS invites public comment on this rule.

B. Executive Order 12866 Assessment (Regulatory Planning and Review)

Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule is not a significant regulatory action for the purposes of Executive Order 12866, as amended, and therefore review by the Office of Management and Budget is not necessary.

This rule describes how to petition DHS to issue, amend, or repeal a rule. The rule's qualitative benefits include additional transparency and accountability for the public. The rule imposes no additional costs on the public or the government.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule does not require a general notice of proposed rulemaking and, therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain or modify any collections of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act. See 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and procedure.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DHS amends 6 CFR chapter I by adding part 3 to read as follows:

PART 3—PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING Sec. 3.1 Definitions. 3.3 Applicability. 3.5 Format and mailing instructions. 3.7 Content of a rulemaking petition. 3.9 Responding to a rulemaking petition. Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301, 553(e); 6 U.S.C. 112.

§ 3.1 Definitions.

As used in this part:

Component means each separate organizational entity within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that reports directly to the Office of the Secretary.

DHS means the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, including its components.

Rulemaking petition means a petition to issue, amend, or repeal a rule, as described at 5 U.S.C. 553(e).

§ 3.3 Applicability.

(a) General requirement. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this part prescribes the exclusive process for interested persons to submit a rulemaking petition on a matter within DHS's jurisdiction.

(b) Exceptions—(1) U.S. Coast Guard. This part does not apply to any petition for rulemaking directed to the U.S. Coast Guard. Such petitions are governed by 33 CFR 1.05-20.

(2) Federal Emergency Management Agency. This part does not apply to any petition for rulemaking directed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Such petitions are governed by 44 CFR 1.18.

§ 3.5 Format and mailing instructions.

(a) Format. A rulemaking petition must include in a prominent location—

(1) The words “Petition for Rulemaking” or “Rulemaking Petition;” and

(2) The petitioner's name and a mailing address, in addition to any other contact information (such as telephone number or email) that the petitioner chooses to include.

(b) Mailing instructions—(1) General mailing address. Any interested person may submit a rulemaking petition by sending it to the following address: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop 0485, Attn: Regulatory Affairs Law Division, 245 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20528-0485.

(2) Transportation Security Administration mailing address. Any interested person may submit a rulemaking petition regarding a Transportation Security Administration program or authority directly to the Transportation Security Administration by sending it to the following address: Transportation Security Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, TSA-2, Attn: Regulations and Security Standards Division, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 20598-6002.

(3) DHS does not accept rulemaking petitions delivered by courier.

§ 3.7 Content of a rulemaking petition.

(a) DHS will be better positioned to understand and respond to a rulemaking petition if the petition describes with reasonable particularity the rule that the petitioner is asking DHS to issue, amend, or repeal, and the factual and legal basis for the petition. For instance, DHS would be better able to understand and respond to a petition that includes—

(1) A description of the specific problem that the requested rulemaking would address;

(2) An explanation of how the requested rulemaking would resolve this problem;

(3) Data and other information that would be relevant to DHS's consideration of the petition;

(4) A description of the substance of the requested rulemaking; and

(5) Citation to the pertinent existing regulations provisions (if any) and pertinent DHS legal authority for taking action.

(b) [Reserved]

§ 3.9 Responding to a rulemaking petition.

(a) Public procedure. DHS may, in its discretion, seek broader public comment on a rulemaking petition prior to its disposition under this section.

(b) Disposition. DHS may respond to the petition by letter or by Federal Register publication. DHS may grant or deny the petition, in whole or in part.

(c) Grounds for denial. DHS may deny the petition for any reason consistent with law, including, but not limited to, the following reasons: The petition has no merit, the petition is contrary to pertinent statutory authority, the petition is not supported by the relevant information or data, or the petition cannot be addressed because of other priorities or resource constraints.

(d) Summary disposition. DHS may, by written letter, deny or summarily dismiss without prejudice any petition that is moot, premature, repetitive, or frivolous, or that plainly does not warrant further consideration.

Jeh Charles Johnson, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-16984 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-7203; Airspace Docket No. 15-ASO-14] Establishment of Class D Airspace: Destin, FL; Duke Field, Eglin AFB, FL; Revocation of Class D Airspace; Eglin AF Aux No 3 Duke Field, FL; and Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Eglin Air Force Base, FL; Eglin Hurlburt Field, FL; and Crestview, FL AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Delay of effective date, disposition of comment.

SUMMARY:

This action changes the effective date of a final rule published June 21, 2016, establishing Class D airspace at Destin, FL, providing the controlled airspace required for the Air Traffic Control Tower at Destin Executive Airport, (formerly Destin-Fort Walton Beach Airport). This allows for the disposition of comments received but not acknowledged prior to publishing the final rule. This action addresses a comment received, but not previously acknowledged.

DATES:

This correction is effective 0901 UTC, November 10, 2016, and the effective date of the rule amending 14 CFR part 71, published on June 21, 2016 (81 FR 40165), is delayed to 0901 UTC November 10, 2016. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking History

The Federal Register published a final rule (81 FR 40165, June 21, 2016) Docket No. FAA-2015-7203, establishing Class D airspace at Destin Executive Airport, Destin, FL; and Duke Field Eglin AFB, FL; removing Class D airspace at Eglin AF Aux No 3 Duke Field; and amending Class D and Class E airspace at Eglin Air Force Base, FL. Further review revealed one comment was received, but not addressed. This action corrects that error.

Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9Z dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

Correction to Final Rule

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, in the Federal Register of June 21, 2016 (81 FR 40165) FR Doc. FAA-2015-7203, Establishment of Class D Airspace: Destin, FL; Duke Field, Eglin AFB, FL; Revocation of Class D Airspace; Eglin AF Aux No 3 Duke Field, FL; and Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Eglin Air Force Base, FL; Eglin Hurlburt Field, FL; and Crestview, FL, is corrected as follows:

On page 40165, column 3, on line 37, Remove the following text: “July 21” and in its place, “November 10”.

On page 40166, column 1, beginning on line 47, remove the following text: “No comments were received” and in its place add, “One comment was received, from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, in support of the rulemaking. The commenter requested the FAA make clear all publications, so as to relay the proper information concerning this airspace to the flying public. ”

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 15, 2016. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2016-17246 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 56 [Docket No. FDA-2015-N-5052] Administrative Actions for Noncompliance; Lesser Administrative Actions; Confirmation of Effective Date AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is confirming the effective date of August 17, 2016, for the direct final rule that appeared in the Federal Register of April 4, 2016. The direct final rule amends the regulations describing lesser administrative actions that may be imposed on an Institutional Review Board (IRB) that has failed to comply with applicable regulations. We are taking this action to ensure clarity and improve the accuracy of the regulations. This document confirms the effective date of the direct final rule.

DATES:

Effective date of final rule published in the Federal Register of April 4, 2016 (81 FR 19033), confirmed: August 17, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sheila Brown, Office of Good Clinical Practice, Office of Special Medical Programs, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5129, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-6563.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In the Federal Register of April 4, 2016 (81 FR 19033), FDA solicited comments concerning the direct final rule for a 75-day period ending June 20, 2016. FDA stated that the effective date of the direct final rule would be on August 17, 2016, no later than 60 days after the end of the comment period, unless any significant adverse comment was submitted to FDA during the comment period. FDA did not receive any significant adverse comments.

Authority:

21 U.S.C. 321, 343, 346, 346a, 348, 350a, 350b, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c-360f, 360h, 360i, 360j, 360hh-360ss, 371, 379e, 381; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 262. Accordingly, the amendment issued thereby is effective.

Dated: July 15, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-17186 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs 25 CFR Part 23 [K00103 12/13 A3A10; 134D0102DR-DS5A300000-DR.5A311.IA000113] RIN 1076-AF25 Indian Child Welfare Act Proceedings AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION:

Announcement of training sessions.

SUMMARY:

The Department of the Interior (Department) is hosting training sessions on its regulations implementing the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) for federally recognized Indian Tribes and for State court and child welfare agency personnel. This document announces the dates and locations of the training sessions.

DATES:

See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for dates of the training sessions.

ADDRESSES:

See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for addresses of the training sessions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Debra Burton, ICWA Specialist, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, (202) 513-7610, [email protected], or Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs, (202) 273-4680; [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On June 14, 2016, the Department published a final rule on Indian Child Welfare Act proceedings, in implementation of ICWA. See 81 FR 38778. To help those affected by the final rule—in particular States courts, State agencies, Tribes, private agencies—to prepare for the December 12, 2016, effective date of the final rule, the Department is offering several training sessions on the final rule.

The following chart shows the current schedule for training sessions. Please check the following Web site for updates: http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/BIA/OIS/HumanServices/index.htm. This Web site also includes the training materials and the full text of the regulation.

Date Time Type Location Monday, August 15, 2016 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (ET) Webinar Please see Web site listed above for call-in and log-in information. Tuesday, August 16, 2016 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (ET) Webinar Please see Web site listed above for call-in and log-in information. Thursday, August 18, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site St. Paul, Minnesota—Doubletree St. Paul, 411 Minnesota Street, St. Paul, MN 55101. Wednesday, August 24, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Oklahoma City, OK—Supreme Court of Oklahoma, Judicial Center Auditorium, 2100 North Lincoln, Suite 3, Oklahoma City, OK 73105. Wednesday, September 7, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Sacramento, CA—Secretary of State Auditorium, 1500 11th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Albany, NY—Empire State Plaza Convention Center, Meeting Rooms 2 & 3, Albany, NY 12242. Thursday, September 22, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Pierre, SD—Best Western Ramkota Hotel & Convention Center, Amphitheater II, 920 West Sioux Ave., Pierre, SD 57501. Wednesday, October 5, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Anchorage, AK—Embassy Suites Hilton, Imagine Ballroom, 600 E. Benson Blvd., Anchorage, AK 99503. Wednesday, October 19, 2016 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Olympia, WA—Legislative Building on the Capitol Campus, Columbia Room, Sid Snyder and Cherry Lane SW., Olympia, WA 98504-1034. Wednesday, November 2, 2016 9:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. (Local Time) On-Site Phoenix, AZ—Burton Barr Central Library, The Pulliam Auditorium, 1221 N. Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85004. Tuesday, November 15, 2016 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (ET) Webinar Please see Web site listed above for call-in and log-in information. Thursday, November 17, 2016 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (ET) Webinar Please see Web site listed above for call-in and log-in information.

At the on-site sessions, trainers will present material during the morning hours, to allow sufficient additional time for discussion.

Each session is open to Tribes, State child welfare agency personnel, and State court personnel. Separate training sessions are being planned for others interested in the new rule and will be announced at a later date. Because space is limited, we ask that you RSVP to [email protected] for each session you plan to attend by submitting your name and the location (or webinar) you plan to attend. Please also note that some on-site locations are at government facilities that may include security screening, and plan accordingly.

Dated: July 13, 2016. Lawrence S. Roberts, Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-17269 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 27 CFR Part 9 [Docket No. TTB-2015-0011; T.D. TTB-139; Ref: Notice No. 155] RIN 1513-AC22 Establishment of the Tip of the Mitt Viticultural Area AGENCY:

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.

ACTION:

Final rule; Treasury decision.

SUMMARY:

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the approximately 2,760-square mile “Tip of the Mitt” viticultural area in all or portions of Charlevoix, Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Isle, Alpena, and Antrim Counties in Michigan. The viticultural area is not located within, nor does it contain, any other established viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase.

DATES:

This final rule is effective August 22, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background on Viticultural Areas TTB Authority

Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary of the Treasury has delegated various authorities through Treasury Department Order 120-01, dated December 10, 2013 (superseding Treasury Order 120-01, dated January 24, 2003), to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions and duties in the administration and enforcement of these laws.

Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) authorizes TTB to establish definitive viticultural areas and regulate the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and lists the approved AVAs.

Definition

Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region having distinguishing features, as described in part 9 of the regulations, and a name and a delineated boundary, as established in part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to the wine's geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area.

Requirements

Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and provides that any interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes standards for petitions for the establishment or modification of AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA must include the following:

• Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;

• An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of the proposed AVA;

• A narrative description of the features of the proposed AVA affecting viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed AVA boundary;

• The appropriate United States Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the boundary of the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and

• A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA boundary based on USGS map markings.

Tip of the Mitt Petition

TTB received a petition from the Straits Area Grape Growers Association, on behalf of winery and vineyard owners in the northern portion of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, proposing the establishment of the “Tip of the Mitt” AVA. The proposed AVA contains approximately 2,760 square miles, and there are 41 commercially-producing vineyards covering a total of 94 acres distributed throughout the proposed AVA, along with 8 wineries. According to the petition, an additional 48 acres of vineyards and 4 new wineries are planned for the near future. The proposed Tip of the Mitt AVA is not located within any established AVA. According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the proposed Tip of the Mitt AVA include its climate and soils.

The proposed AVA is bordered by Grand Traverse Bay, Little Traverse Bay, and Lake Michigan to the west; the Straits of Mackinac to the north; and Lake Huron to the east. The presence of large bodies of water on three sides of the proposed AVA has a moderating effect on the climate, providing slightly warmer annual high temperatures than are found south of the proposed AVA. The proposed Tip of the Mitt AVA also has fewer days with high temperatures below both 0 and 32 degrees Fahrenheit than the region to the south, meaning that temperatures do not drop low enough to cause severe damage to cold-hardy grape varietals such as Marechal Foch and Leon Millot. The proposed AVA also has a longer growing season and higher growing degree day accumulations than the region to the south, providing ample time for mid-to-late season grape varietals such as Frontenac to ripen.

With respect to soils, the proposed Tip of the Mitt AVA predominately contains coarse-textured glacial till and Lacustrine sand and gravel. Soils that contain either glacial outwash sand or ice-contact sand and gravel are present only in small amounts within the proposed AVA and are more common in the region to the south. The soils within the proposed AVA have high levels of organic matter, which prevents nutrients from leaching rapidly. The soils also have high water-holding capacities, so vineyard owners take steps to reduce moisture accumulation, such as planting cover crops between rows to absorb excess water. By contrast, the soils in the region south of the proposed AVA have lower levels of organic matter and lower water-holding capacities. Finally, the soils within the proposed AVA do not heat as quickly in the spring as soils that contain high levels of sand and gravel, so bud-break is naturally delayed until the risk of late spring frosts has passed.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received

TTB published Notice No. 155 in the Federal Register on August 6, 2015 (80 FR 46883), proposing to establish the Tip of the Mitt AVA. In the notice, TTB summarized the evidence from the petition regarding the name, boundary, and distinguishing features for the proposed AVA. The notice also compared the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA to the features of the surrounding areas. For a detailed description of the evidence relating to the name, boundary, and distinguishing features of the proposed AVA, and for a detailed comparison of the distinguishing features of the proposed AVA to the surrounding areas, see Notice No. 155.

In Notice No. 155, TTB solicited comments on the accuracy of the name, boundary, and other required information submitted in support of the petition. The comment period closed on October 5, 2015. TTB received 14 comments in response to Notice No. 155. All 14 commenters supported the establishment of the proposed AVA. Commenters included self-identified local winery and vineyard owners and operators; members of the Straits Area Grape Growers Association; the Corporate and Community Education Training Coordinator for North Central Michigan College in Petoskey, MI; an Agricultural Innovation Counselor with Michigan State University's Product Center; and several individuals who did not describe any affiliation with the wine industry. Many of the commenters stated that the region's climate and the ability to grow a variety of cold-hardy grape varietals distinguish the proposed AVA from the region to the south. Several of the commenters supported the proposed AVA as a way to showcase the region's wines and promote tourism to the region. TTB did not receive any comments opposing the establishment of the proposed AVA.

Proposed Name Change

One commenter (comment 6) supported the establishment of the proposed AVA but did not support the proposed name. The commenter stated that he believed “Tip of the Mitt” was a “whimsical” name that is “Michigan slang” and “doesn't provide the public with an accurate geographical description” of where the proposed AVA is located. The commenter suggested “The Straits” or “Little Traverse” as alternate names for the proposed AVA, but did not provide any evidence to support the alternative AVA names.

Section 9.12(a)(1) of TTB regulations requires, among other things, that: (1) A proposed AVA name be currently and directly associated with an area in which viticulture exists; (2) the proposed name apply to all of the area within the proposed AVA; and (3) the region of the proposed AVA be known nationally or locally by the proposed name. Although “Little Traverse” and “The Straits” both refer to geographical features within the proposed AVA, the commenter did not provide evidence to show that the entire region of the proposed AVA is known locally or nationally by either of those names. Additionally, “The Straits” could apply to any of the numerous straits in the United States and is therefore unsuitable as an AVA name without a geographical modifier. Therefore, TTB does not believe that either “Little Traverse” or “The Straits” meets the regulatory requirements for an AVA name.

TTB believes that the petition to establish the Tip of the Mitt AVA provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the name “Tip of the Mitt” is widely used throughout the proposed AVA to describe the region. The petition included names of local businesses and organizations and regional events that use the phrase in their names. Therefore, TTB has determined that “Tip of the Mitt” meets the regulatory requirements for an AVA name as set forth in § 9.12(a).

TTB Determination

After careful review of the petition and the comments received, TTB finds that the evidence provided by the petitioner supports the establishment of the Tip of the Mitt AVA. Accordingly, under the authority of the FAA Act, section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and parts 4 and 9 of the TTB regulations, TTB establishes the “Tip of the Mitt” AVA in the northern portion of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, effective 30 days from the publication date of this document.

Boundary Description

See the narrative description of the boundary of the AVA in the regulatory text published at the end of this final rule.

Maps

The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed below in the regulatory text.

Impact on Current Wine Labels

Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a wine that indicates or implies an origin other than the wine's true place of origin. For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name or with a brand name that includes an AVA name, at least 85 percent of the wine must be derived from grapes grown within the area represented by that name, and the wine must meet the other conditions listed in 27 CFR 4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA name and that name appears in the brand name, then the label is not in compliance and the bottler must change the brand name and obtain approval of a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name appears in another reference on the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have to obtain approval of a new label. Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing an AVA name that was used as a brand name on a label approved before July 7, 1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.

With the establishment of this AVA, its name, “Tip of the Mitt,” will be recognized as a name of viticultural significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the regulation clarifies this point. Consequently, wine bottlers using the name “Tip of the Mitt” in a brand name, including a trademark, or in another label reference as to the origin of the wine, will have to ensure that the product is eligible to use the AVA name as an appellation of origin.

The establishment of the Tip of the Mitt AVA will not affect any existing AVA. The establishment of the Tip of the Mitt AVA will allow vintners to use “Tip of the Mitt” as an appellation of origin for wines made primarily from grapes grown within the Tip of the Mitt AVA if the wines meet the eligibility requirements for the appellation.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

TTB certifies that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The regulation imposes no new reporting, recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived from the use of an AVA name would be the result of a proprietor's efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area. Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required.

Executive Order 12866

It has been determined that this final rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993. Therefore, no regulatory assessment is required.

Drafting Information

Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted this final rule.

List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9

Wine.

The Regulatory Amendment

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB amends title 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows: Authority:

27 U.S.C. 205.

Subpart C—Approved American Viticultural Areas 2. Subpart C is amended by adding § 9.257 to read as follows:
§ 9.257 Tip of the Mitt.

(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this section is “Tip of the Mitt”. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter, “Tip of the Mitt” is a term of viticultural significance.

(b) Approved maps. The 2 United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1:250,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the Tip of the Mitt viticultural area are titled:

(1) Cheboygan, Michigan, 1955; revised 1981; and

(2) Alpena, Mich., US-Ontario, Can.; 1954.

(c) Boundary. The Tip of the Mitt viticultural area is located in all or portions of Charlevoix, Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Isle, Alpena, and Antrim Counties in Michigan. The boundary of the Tip of the Mitt viticultural area is as described below:

(1) The beginning point is on the Cheboygan map, at the point where the Mackinac Bridge intersects the southern shoreline of the Straits of Mackinac. From the beginning point, proceed east-southeasterly along the shoreline of the South Channel of the Straits of Mackinac and Lake Huron, crossing onto the Alpena map and continuing to follow the Lake Huron shoreline and then the Thunder Bay shoreline to the point where the Thunder Bay shoreline intersects the common T31N/T30N township line south of the city of Alpena and north of Bare Point; then

(2) Proceed northwesterly in a straight line to the intersection of an unnamed medium-duty road known locally as Long Rapids Road and an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Cathro Road; then

(3) Proceed west in a straight line to the line's intersection with State Highway 65 and an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Hibner Road; then

(4) Proceed northwesterly in a straight line to the intersection of the Presque Isle, Alpena, and Montmorency county lines; then

(5) Proceed west along the southern boundary of Presque Isle County, crossing onto the Cheboygan map, to the point where the Presque Isle county line becomes the southern boundary of Cheboygan County, and continuing along the Cheboygan county line to the intersection of the Cheboygan county line with the eastern boundary of Charlevoix County; then

(6) Proceed south then east along the Charlevoix county line to the intersection of the Charlevoix county line with the eastern boundary of Antrim County; then

(7) Proceed south along the Antrim county line to the point where the county line turns due east; then

(8) Proceed west in a straight line to the eastern shoreline of Grand Traverse Bay; then

(9) Proceed north-northeasterly along the shorelines of Grand Traverse Bay, Lake Michigan, Little Traverse Bay, Sturgeon Bay, Trails End Bay, and the Straits of Mackinac, returning to the beginning point.

Signed: June 29, 2016. John J. Manfreda, Administrator. Approved: July 10, 2016. Timothy E. Skud, Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016-17274 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-31-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0467] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Tennessee River 385.0-387.0; Scottsboro, AL AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone for all waters of the Tennessee River beginning at mile marker 385.0 and ending at mile marker 387.0. This safety zone is necessary to protect persons, property, and infrastructure from potential damage and safety hazards associated with the demolition of the B.B. Comer Bridge. This rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering the safety zone area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from July 21, 2016 until August 1, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from May 31, 2016 until July 21, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0467 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 Petty Officer Ashley Schad, MSD Nashville, Nashville, TN, at 615-736-5421 or at [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

On May 27, 2016, the Contract Drilling and Blasting representative submitted a CG-4260 to the Coast Guard for blasting operations that would take place from May 31, 2016 to August 1, 2016 during the demolition of the B.B. Comer Bridge on the Tennessee River at mile marker 386.0. The blasting operations will take place at various times and dates determined by environmental factors. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that this safety zone is necessary to protect persons, property, and infrastructure before, during, and after blasting operations.

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 the Coast Guard was informed of this project in early May, but full details of blasting operations on or over a Navigable Waterway were not provided until May 27, 2016 with a start date of May 31, 2016. The notification of blasting requirements were made only a few days before the project is scheduled to begin. Immediate action is needed to respond to potential safety hazards related to blasting operations on or over this navigable waterway. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this safety zone by May 31, 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. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action is needed to establish a safety zone to protect persons, property, and infrastructure whenever blasting operations take place on the B.B. Comer Bridge from May 31, 2016 until August 1, 2016.

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 Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined the need to protect persons, property, and infrastructure during the blasting operations taking place on the B.B. Comer Bridge on the Tennessee River at mile marker 386.0. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and these navigable waters before, during, and after blasting operations take place.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley is establishing this safety zone from May 31, 2016 through August 1, 2016, for all waters of the Tennessee River beginning at mile marker 385.0 and ending at mile marker 387.0. The periods of enforcement will be 30 minutes prior to, during, and 30 minutes after any blasting operation that takes place on the B.B. Comer Bridge. The Coast Guard was informed that there would be between 9 and 12 blasting operations that will take place during daylight hours and will last approximately one hour on each occurrence. Safety zone enforcement times will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners (LNM), or through other public notice and at least 12-24 hour notice will be provided before each enforcement period. Any deviation from this rule are prohibited unless specifically authorized by the COTP Ohio Valley, or a designated representative. Deviations requests will be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The COTP Ohio Valley may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7465 or can be reached by VHF-FM channel 16.

The duration of each safety zone enforcement period is intended to protect persons, property, and infrastructure from safety hazards associated with blasting operations. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are establishing appears at the end of this document.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive order related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 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. Executive Order 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 Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone.

This safety zone prohibits transit on the Tennessee River from mile 385.0 to mile 387.0, 30 minutes prior to, during, and 30 minutes after blasting operations on the B.B. Comer bridge from May 31, 2016 through August 1, 2016. Broadcast Notices to Mariners and Local Notices to Mariners will also inform the community of the safety zone enforcement periods through BNM, LNM and other forms of public notice so that they may plan accordingly for each short enforcement period restricting transit. Vessel traffic may request permission from the COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative to enter the restricted area.

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 area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above this rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

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

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 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 an 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 area safety zone that would prohibit entry to unauthorized vessels. 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, Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the U.S. 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.

2. A new temporary § 165.35T08-0467 is added to read as follows:
§ 165.35T08-0467 Safety Zone; Tennessee River Mile 385.0 to 387.0 Scottsboro, AL.

(a) Location. All waters of the Tennessee River beginning at mile marker 385.0 and ending at mile marker 387.0 Scottsboro, AL.

(b) Effective date. This rule is effective from May 31, 2016 through August 1, 2016.

(c) Periods of Enforcement. This rule will be enforced from 30 minutes prior to and 30 minutes after all blasting operations on the B.B. Comer Bridge. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative will inform the public through Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners (LNM), or through other public notice and at least 12-24 in advance of each enforcement period.

(d) Regulations.

(1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this area is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the area must request permission from the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative. U.S. Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley may be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or 16, or at 1-800-253-7465.

Dated: May 31, 2016. R. V. Timme, Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2016-17333 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0648] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Hudson River, Edgewater, NJ. AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the waters of the Hudson River in the vicinity of Edgewater, NJ. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of the Hudson River due to the presence of a dielectric oil leak from a submerged power cable, and the hazards associated with the cable repair vessels. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect people and vessels from the hazards associated with this event. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port New York.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from July 21, 2016 through July 10, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from July 10, 2016 through July 21, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0648 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 Kristina Pundt, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector New York; telephone 718-354-4352, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NAD 83 North American Datum of 1983 NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

On January 2, 2016, the Coast Guard received notification of a dielectric oil release from a submerged power cable in the Hudson River in the vicinity Edgewater, NJ. In response, on February 5, 2016, the Coast Guard published a temporary final rule at 33 CFR 165-T01.0028 (81 FR 246181) establishing a safety zone to be enforced until July 9, 2016 or until completion of cleanup and cable repairs. On May 29, 2016, the Coast Guard received notification that cleanup operations and cable repairs were completed. The Coast Guard received notification of another dielectric oil release from a submerged power cable in the Hudson River in the vicinity of Edgewater, NJ on June 28, 2016.

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 doing so would be impracticable. Waiting for a notice and comment period to run would inhibit the Coast Guard from protecting the public and vessels from the possible hazards associated with this dielectric oil leak and the hazards associated with the cable repairs.

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. For the same reasons as discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice and comment period to run would be impracticable.

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 New York (COTP) has determined that a temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels from the hazards associated with this dielectric oil leak and power cable repairs.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a safety zone from July 10, 2016 through July 10, 2017. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Hudson River extending 1700 feet from the New Jersey shoreline and approximately 460 feet on either side of the charted power cable between Edgewater, NJ and W 110th Street, Manhattan, NY.

Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. Vessel operators must contact the COTP or an on-scene representative to obtain permission to transit through this safety zone. The COTP or an on-scene representative may be contacted by VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 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. Executive Order 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 Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, and will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone. This safety zone only affects a small-designated area of the Hudson River waterway. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 and publish the information in the Local Notice to Mariners.

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 any vessel owner or operator.

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

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 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 an 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 the establishment of a safety zone that will prohibit entry within the dielectric oil spill, cleanup, and power cable repair area, and is therefore 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 will be 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, 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.T01-0648 to read as follows:
§ 165.T01-0648 Safety Zone: Hudson River, Edgewater, NJ.

(a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: All U.S. navigable waters of the Hudson River bound by the following points: 40°48′40.088″ N., 073°58′53.026″ W.; thence to 40°48′34.267″ N., 073°58′37.096″ W.; thence to 40°48′26.404″ N., 073°58′42.270″ W.; thence to 40°48′33.882″ N., 073°59′01.955″ W., thence along the western shoreline to the point of origin. All coordinates are based on the NAD 83.

(b) Enforcement period. The safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section will be enforced from July 10, 2016 through July 10, 2017, unless terminated sooner by the COTP.

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR 165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated on scene representative.

(3) An “on-scene representative” of the COTP is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer or a Federal, State or local law enforcement officer designated by or assisting the COTP to act on his behalf.

(4) Vessel operators must contact the COTP via the Command Center to obtain permission to enter or operate within the safety zone. The COTP may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at (718) 354-4353. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate within the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP, via the Command Center or an on-scene representative.

Dated: July 8, 2016. M.H. Day, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2016-17332 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 34 CFR Chapter III [ED-2016-OSERS-0024; CFDA Number: 84.373A.] Final Priority and Requirements—Technical Assistance on State Data Collection Program—Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data To Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s) AGENCY:

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), Department of Education.

ACTION:

Final priority and requirements.

SUMMARY:

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority and requirements under the Technical Assistance on State Data Collection program. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2016 and later years. We take this action to focus attention on an identified need to address national, State, and local assessment issues related to students with disabilities, including students with disabilities who are also English Learners (ELs).

DATES:

This priority and these requirements are effective August 22, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Egnor, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7334 or by email: [email protected]

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance on State Data Collection program is to improve the capacity of States to meet the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data collection and reporting requirements. Funding for this program is authorized under section 611(c)(1) of IDEA, which gives the Secretary the authority to reserve funds appropriated under Part B of the IDEA to provide technical assistance activities authorized under section 616(i) of IDEA. Section 616(i) of IDEA requires the Secretary to review the data collection and analysis capacity of States to ensure that data and information determined necessary for implementation of IDEA section 616 are collected, analyzed, and accurately reported to the Secretary. It also requires the Secretary to provide technical assistance, where needed, to improve the capacity of States to meet the data collection requirements under IDEA Parts B and C, which include the data collection and reporting requirements in sections 616 and 618 of IDEA.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c) and 1416(i).

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR 300.702.

We published a notice of proposed priority and requirements for this program in the Federal Register on March 23, 2016 (81 FR 15491). That notice contained background information and our reasons for proposing the particular priority and requirements.

Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of proposed priority and requirements, we did not receive any comments on the proposed priority and requirements. However, as a result of our further review of the proposed priority and requirements since publication of the notice of proposed priority and requirements, we have made changes as follows:

Analysis of Comments and Changes:

Comment: None.

Discussion: As a result of our further review, we realized that a few items in the priority could benefit from further clarification. First, we have changed the title of the priority to be more descriptive. Second, we clarified that references to “assessment” in the priority include both formative and summative assessments. Third, to clarify how we intend for applicants to address logic models, we deleted some references to “logic model” and instead included a note directing the reader to additional information on the meaning of the term.

Changes: We have changed the title of the priority to: “Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s).” We have modified, as appropriate, references to assessment describing “formative and summative” assessments, deleted references to “logic model” and inserted a note directing the reader to additional information on the meaning of the term, and made other technical changes.

FINAL PRIORITY: Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s).

Priority: The purpose of this priority is to (1) assist States in analyzing and using assessment data to better achieve the States' Identified Measurable Result(s) (SIMR) as described in their IDEA Part B State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs), and (2) assist State efforts to provide technical assistance (TA) to local educational agencies (LEAs) in analyzing and using State and districtwide assessment data to better achieve the SIMR, as appropriate.

The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Increased capacity of State educational agency (SEA) personnel to analyze and use assessment data to better achieve the SIMR described in the IDEA Part B SSIP, including using assessment data to evaluate and improve educational policy, inform instructional programs, and improve instruction for students with disabilities; and

(b) Increased capacity of SEA personnel to provide TA to LEAs in the analysis and use of State and districtwide assessment data to improve instruction of students with disabilities and better achieve the SIMR.

Types of Priorities:

When inviting applications for a competition using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:

Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).

Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).

Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

FINAL REQUIREMENTS: The Assistant Secretary establishes the following requirements for this program. We may apply these requirements in any year in which this program is in effect.

Requirements: Applications that:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance of the Project,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Address the needs of SEAs and LEAs to analyze and use formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

(i) Present applicable national, State, and local data demonstrating the needs of SEAs and LEAs to analyze and use formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy initiatives related to analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

(iii) Describe the current level of implementation related to analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities.

(2) Improve the analysis and use of formative and summative assessment data to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Project Services,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

(ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the intended recipients (e.g., by creating materials in formats and languages accessible to the stakeholders served by the intended recipients);

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) The logic model by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes;

(3) Use a conceptual framework to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: While section 77.1(c) of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) contains a definition for “logic model,” the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), based upon its experience in this area, has been using the above definition as standard language for the OSEP Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) program priorities. OSEP's definition establishes a difference between logic models and conceptual frameworks whereas 34 CFR 77.1(c) considers the model to be one and the same. The following Web sites provide more information on logic models: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research and make use of practices supported by evidence. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research on the effectiveness of analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities; and

(ii) How the proposed project will incorporate current practices supported by evidence in the development and delivery of its products and services;

(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base on analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,1 which must identify the intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

1 “Universal, general TA” means TA and information provided to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time, invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This category of TA also includes information or products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the TA center's Web site by independent users. Brief communications by TA center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also considered universal, general TA.

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,2 which must identify—

2 “Targeted, specialized TA” means TA services based on needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively individualized. A relationship is established between the TA recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can also be considered targeted, specialized TA.

(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach; and

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level; and

(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,3 which must identify—

3 “Intensive, sustained TA” means TA services often provided on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA center staff and the TA recipient. “TA services” are defined as negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.

(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of SEA and LEA personnel to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the SEA and LEA levels;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs (and LEAs, in conjunction with SEAs) to build training systems that include professional development based on adult learning principles and coaching; and

(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, schools, and families) to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support the collection, analysis, and use of formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

(E) Its proposed plan for collaborating and coordinating with Department-funded TA investments and the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) research and development investments, where appropriate, in order to align complementary work and jointly develop and implement products and services to meet the purposes of this priority;

(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Evaluation Plan,” include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must describe: Measures of progress in implementation, including the extent to which the project's products and services have reached its target population; and measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's activities in order to assess the effectiveness of those activities.

In designing the evaluation plan, the project must—

(1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP),4 the project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:

4 The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per year and required to participate in the 3 + 2 process) in OSEP's Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development; Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology, Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and unbiased technical assistance in designing the evaluations with due consideration of the project's budget. CIPP does not function as a third-party evaluator.

(i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the grant application to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;

(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in the grant application consistent with the logic model (e.g., preparing evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes, developing quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate, and progress toward achieving intended outcomes, selecting respondent samples if appropriate, designing instruments or identifying data sources, and identifying analytic strategies); and

(iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the grant application such that it clearly—

(A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completion of the plan;

(B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the second project year for use during the project's intensive review for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project officer, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the performance measures to be addressed in the project's Annual Performance Report;

(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks described in paragraph (1) of this section; and

(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section and implementing the evaluation plan.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of Project Resources,” how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Management Plan,” how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated to the project and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its intended outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative and summative evaluations of the project.

(2) Include, in Appendix A, a conceptual framework for the project;

(3) Include, in Appendix A, person-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(4) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee's project director or other authorized representative;

(ii) A two and a half day project directors' meeting in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;

(iii) Three trips annually to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

(iv) A one-day intensive 3 + 2 review meeting in Washington, DC, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(5) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with OSEP.

Note: With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period; and

(6) Maintain a Web site that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project: In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), as well as—

(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's products and services and the extent to which the project's products and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use this priority and these requirements, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 Regulatory Impact Analysis

Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether this regulatory action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action likely to result in a rule that may—

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to as an “economically significant” rule);

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

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

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

This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

We have also reviewed this final regulatory action under Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency—

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify);

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into account—among other things and to the extent practicable—the costs of cumulative regulations;

(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);

(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and

(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including economic incentives—such as user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired behavior, or provide information that enables the public to make choices.

Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these techniques may include “identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.”

We are issuing this final priority and requirements only on a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.

We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.

In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.

The benefits of the TA projects have been well-established over the years in that other TA projects have been completed successfully. The priority announced in this notice will improve the capacity of States to meet the IDEA data collection and reporting requirements, including (1) increased capacity of SEA personnel to analyze and use assessment data to better achieve the SIMR described in the IDEA Part B SSIP through means such as the use of formative and summative assessment data to evaluate and improve educational policy, inform instructional programs and improve instruction for students with disabilities; and (2) increased capacity of SEA personnel to provide TA to LEAs in the analysis and use of State and districtwide assessment data to improve instruction of students with disabilities and better achieve the SIMR.

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 program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or 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: July 18, 2016. Sue Swenson, Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2016-17323 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0241; FRL-9948-08-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management District AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). We are approving a local emergency episode plan that describes actions that EDCAQMD must take in the event of dangerously high ambient ozone concentrations levels under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).

DATES:

This rule is effective on September 19, 2016 without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by August 22, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0241 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 947 4115, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What plan did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this plan? C. What is the purpose of the submitted plan? II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the plan? B. Does the plan meet the evaluation criteria? C. Public Comment and Final Action III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What plan did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the plan addressed by this action with the date that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

Table 1—Submitted Plan Local agency Plan title Adopted Submitted EDCAQMD Ozone Emergency Episode Plan 01/12/16 04/06/16

On April 21, 2016, the EPA determined that EDCAQMD's Ozone Emergency Episode Plan submittal met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this plan?

There are no previous versions of this plan adopted by EDCAQMD or approved by EPA in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted plan?

The CAA requires the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone and five other pollutants that are harmful to public health and the environment. Each state is required to submit to the EPA, within three years after the promulgation of a primary or secondary NAAQS, or any revision thereof, an infrastructure SIP revision that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) describes the contents required of such a plan that constitute the “infrastructure” of a state's air quality management program. The EDCAQMD Ozone Emergency Episode Plan is intended to fulfill the CAA § 110(a)(2)(G) infrastructure SIP requirement.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the plan?

SIPs must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)) and SIP revisions are restricted in how they can relax approved SIPs. This plan must also meet the infrastructure SIP requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and EPA's implementing regulations found in 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (51.150 through 51.153).

Guidance that we used to evaluate section 110(a)(2) CAA requirements includes: “Guidance Document for Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)”, EPA (September 2013).

B. Does the plan meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe this plan is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations and infrastructure SIPs. The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about this plan and our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully approving the submitted plan because we believe it fulfills all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted plan. If we receive adverse comments by August 22, 2016, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on September 19, 2016. This will incorporate the plan into the federally enforceable SIP.

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

III. Incorporation by Reference

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the EDCAQMD plan described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents available electronically through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX (AIR4), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA, 94105-3901.]

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 19, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 13, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

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

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by add ing paragraph (c)(473) to read as follows:
§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

(c) * * *

(473) A new regulation for the following AQMD was submitted on April 6, 2016 by the Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) El Dorado County Air Quality Management District.

(1) “Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,” adopted January 12, 2016.

[FR Doc. 2016-17177 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0583; FRL-9949-24-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve rescissions from the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), as it applies to rules approved into the SIP for the Riverside County Air Pollution Control District (RCAPCD) and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). These revisions concern superseded New Source Review (NSR) rules. We are approving the rescission of rules under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES:

This rule is effective on September 19, 2016 without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by August 22, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0583 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura Lawrence, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3407, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents I. Background II. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit for rescission? B. What are the purposes of the submitted rule rescissions? III. Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rescission of the rules? B. Do the rule rescissions meet the evaluation criteria? C. Public Comment and Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted Riverside County Air Pollution Control District (RCAPCD) and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2, which address Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for New Source Review (NSR) programs, to the EPA on June 6, 1977 for inclusion in the California SIP. The EPA approved RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 into the SIP on November 9, 1978 (43 FR 52237). The area under the jurisdiction of RCAPCD and SBCAPCD at the time these rules were submitted is now under the jurisdiction of the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). More information about the jurisdictional history of this area is found in the EPA's Technical Support Document (TSD) accompanying this rulemaking.

CARB has since submitted and the EPA has approved into the California SIP a series of NSR rules for MDAQMD and SCAQMD referred to as Regulation XIII. These rules supersede, among other rules, Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2. This rulemaking action clarifies the applicable NSR rules for the Mojave Desert air district by removing from the Mojave Desert portion of the California SIP RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2.

RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 also address NSR requirements. However, we can find no evidence that RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 were ever submitted for SIP approval. Consequently, we are taking no action on the rescission of RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3.

II. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit for rescission?

MDAQMD rescinded Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 on April 28, 2008, and CARB submitted the rescissions adopted by MDAQMD as a revision to the California SIP on October 20, 2008. As noted above, these rules had originally been adopted by RCAPCD and SBCAPCD and approved by the EPA as part of the California SIP. More than a decade later, when MDAQMD was established, MDAQMD adopted the rules that had been adopted by the previous air pollution control district as part of that agency's initial set of rules and regulations. MDAQMD's submittal of the rescissions to CARB for submittal to the EPA make it clear that the rescissions relate to the corresponding SIP rules from which the corresponding MDAQMD rules derive. As such, CARB's submittal of the rescission of MDAQMD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 constitutes the rescission of the corresponding SIP rules, i.e., RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3. Table 1 lists these rules, along with SIP approval dates (if any).

Table 1—Rules Requested for Rescission From the Mojave Desert Portion of the California SIP Current agency Agency when rule was
  • submitted to SIP
  • Rule No. Rule title SIP approval date and FR citation
    MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 203.1 Special Permit Provisions Not in SIP. MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 203.2 Eligibility of Compensatory Emission Reductions Not in SIP. MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 213 Standards for Permits to Construct: Air Quality Impact 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 213.1 Standards for Permits to Operate: Air Quality Impact 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 213.2 Definitions for Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.3 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD/SCAQMD RCAPCD 213.3 Additional Standards for Permits to Construct and Operate Not in SIP. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 203.1 Special Permit Provisions Not in SIP. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 203.2 Eligibility of Compensatory Emission Reductions Not in SIP. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 213 Standards for Permits to Construct: Air Quality Impact 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 213.1 Standards for Permits to Operate: Air Quality Impact 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 213.2 Definitions for Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.3 11/09/78 43 FR 52237. MDAQMD SBCAPCD 213.3 Additional Standards for Permits to Construct and Operate Not in SIP.

    On November 18, 2008, we determined that CARB's October 20, 2008 SIP revision met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal review by the EPA.

    B. What are the purposes of the submitted rule rescissions?

    SBCAPCD and RCAPCD rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 have been superseded by MDAQMD Regulation XIII and SCAQMD Regulation XIII. CARB has requested that these SBCAPCD and RCAPCD rules be rescinded from the SIP for the purpose of clarifying the SIP and to avoid confusion as to the SIP status of these rules. This action represents an administrative change and does not result in changes to SIP approved Regulation XIII that contains the current NSR program. A more detailed discussion of these rules is found in the TSD accompanying this rulemaking.

    III. Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rescission of the rules?

    The EPA is evaluating the rules submitted for rescission by CARB to determine whether they were ever approved in the relevant portion of the SIP, and if they had been approved in the SIP, whether they have been superseded by approval of subsequent rules by the EPA.

    B. Do the rule rescissions meet the evaluation criteria?

    The provisions contained in RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 have been superseded by MDAQMD Regulation XIII, Rules 1300-1306 (61 FR 58133) and SCAQMD Regulation XIII, Rules 1301-1306, 1309-1310, 1313, and 1325 (50 FR 3906, 61 FR 64291, 64 FR 13514, 71 FR 35157, 80 FR 24821). The rescission of superseded rules is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. We can find no evidence that RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 were ever approved into the SIP, therefore no action is necessary to remove them. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

    C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, the EPA is fully approving the rescission of RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 because we have concluded that they were superseded years ago by approval by the EPA of subsequent rules and thus are no longer part of the applicable California SIP, and because rescission of them will clarify the contents of the MDAQMD portion of the SIP and avoid confusion as the SIP status of these rules. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule rescissions. If we receive adverse comments by August 22, 2016, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on September 19, 2016. This action will rescind specific rules from the federally enforceable SIP.

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

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 19, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 24, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(39)(ii)(J) and (c)(39)(iv)(J) to read as follows:
    § 52.220 Identification of plan—in part.

    (c) * * *

    (39) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (J) Previously approved on November 9, 1978 in paragraph (c)(39)(ii)(B) of this section and now deleted without replacement: Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2.

    (iv) * * *

    (J) Previously approved on November 9, 1978 in paragraph (c)(39)(iv)(B) of this section and now deleted without replacement: Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2.

    [FR Doc. 2016-17171 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0646; FRL-9948-28] Cyprodinil; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of cyprodinil in or on vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C and potato, wet peel. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective July 21, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before September 19, 2016, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0646, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0646 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before September 19, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0646, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

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

    II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of October 21, 2015 (80 FR 63731) (FRL-9935-29), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 5F8358) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.532 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide cyprodinil, 4-cyclopropyl-6-methyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamine, in or on vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 parts per million (ppm) and potato, wet peel at 0.03 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. No comments were received in response to the Notice of Filing.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.

    The major target organs of cyprodinil are the liver and the kidney. Liver effects were consistent among male and female rats and mice in both sub-chronic and chronic studies and typically included increased liver weights along with increases in serum clinical chemistry parameters associated with adverse effects on liver function (i.e., increased cholesterol and phospholipid levels). Microscopic lesions in rats and mice included hepatocyte hypertrophy and hepatocellular necrosis. In the kidneys, adverse effects were seen as chronic tubular lesions and chronic kidney inflammation following sub-chronic exposure of male rats. Chronically, cyprodinil caused increased kidney weights and progressive nephropathy in male rats. Chronic effects in dogs were limited to decreased body-weight gain, decreased food consumption and decreased food efficiency; liver toxicity was not seen in the dog. Although increases in thyroid weight and/or hypertrophy of thyroid follicular cells were observed at higher doses in the rat 28-day oral-toxicity studies and in the 90-day oral-toxicity study in rats, treatment related changes in thyroid weights or gross/microscopic observations were not observed in the chronic rat study or in other studies.

    A 28-day dietary immunotoxicity study in mice resulted in no apparent suppression of the humoral component of the immune system. The only effect attributed to cyprodinil treatment was higher mean absolute, relative (to body weight), and adjusted liver weights for the 5,000 ppm group. There were no treatment-related effects on absolute, adjusted, or relative spleen or thymus weights; no effects on specific activity or total activity of splenic Immunoglobulin M antibody-forming cells to the T cell-dependent red blood cell antigens. No dermal or systemic toxicity was seen following repeated dermal application at the highest dose in a 21-day dermal toxicity study in rabbits.

    An acute neurotoxicity study indicated systemic toxicity with signs of induced hunched posture, piloerection, and reduced responsiveness to sensory stimuli and reduced motor activity. Females were slightly more affected than males per daily clinical observations, which disappeared by day 3 to 4. A dose-related reduction in body temperature was seen in all treated animals, thus hypothermia is considered a compound-related effect in the highest dose tested and was found to be statistically significant, whereas the lower dosed animals was not or only marginally significant and was fully reversible in all groups. Clinical signs, hypothermia, and changes in motor activity were found to all be reversible by day 8. There were no histopathological findings to support evidence of damage to the central nervous system, eyes, optic nerves, or skeletal muscles. A sub-chronic neurotoxicity study showed no treatment related effects on mortality, clinical signs, or gross or histological neuropathology. Functional observational battery and motor activity testing revealed no treatment related effects up to the highest dose tested.

    There was no evidence of increased susceptibility in the developmental rat or rabbit study following in utero exposure or in the two-generation reproduction study following pre- and post-natal exposure. Fetal toxicity, manifested as significantly lower fetal weights and an increased incidence of delayed ossification in the rat and a slight increase in litters showing extra ribs (13th) in the rabbit, was reported in developmental toxicity studies. In a rat two-generation reproduction study, significantly lower pup weights for F 1 and F 2 offspring were observed. However, each of these fetal/neonatal effects occurred at the same dose levels at which maternal toxicity (decreased body weight gain) was observed and were considered to be secondary to maternal toxicity.

    Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and rats at doses that were judged to be adequate to the carcinogenic potential, cyprodinil was classified as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cyprodinil as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document, “Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review and New Use Risk Assessment to Support the Registration of Proposed Use on Crop Subgroup 1C” in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0646.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

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

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cyprodinil used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B of the final rule published in the Federal Register of August 17, 2012 (77 FR 49732) (FRL-9359-7).

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to cyprodinil, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing cyprodinil tolerances in 40 CFR 180.532.

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified for cyprodinil. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). This dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to 2008. As to residue levels in food, EPA utilized the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16 default processing factors and tolerance-level residues and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA NHANES/WWEIA dietary survey conducted from 2003 to 2008. As to residue levels in food, EPA tolerance-level residues were used for most commodities, and average field trial residues were used for pome fruit, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, spinach, tomato, and grapes. 100 PCT assumptions were used for all commodities. DEEM default and empirical processing factors were used to modify the tolerance values.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that cyprodinil does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.

    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for cyprodinil and CGA 249287 in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of cyprodinil and CGA 249287. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.

    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS), Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of cyprodinil and CGA 249287 for acute exposures are estimated to be 34.8 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 2.05 ppb for ground water. EDWCs for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 24.7 ppb for surface water and 1.80 ppb for ground water.

    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 34.8 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 24.7 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Cyprodinil is currently registered for the following uses that could result in residential exposures: Ornamental plants. EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: Only short-term inhalation exposures to adult residential handlers from application to ornamental plants. Though there may be short-term dermal exposures to handlers, this was not assessed since no dermal endpoint was identified. Post-application exposures to adults and children are not expected. Intermediate or chronic exposures are not expected. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.

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

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

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

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

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In a rat developmental toxicity study, there were significantly lower mean fetal weights in the high-dose group compared to controls as well as a significant increase in skeletal anomalies in the high-dose group due to abnormal ossification. The skeletal anomalies/variations were considered to be a transient developmental delay that occurs secondary to the maternal toxicity noted in the high-dose group. In the rabbit study, the only treatment related developmental effect was indication of an increased incidence of a 13th rib at maternally toxic doses. Signs of fetal effects in the two-generation reproductive toxicity study included significantly lower F1 and F2 pup weights in the high-dose group during lactation, which continued to be lower than controls post-weaning and after the pre-mating period in the F1 generation only. Reproductive effects were seen only at doses that also caused parental toxicity.

    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1X for non-inhalation routes of exposure and retained at 10X for inhalation exposure scenarios for all population groups. That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicity database for cyprodinil is complete, except for a 90-day inhalation toxicity study required to reduce uncertainty associated with the use of an oral POD for assessing risk via the inhalation route. In the absence of a route-specific inhalation study, a 10x FQPA SF factor for residential scenarios will be retained for risk assessments involving inhalation exposure.

    ii. As indicated by an acute neurotoxicity study in mice, clinical signs, hypothermia, and changes in motor activity were all found to be reversible and no longer seen at day 8. There were no treatment related effects on mortality, gross or histological neuropathology. Reduced motor activity, induced hunched posture, piloerection and reduced responsiveness to sensory stimuli were observed and disappeared in all animals by day 3 to 4. In a sub-chronic neurotoxicity study in rats, there were no treatment related effects on mortality, clinical signs, or gross or histological neuropathology. No clinical signs suggestive of neurobehavioral alterations or evidence of neuropathological effects were observed in the available oral-toxicity studies. Based on this evidence, there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.

    iii. In the prenatal developmental rat and rabbit studies and in the two-generation reproduction rat study, toxicity to the fetuses/offspring, when observed, occurred at the same doses at which effects were observed in maternal/parental animals. All of these fetal effects were considered to be secondary to maternal toxicity. There is no evidence that cyprodinil results in increased susceptibility in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the two-generation reproduction study.

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The acute dietary assessment was conservative and based on 100 PCT and tolerance level residues as well as DEEM default and empirical processing factors. The chronic dietary assessment was partially refined with average field trial residues for some commodities and tolerance-level residues for the remaining commodities. DEEM default and empirical processing factors were also incorporated into the chronic dietary assessment. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to cyprodinil in drinking water. Based on the discussion in Unit III.C.3, postapplication exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers is not expected. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by cyprodinil.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

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

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to cyprodinil will occupy 8.6% of the aPAD for children one to two years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to cyprodinil from food and water will utilize 86% of the cPAD for children one to two years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of cyprodinil is not expected.

    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyprodinil is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with short-term residential exposures to cyprodinil. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures, EPA has estimated the short-term food, water, and residential exposures. For adults, oral dietary and inhalation estimates were combined using the total aggregate risk index (ARI) methodology since the levels of concern (LOC) for oral and dietary exposure (LOC = 100) and inhalation (LOC 1,000) are different. The short-term ARI for adults is 70 which is greater than 1 and is therefore, not of concern.

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

    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, chemical name is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.

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

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (AG-631 and AG-631B) are available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected].

    B. International Residue Limits

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

    The Codex has not established a MRL for cyprodinil in/on potato, wet peel and vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyprodinil, 4-cyclopropyl-6-methyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamin, in or on potato, wet peel at 0.03 and vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01ppm.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 11, 2016. Daniel Kenny, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.532, add alphabetically the commodities “Potato, wet peel” and “Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C” to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 180.532 Cyprodinil; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per million *    *    *    *    * Potato, wet peel 0.03 *    *    *    *    * Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C 0.01 *    *    *    *    *
    [FR Doc. 2016-17268 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0329; FRL-9945-41] Isaria fumosorosea Strain FE 9901; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 in or on all food commodities when used in accordance with label directions and good agricultural practices. Novozymes BioAg, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 under FFDCA.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective July 21, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before September 19, 2016, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0329, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0329 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before September 19, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0329, by one of the following methods:

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

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

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. Background

    In the Federal Register of August 1, 2014 (79 FR 44729) (FRL-9911-67), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition (PP 3F8193) by Technology Sciences Group, Inc., 1150 18th St., NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036 (on behalf of Novozymes BioAg, Inc., 13100 W. Lisbon Rd., Suite 600, Brookfield, WI 53005). The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Isaria fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 in or on all food commodities. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner Novozymes BioAg, Inc., which is available in the docket via http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to this notice of filing.

    Based upon a tolerance exemption that EPA established for a different strain of this microbe in 2011 and a review of public literature, EPA revised the active ingredient name from “Isaria fumosoroseus strain FE 9901” to “Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901.” The reason for this change is explained in Unit III.C.

    III. Final Rule A. EPA's Safety Determination

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the exemption is “safe.” Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings but does not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance or tolerance exemption, and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . . . .” Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that EPA consider “available information concerning the cumulative effects of [a particular pesticide's] . . . residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.”

    EPA evaluated the available toxicity and exposure data on Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability, as well as the relationship of this information to human risk. A full explanation of the data upon which EPA relied and its risk assessment based on that data can be found within the April 11, 2016, document entitled “Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Considerations for Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901.” This document, as well as other relevant information, is available in the docket for this action as described under ADDRESSES. Based upon its evaluation, EPA concludes that Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 is not toxic, is not pathogenic, and is not infective. Although there may be some exposure to residues when used as an insecticide on food, there is a lack of concern due to the lack of potential for adverse effects. EPA also determined that retention of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor (SF) was not necessary as part of the qualitative assessment conducted for Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901.

    Based on its evaluation, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901. Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for residues of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 in or on all food commodities when used in accordance with label directions and good agricultural practices.

    B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes for the reasons contained in the April 11, 2016, document entitled “Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Considerations for Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901” and because EPA is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

    C. Revision to the Requested Tolerance Exemption

    One modification has been made to the requested tolerance exemption. When Novozymes BioAg, Inc. first submitted this petition in 2013, it described the active ingredient as “Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901.” After conducting an initial review of this petition, EPA asked Novozymes BioAg, Inc. to revise the genus name of the active ingredient from “Paecilomyces” to “Isaria” based upon what it believed to be current, acceptable taxonomy. Novozymes BioAg, Inc. responded to EPA's request by representing the active ingredient as “Isaria fumosoroseus strain FE 9901” instead of “Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901” in its petition. After recently reviewing a tolerance exemption established in 2011 for a different strain of this microbe (40 CFR 180.1306 for Isaria fumosorosea Apopka strain 97) and public literature, EPA realizes that it should have also asked Novozymes BioAg, Inc. to change the species name of the active ingredient from “fumosoroseus” to “fumosorosea” to align completely with current, acceptable taxonomy (Refs. 1, 2, and 3). Use of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 throughout this document is supported by public literature, is consistent with a previous tolerance exemption that EPA established for a different strain of this microbe, and should assist in preventing confusion with regard to the proper nomenclature for this particular active ingredient in the future. EPA does not believe the change from “fumosoroseus” to “fumosorosea” will cause confusion among the public as there is a clear history linking the first term to the second and because the names refer to the same microbe.

    IV. References 1. U.S. EPA. 2011. Isaria fumosorosea Apopka Strain 97; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance—Final Rule (Dated September 18, 2011). Available from https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-28/pdf/2011-24990.pdf. 2. USDA. 2011. Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Collection of Entomopathogenic Fungal Cultures—Isaria Plus Paecilomyces, Purpureocillium and Evlachovaea (Dated July 28, 2011). Available from http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2userfiles/place/80620510/arsefpdfs/isaria.july2011.pdf. 3. Zimmermann G. 2008. The entomopathogenic fungi Isaria farinosa (formerly Paecilomyces farinosus) and the Isaria fumosorosea species complex (formerly Paecilomyces fumosoroseus): biology, ecology and use in biological control. Biocontrol Science and Technology 18:865-901. Available from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09583150802471812. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes. As a result, this action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, EPA has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, EPA has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

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

    VI. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 6, 2016. Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. Add § 180.1335 to subpart D to read as follows:
    § 180.1335 Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.

    An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for residues of Isaria fumosorosea strain FE 9901 in or on all food commodities when used in accordance with label directions and good agricultural practices.

    [FR Doc. 2016-17275 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 370 [EPA-HQ-SFUND-2010-0763; FRL 9949-05-OLEM] RIN 2050-AG85 Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Community Right-to-Know; Revisions to Hazard Categories and Minor Corrections; Correction AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendment, correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) issued a final rule in the Federal Register on June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38104) amending its hazardous chemical reporting regulations. That document inadvertently omitted the hazard “serious eye damage or eye irritation” in § 370.66 under the definition of “health hazard”. This action corrects that definition.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: This final rule is effective July 21, 2016.

    Compliance Date: The compliance date is January 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2010-0763. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sicy Jacob, Office of Emergency Management, Mail Code 5104A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington DC 20004; telephone number: (202) 564-8019; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38104) amending its hazardous chemical regulations due to the changes in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). The final rule inadvertently omitted the hazard “serious eye damage or eye irritation” in § 370.66 under the definition of “health hazard”. This action is being issued to correct the omitted hazard in 40 CFR 370.66, which contains the definitions of the key words used in 40 CFR part 370. Specifically, under the definition of “hazard category,” EPA inadvertently omitted the hazard, “serious eye damage or eye irritation” under the definition of “health hazard.” This document corrects this error by adding the hazard, “serious eye damage or eye irritation” in 40 CFR 370.66 under the definition of “health hazard.”

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 370

    Environmental protection, Extremely hazardous substances, GHS, Hazard categories, Hazard class, Hazardous chemicals, OSHA HCS, Tier II Inventory Form.

    Dated: July 12, 2016. Mathy Stanislaus, Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency Management.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is corrected as follows:

    PART 370—HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL REPORTING: COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW 1. The authority citation for part 370 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Sections 302, 311, 312, 322, 324, 325, 327, 328, and 329 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) (Pub. L. 99-499, 100 Stat. 1613, 42 U.S.C. 11002, 11021, 11022, 11042, 11044, 11045, 11047, 11048, and 11049).

    2. Amend § 370.66 by revising the definition of the term “Hazard category” to read as follows:
    § 370.66 How are key words in this part defined?

    Hazard category is divided into two categories, health and physical hazards.

    (1) Health hazard means a chemical which poses one of the following hazardous effects: Carcinogenicity; acute toxicity (any route of exposure); aspiration hazard; reproductive toxicity; germ cell mutagenicity; skin corrosion or irritation; respiratory or skin sensitization; serious eye damage or eye irritation; specific target organ toxicity (single or repeated exposure); simple asphyxiant; and hazard not otherwise classified (HNOC).

    (2) Physical hazard means a chemical which poses one of the following hazardous effects: Flammable (gases, aerosols, liquids or solids); gas under pressure; explosive; self-heating; pyrophoric (liquid or solid); pyrophoric gas; oxidizer (liquid, solid or gas); organic peroxide; self-reactive; in contact with water emits flammable gas; combustible dust; corrosive to metal; and hazard not otherwise classified (HNOC).

    [FR Doc. 2016-17277 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Parts 143 and 144 [Docket No. USCG-2006-24412] RIN 1625-AB06 Inspection of Towing Vessels AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on June 20, 2016 (81 FR 40004). The document issued safety regulations governing the inspection, standards, and safety management systems of towing vessels. In that document there are errors in three regulations that refer to the date July 20, 2016. This rule corrects those errors.

    DATES:

    Effective July 20, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lieutenant Commander William Nabach, Project Manager, CG-OES-2, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1386, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In FR Doc. 2016-12857 appearing on page 40004 in the Federal Register of Monday, June 20, 2016, the following corrections are made:

    § 143.300 [Corrected]
    1. On page 40137, in the second column, in § 143.300 Pressure Vessels, in paragraph (d), “Pressure vessels installed after July 20, 2016 must meet the requirements of § 143.545.” is corrected to read “Pressure vessels installed after July 20, 2018, or the date the vessel obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever date is earlier, must meet the requirements of § 143.545.”.
    § 144.105 [Corrected]
    2. On page 40141, in the third column, in § 144.105 Applicability and delayed implementation, in paragraph (c), the date “July 20, 2016” is corrected to read “July 20, 2017”.
    § 144.135 [Corrected]
    3. On page 40142, in Table 144.135, in paragraph (c), “A vessel on which a new installation that is not a “replacement in kind” is to be made after July 20, 2016.” is corrected to read “A vessel on which a new installation that is not a “replacement in kind.””
    Dated: July 18, 2016. J.G. Lantz, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17224 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    81 140 Thursday, July 21, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-7099; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-15-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain International Aero Engines AG (IAE) V2522-A5, V2524-A5, V2527-A5, V2527E-A5, V2527M-A5, V2530-A5, V2533-A5, V2525-D5, V2528-D5, and V2531-E5 turbofan engines. This proposed AD was prompted by nine in-flight shutdowns that resulted from premature failure of the No. 3 bearing. This proposed AD would require initial and repetitive inspections of the master magnetic chip detector (MMCD) and, if metallic debris is found, further actions depending on the type of metallic debris. This proposed AD would also require removal of the No. 3 bearing from service at the next engine shop visit. We are proposing this AD to prevent failure of the No. 3 bearing, failure of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and loss of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 19, 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 NPRM, contact International Aero Engines AG, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860-565-0140; email: [email protected]; Internet: https://fleetcare.pw.utc.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, 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-2016-7099; 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:

    Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7772; 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 proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-7099; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-15-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 learned from the manufacturer that nine in-flight shutdowns resulted from premature failure of the No. 3 bearing. This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of the No. 3 bearing, failure of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and loss of the airplane.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed IAE Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016. The NMSB describes procedures for inspecting the MMCD and further actions if metallic debris is found. 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.

    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 initial and repetitive inspections of the MMCD and, if metallic debris is found, further actions depending on the type of metallic debris. This proposed AD would also require removal of the No. 3 bearing from service at the next engine shop visit and its replacement with a part eligible for installation.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 11 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate that it would take about 1 hour to perform the inspection. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We estimate the cost to replace a No. 3 bearing to be $54,510. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $600,545.

    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): International Aero Engines AG: Docket No. FAA-2016-7099; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-15-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by September 19, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to International Aero Engines (IAE) V2522-A5, V2524-A5, V2527-A5, V2527E-A5, V2527M-A5, V2530-A5, V2533-A5, V2525-D5, V2528-D5, and V2531-E5 turbofan engines with No. 3 bearing serial numbers listed in Appendix 1 of IAE Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016.

    (d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by several in-flight shutdowns that resulted from premature failure of the No. 3 bearing. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the No. 3 bearing, failure of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and loss of the airplane.

    (e) Compliance

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

    (1) Prior to accumulating 125 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, inspect the master magnetic chip detector (MMCD) for metallic debris. If no metallic debris is found during the MMCD inspection, repeat the inspection within every 125 flight hours.

    (2) If metallic debris is found during the MMCD inspection, evaluate the debris using paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions in IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016. Perform additional inspections or remove the engine from service in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions in IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0671.

    (3) Remove the No. 3 bearing from service at the next engine shop visit and replace it with a bearing part/serial number combination not listed in Appendix 1 of IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016.

    (f) Mandatory Terminating Action

    Removal of the No. 3 bearing from service at the next engine shop visit and replacement with a bearing not listed in Appendix 1 of IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016, is terminating action to this AD.

    (g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, an “engine shop visit” is the induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the separation of pairs of major mating engine flanges, except that the separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of transportation without subsequent engine maintenance does not constitute an engine shop visit.

    (h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

    (i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7772; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0671, dated March 22, 2016, can be obtained from IAE using the contact information in paragraph (i)(3) of this proposed AD.

    (3) For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact International Aero Engines AG, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860-565-0140; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://fleetcare.pw.utc.com.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 13, 2016. Colleen M. D'Alessandro, Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17159 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0428; FRL-9949-38-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), formerly known as the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Air Quality (DAQ), on December 4, 2015, for inclusion into the North Carolina SIP. This proposal pertains to the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP submission. DAQ certified that the North Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in North Carolina. EPA is proposing to determine that portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission, provided to EPA on December 4, 2015, satisfy certain infrastructure elements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0428 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Bell can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at (404) 562-9088.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background and Overview

    On December 14, 2012 (78 FR 3086, January 15, 2013), EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The standard was strengthened from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) to 12.0 μg/m3. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than December 14, 2015.1

    1 In these infrastructure SIP submissions States generally certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking unless otherwise noted, the cited regulation (North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC)) has either been approved, or submitted for approval into North Carolina's federally-approved SIP. The North Carolina statutory provisions cited to herein (North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS)) have not been approved into the North Carolina SIP, unless otherwise noted.

    This rulemaking is proposing to approve portions of North Carolina's PM2.5 infrastructure SIP submissions 2 for the applicable requirements of the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, with the exception of the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4) and preconstruction Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), for which EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking regarding these requirements. For the aspects of North Carolina's submittal proposed for approval in this rulemaking, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that North Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements.

    2 North Carolina's 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submission dated December 4, 2015, is referred to as “North Carolina's PM2.5 infrastructure SIP” in this action.

    II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already contains.

    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for “infrastructure” SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking are summarized below and in EPA's September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).” 3

    3 Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D Title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. This proposed rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of 110(a)(2)(C).

    • 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures • 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System • 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources 4

    4 This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element as they relate to attainment areas.

    • 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport • 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution • 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies • 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting • 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers • 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions • 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas 5

    5 As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to this proposed rulemaking.

    • 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility Protection • 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data • 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees • 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from North Carolina that addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions “within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),” and these SIP submissions are to provide for the “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that “[e]ach such plan” submission must address.

    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as “infrastructure SIP” submissions. Although the term “infrastructure SIP” does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as “nonattainment SIP” or “attainment plan SIP” submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, “regional haze SIP” submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.

    Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions.6 EPA therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission.

    6 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies.

    The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) requires that “each” SIP submission must meet the list of requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.7 Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated.8 This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission.

    7 See, e.g., “Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call; Final Rule,” 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)).

    8 EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS.

    Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit “a plan” to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either individually or in a larger combined action.9 Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.10

    9 See, e.g., “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,” 78 FR 4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule), and “Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,” (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS).

    10 On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14, 2007, submittal.

    Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.11

    11 For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS.

    EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D have to meet the “applicable requirements” of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others.

    Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that particular NAAQS.

    Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.12 EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 (2013 Guidance).13 EPA developed this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submissions.14 The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.

    12 EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist states, as appropriate.

    13 “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.

    14 EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly after the United States (U.S.) Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state's CAA obligations. On March 17, 2016, EPA released a memorandum titled, “Information on the Interstate Transport `Good Neighbor' Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)” to provide guidance to states for interstate transport requirements specific to the PM2.5 NAAQS.

    As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 128.

    As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR) pollutants, including greenhouse gases. By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action.

    For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the state's implementation plan meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor new source review program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs.

    With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (“SSM”); (ii) existing provisions related to “director's variance” or “director's discretion” that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's “Final NSR Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (“NSR Reform”). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions.15 It is important to note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described.

    15 By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.

    EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the purposes of “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of a new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.

    For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).

    Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a “SIP call” whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.16 Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP submissions.17 Significantly, EPA's determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.18

    16 For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events. See “Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revisions,” 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).

    17 EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See “Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,” 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).

    18 See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).

    IV. What is EPA's analysis of how North Carolina addressed the elements of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) “infrastructure” provisions?

    The North Carolina infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.

    1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements. These requirements are met through several North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) regulations. Specifically, 15A NCAC 2D .0500 Emission Control Standards establishes emission limits for PM2.5. The following State rules address additional control measures, means and techniques: 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring: Recordkeeping: Reporting, and 15A NCAC 2D .2600 Source Testing. In addition North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS)143-215.107(a)(5), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) with the statutory authority, “To develop and adopt emission control standards as in the judgment of the Commission may be necessary to prohibit, abate, or control air pollution commensurate with established air quality standards.” EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions contained in these regulations, and North Carolina's statutory authority are adequate for Section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing State provisions with regard to excess emissions during SSM operations at a facility. EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, “State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown” (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such state regulations in a separate action.19

    19 On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled, “State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.” See 80 FR 33840.

    Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.

    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to: (i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. NCGS 143-215.107(a)(2), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the EMC with the statutory authority “To determine by means of field sampling and other studies, including the examination of available data collected by any local, State or federal agency or any person, the degree of air contamination and air pollution in the State and the several areas of the State.”

    Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring network, and includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary support equipment.20 The latest monitoring network plan for North Carolina was submitted to EPA on July 23, 2015, and on November 19, 2015, EPA approved this plan. North Carolina's approved monitoring network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0428.

    20 On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

    NCGS 143-215.107(a)(2), EPA regulations, along with North Carolina's Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, provide for the establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, the compilation and analysis of ambient air quality data, and the submission of these data to EPA upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element consists of three sub-elements: Enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program). To meet these obligations, North Carolina cited the following State regulations: 15A NCAC 2D .0500 Emissions Control Standards; 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration; 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas; and 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction Operation Permits. Collectively, these regulations enable North Carolina to regulate sources contributing to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through enforceable permits. North Carolina also cited to the following statutory provisions as supporting this element: NCGS 143-215.108, Control of sources of air pollution; permits required; NCGS 143-215.107(a)(7), Air quality standards and classifications; and NCGS 143-215.6A, 6B, and 6C, Enforcement procedures: Civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.

    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP for enforcement of PM2.5 emissions controls and measures and the regulation of minor sources and modifications to assist in the protection of air quality in nonattainment, attainment or unclassifiable areas.

    Enforcement: DAQ's above-described, SIP-approved regulations provide for enforcement of PM2.5 emission limits and control measures through enforceable permits. In addition, North Carolina cited NCGS 143-215.6A, 6B, and 6C, which provides NC DAQ with the statutory authority to seek civil and criminal penalties, and injunctive relief to enforce air quality rules.

    Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction PSD permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C), EPA is not proposing any action in this rule making regarding these requirements and instead will act on this portion of the submission in a separate action.

    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor source program that regulates emissions of the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction Operation Permits governs the preconstruction permitting of minor modifications and construction of minor stationary sources.

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP is adequate for enforcement of control measures and regulation of minor sources and modifications related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as “prongs,” that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (“prong 1”), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (“prong 2”). The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state (“prong 3”), or to protect visibility in another state (“prong 4”). EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prongs 1 through 4).

    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources of Nonattainment Areas provide how DAQ will notify neighboring states of potential impacts from new or modified sources consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166. These regulations require DAQ to provide an opportunity for a public hearing to the public, which includes state or local air pollution control agencies, “whose lands may be affected by emissions from the source or modification” in North Carolina. In addition, North Carolina does not have any pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA. Accordingly, EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP is adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide: (i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii) and (iii). EPA's rationale for this proposal respecting each sub-element is described below.

    To satisfy the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites several regulations. Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 “Permit Fees,” provides the mechanism by which stationary sources that emit air pollutants pay a fee based on the quantity of emissions. State statutes NCGS 143-215.3, General powers of Commission and Department: Auxiliary powers, and NCGS 143-215.107(a)(1), Air quality standards and classifications, provide the EMC with the statutory authority “[t]o prepare and develop, after proper study, a comprehensive plan or plans for the prevention, abatement and control of air pollution in the State or in any designated area of the State.” NCGS 143-215.112, Local air pollution control programs, provides the EMC with the statutory authority “to review and have general oversight and supervision over all local air pollution control programs.” North Carolina has three local air agencies located in Buncombe, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg Counties that implement the air program in these areas.

    As further evidence of the adequacy of DAQ's resources, EPA submitted a letter to North Carolina on April 19, 2016, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status of these commitments for fiscal year 2015. The letter EPA submitted to North Carolina can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0428. Annually, states update these grant commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. North Carolina satisfactorily met all commitments agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 2015, therefore North Carolina's grants were finalized and closed out. Collectively, these rules and commitments provide evidence that DAQ has adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority to carry out the State's implementation plan and related issues. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina has adequate resources and authority to satisfy sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) of the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state comply with section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 requires that the SIP provide: (1) The majority of members of the state board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permitting or enforcement orders under the CAA; and (2) any potential conflicts of interest by such board or body, or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. For purposes of section 128(a)(1), as of October 1, 2012, North Carolina has no boards or bodies with authority over air pollution permits or enforcement actions. The authority to approve CAA permits or enforcement orders are instead delegated to the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and his/her delegatee. As such, a “board or body” is not responsible for approving permits or enforcement orders in North Carolina, and the requirements of section 128(a)(1) are not applicable.

    On November 3, 2015 (80 FR 67645), EPA approved North Carolina's section 128(a)(2) conflict of interest disclosure requirements for administrative law judges (ALJs) 21 through NCGS 7A-754 of the North Carolina General Statues, which contains provisions related to the Office of Administrative Hearings addressing these requirements for the ALJ. NCGS 7A-754 requires ALJs to act impartially, which broadly includes financial considerations, relationships, and other associations. ALJs are prohibited from participating in any matter in which the ALJs impartiality might reasonably be questioned or the ALJ must disclose the potential conflict of interest on the record in the proceeding. In the case of such disclosures, the parties to the matter must agree that the disclosed conflict of interest is immaterial before the ALJ may continue to participate in the matter.

    21 EPA has determined that ALJs in North Carolina are authorized to approve permits and enforcement orders on appeal and that the ALJs must therefore meet the conflict of interest disclosure requirements of section 128(a)(2).

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that the State has adequately addressed the requirements of section 128(a), and accordingly has met the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii) and (iii).

    7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing: (i) The installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection. North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission describes how the State establishes requirements for emissions compliance testing and utilizes emissions sampling and analysis. DAQ uses these data to track progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements. North Carolina meets these requirements through 15A NCAC 2D .0604 Exceptions to Monitoring and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0605 General Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0611 Monitoring Emissions from Other Sources; 15A NCAC 2D .0612 Alternative Monitoring and Reporting Procedures; 15A NCAC 2D .0613 Quality Assurance Program; and 15A NCAC 2D .0614 Compliance Assurance Monitoring. In addition, 15A NCAC 2D .0605(c) General Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements allows for the use of credible evidence in the event that the DAQ Director has evidence that a source is violating an emission standard or permit condition, the Director may require that the owner or operator of any source submit to the Director any information necessary to determine the compliance status of the source. In addition, EPA is unaware of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the North Carolina SIP. Also, NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the EMC with the statutory authority “To collect information or to require reporting from classes of sources which, in the judgment of the [EMC], may cause or contribute to air pollution.”

    Stationary sources are required to submit periodic emissions reports to the State by Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 “Annual Emissions Reporting.” North Carolina is also required to submit emissions data to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data. See 73 FR 76539. The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and the precursors that form them—nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxides, ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollutants. North Carolina made its latest update to the 2011 NEI on June 3, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems obligations for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F).

    8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency powers: This section requires that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites 15A NCAC 2D .0300 Air Pollution Emergencies as identifying air pollution emergency episodes and preplanned abatement strategies, and provides the means to implement emergency air pollution episode measures. Under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(12), General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary powers, if NC DENR finds that such a “condition of . . . air pollution exists and that it creates an emergency requiring immediate action to protect the public health and safety or to protect fish and wildlife, the Secretary of the Department [NC DEQ] with the concurrence of the Governor, shall order persons causing or contributing to the . . . air pollution in question to reduce or discontinue immediately the emission of air contaminants or the discharge of wastes.” In addition, NCGS 143-215.3(a)(12) provides NC DEQ with the authority to declare an emergency when it finds that a generalized condition of water or air pollution which is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of the public. This statute also allows, in the absence of a generalized condition of air pollution, should the Secretary find “that the emissions from one or more air contaminant sources . . . is causing imminent danger to human health and safety or to fish and wildlife, he may with the concurrence of the Governor order the person or persons responsible for the operation or operations in question to immediately reduce or discontinue the emissions of air contaminants . . . or to take such other measures as are, in his judgment, necessary.” EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina satisfies the emergency powers obligations of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan (i) as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional applicable requirements. DAQ is responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the NAAQS in North Carolina. NCGS 143-215.107(a)(1) and (a)(10) grant DAQ the authority to prepare and develop, after proper study, a comprehensive plan for the prevention of air pollution and implement the CAA, respectively. These provisions also provide DAQ the ability and authority to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and North Carolina has provided a number of SIP revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS. In addition, State regulation 15A NCAC 2D .2401(d) states that “The EMC may specify through rulemaking a specific emission limit lower than that established under this rule for a specific source if compliance with the lower emission limit is required to attain or maintain the ambient air quality standard for ozone or PM2.5 or any other ambient air quality standard in Section 15A NCAC 2D .0400.” EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP revisions related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, when necessary.

    10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127, and visibility protection. With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction PSD permitting, EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking regarding these requirements and instead will act on these portions of the submission in a separate action. EPA's rationale for its proposed action regarding applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127, and visibility is described below.

    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for consultation with local governments, designated organizations and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. 15A NCAC 2D .1600 General Conformity, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation Conformity, and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas, along with the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan, provide for consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities. Specifically, North Carolina adopted state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity. Implementation of transportation conformity as outlined in the consultation procedures requires DAQ to consult with Federal, state and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. The Regional Haze SIP provides for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding FLMs. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate that the State meets applicable requirements related to consultation with government officials for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when necessary for the consultation with government officials element of section 110(a)(2)(J).

    Public notification (127 public notification): Rule 15A NCAC 2D .0300 Air Pollution Emergencies provides North Carolina with the authority to declare an emergency and notify the public accordingly when it finds a generalized condition of water or air pollution which is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of the public. Additionally, the DAQ has the North Carolina Air Awareness Program which is a program to educate the public on air quality issues and promote voluntary emission reduction measures. The DAQ also features a Web page providing ambient monitoring information regarding current and historical air quality across the State at http://www.ncair.org/monitor/. North Carolina participates in the EPA AirNOW program, which enhances public awareness of air quality in North Carolina and throughout the country. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide public notification related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when necessary for the public notification element of section 110(a)(2)(J).

    Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. NC DEQ referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B). However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has determined that states do not need to address the visibility component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so NC DENR does not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission is approvable for the visibility protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J) related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and that North Carolina does not need to rely on its regional haze program to satisfy this element.

    11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such data to the EPA can be made. This infrastructure requirement is met through emissions data collected through 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring: Recordkeeping: Reporting (authorized under NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4)), which requires sources to provide information needed to model potential impacts on air quality). NCGS 143-215.107(a) also provides authority for the EMC to determine by means of field sampling and other studies, the degree of air contamination and air pollution in the state. Collectively, these regulations demonstrate that North Carolina has the authority to perform air quality modeling and to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The submittal also states that DAQ currently has personnel with training and experience to conduct source-oriented dispersion modeling that would likely be used in PM2.5 NAAQS applications with models approved by EPA. Additionally, North Carolina participates in a regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, for the Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, North Carolina's air quality regulations and practices demonstrate that DAQ has the authority to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated, and to provide such information to the EPA Administrator upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air quality modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: This element necessitates that the SIP require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover: (i) The reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee program under title V.

    To satisfy these requirements, North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 Permit Fees, which requires the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a sufficient fee to cover the costs of the permitting program. The 15A NCAC 2D .0500 and 2Q .0500 rules contain the State's title V program 22 which includes provisions to implement and enforce PSD and NNSR permits once these permits have been issued. The fees collected under 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 also support this activity. NCGS 143-215.3, General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary Powers, provides authority for DAQ to require a processing fee in an amount sufficient for the reasonable cost of reviewing and acting upon PSD and NNSR permits. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately provide for permitting fees related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, when necessary.

    22 Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.

    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration requires that NC DEQ notify the public, including affected local entities, of PSD permit applications and associated information related to PSD permits, and the opportunity for comment prior to making final permitting decisions. NCGS 150B-21.1 and 150B-21.2 authorize and require DAQ to advise, consult, cooperate and enter into agreements with other agencies of the state, the Federal Government, other states, interstate agencies, groups, political subdivisions, and industries affected by the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the Department. Also, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation Conformity requires a consultation with all affected partners to be implemented for transportation conformity determinations. Furthermore, DAQ has demonstrated consultation with, and participation by, affected local entities through its work with local political subdivisions during the developing of its Transportation Conformity SIP, Regional Haze Implementation Plan, and the 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill NC-SC nonattainment area. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, when necessary.

    V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve that portions of DAQ's infrastructure SIP submission, submitted December 4, 2015, for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, has met the above described infrastructure SIP requirements. The PSD permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4), will not be addressed by EPA at this time. EPA is proposing to approve these portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS because these aspects of the submission are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: July 8, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17301 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0241; FRL-9948-07-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, El Dorado County Air Quality Management District AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). This revision describes actions that EDCAQMD must take in the event of dangerously high ambient ozone concentration levels.

    DATES:

    Any comments on this proposal must arrive by August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0241 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 947 4115, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are approving the EDCAQMD Ozone Emergency Episode Plan in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe this SIP revision is not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in a subsequent action based on this proposed rule.

    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: June 13, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17172 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0583; FRL-9949-23-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, Riverside County Air Pollution Control District, and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve rescissions from the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD), Riverside County Air Pollution Control District (RCAPCD), and San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern superseded New Source Review (NSR) rules. We are proposing to approve the rescission of rules under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

    DATES:

    Any comments on this proposal must arrive by August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0583 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to mailto:[email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Laura Lawrence, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3407, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA. This proposal addresses the rescission of RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2 from the Mojave Desert portion of the California SIP. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are approving the rescission of these local rules in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe this SIP revision is not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule.

    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: June 24, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17169 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 60 and 62 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0033; FRL-9949-36-OAR] RIN 2060-AS84 Clean Energy Incentive Program Design Details; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On June 30, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule titled, “Clean Energy Incentive Program Design Details.” The EPA is extending the comment period on the proposed rule that was scheduled to close on August 29, 2016, by four days until September 2, 2016. The EPA is making this change to align the public comment period with the public hearing submittal time frame.

    DATES:

    The public comment period for the proposed rule published in the Federal Register on June 30, 2016 (81 FR 42940), is being extended. Written comments must be received on or before September 2, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for the proposed rulemaking (available at http://www.regulations.gov). The Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0033. Information on this action is posted at https://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan/clean-energy-incentive-program. Submit your comments, identified by the appropriate Docket ID No. to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part of your comment, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html for instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information on this action, contact Dr. Tina Ndoh, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (D243-04), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2750; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    To provide administrative simplicity for stakeholders by aligning the public comment period on the proposal with the 30-day timeframe for submissions after the public hearing on August 3, 2016, the EPA has decided to extend the public comment period until September 2, 2016.

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Michael Koerber, Associate Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17279 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 300 [Docket No. 120201087-6529-01] RIN 0648-BB86 International Affairs; Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS proposes revising the regulations that implement conservation measures adopted by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR or Commission). These revisions would be in addition to those proposed on December 29, 2015, that would revise procedures and requirements for filing import, export, and re-export documentation for certain fishery products, to integrate the collection of trade documentation within the government-wide International Trade Data System (ITDS) and require electronic information collection. The purposes of the revisions in this proposed rule are to streamline and clarify the regulations, shift deadlines for advance notice of intended fishing activities, distinguish between first receivers and dealers of Antarctic marine living resources (AMLR), reduce the time for advance notice of imports of Dissostichus species, and add transshipment notification requirements. The sections of these regulations would be reorganized to group requirements related to the trade of Antarctic marine living resources and those that apply to fishing activities. Additionally, this action would update the regulations to reflect Commission adopted revisions to existing conservation measures and changes made to the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act through the Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received by August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments on this action, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2016-0076, may be submitted by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0076, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Mi Ae Kim, Office of International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mi Ae Kim, Office of International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, NMFS (phone 301-427-8365, fax 301-713-2313, or email [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The United States is a Contracting Party to the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Convention). Under Article VII of the Convention, contracting parties established and agreed to maintain the Commission to give effect to the Convention's objective—conservation of AMLR. The United States, along with 23 other countries and the European Union, are members of the Commission and meet annually to formulate, adopt and revise conservation measures. Article IX(6) of the Convention requires the Commission to notify conservation measures to all members and, 180 days thereafter, such measures become binding. If a member objects to a measure within 90 days of notification, the measure is not binding on that member, and Article IX(6)(d) of the Convention includes a procedure that allows other members to notify that they can no longer accept that measure.

    The Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 (AMLRCA), codified at 16 U.S.C. 2431, et seq., provides the statutory authority for the United States to carry out its obligations under the Convention, including implementation of Commission adopted conservation measures. AMLRCA section 305(a)(1) authorizes the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of the National Science Foundation, to decide whether the United States is unable to accept or can no longer accept a Commission adopted conservation measure (16 U.S.C. 2434(a)(1)). AMLRCA also gives the Secretary of Commerce authority to promulgate regulations as necessary and appropriate to implement the Act. This authority has been delegated to the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (Assistant Administrator), who has implemented Commission adopted conservation measures that are binding on the United States under Article IX of the Convention through regulations at 50 CFR part 300, subpart G (AMLR regulations).

    Through the “Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act” (IUU Fishing Enforcement Act), Public Law 114-81 (2015), Congress amended AMLRCA section 306, 16 U.S.C. 2435, which specifies unlawful activities; section 307, 16 U.S.C. 2436, which provides the Secretary of Commerce authority to promulgate regulations that are necessary and appropriate to implement AMLRCA; and section 308(a), 16 U.S.C. 2437(a), which specifies the penalties available for violations of the Act. Public Law 114-81 (2015), Title I, 106(1)-(2). The amendments to sections 306 and 307 are further discussed below; no regulatory changes are necessary to implement the amendments to section 308(a).

    At each annual meeting, the Commission may adopt new conservation measures or revise existing measures. The current and past versions of the conservation measures are available on the Commission Web site: http://www.ccamlr.org. The conservation measures are organized by categories, including compliance, general fishery matters, fishery regulations, and protected areas, with each category designated by a two-digit code. While all conservation measures are subject to revision at the annual meeting, some (particularly those in the fishery regulation category) expire after one or two fishing seasons and so must be revised annually or biennially, to reflect management or monitoring needs identified during Commission deliberations, changes in catch limits or bycatch limits, or other considerations.

    Through this action, NMFS would reorganize, streamline, and update the regulations that implement AMLRCA and Commission adopted conservation measures. These revisions would be in addition to those proposed in 80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015, hereinafter referred to as the rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation, which integrates the collection of trade documentation within the government-wide ITDS and requires electronic information collection. Certain sections are rearranged so that regulations applicable to the trade of AMLR are grouped together while other sections that are obsolete are removed. This action removes sections that implement annual measures which generally will be implemented through vessel permits if applicable to the permitted fishing activities. Table 1 identifies how the sections of the current regulations will be designated by this action.

    Table 1—Proposed Reorganization of 50 CFR Part 300, Subpart G Current structure Proposed designation 300.100 Purpose and scope Same. 300.101 Definitions Same. 300.102 Relationship to other treaties, conventions, laws, and regulations Same. 300.103 Procedure for according protection to CEMP Sites Moved to 300.113. 300.104 Scientific research Moved to 300.103. 300.105 Initiating a new fishery Moved to 300.109. 300.106 Exploratory fisheries Moved to 300.110. 300.107 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements DCD Requirements moved to 300.106 and first receiver and vessel reporting and recordkeeping requirements moved to 300.104 and 300.107, respectively. 300.108 Vessel and gear identification Same. 300.109 Gear disposal Removed. 300.110 Mesh size Removed. 300.112 Harvesting permits Moved to 300.107. 300.113 Scientific observers Moved to 300.111. 300.114 Dealer permits and preapproval Moved to 300.104 (permits) and 300.105 (preapprovals). 300.115 Appointment of a designated representative Removed. 300.116 Requirements for a vessel monitoring system for U.S. vessels Moved to 300.112. 300.117 Prohibitions Moved to 300.114. 300.118 Facilitation of enforcement and inspection Moved to 300.115. 300.119 Penalties Moved to 300.116.

    This proposed rule would delete all references from the current version of the AMLR regulations to section 300.111 which was removed and reserved by a final rule published on April 9, 2010 (75 FR 18111).

    Definitions

    This action would remove the following definitions from 50 CFR 300.101:

    “Antarctic finfish” would be removed because the list of species in the current definition contains only a subset of all Antarctic finfish species and also because the AMLR regulations do not reference this term.

    “Directed fishing” would be removed because the sections that refer to this term, gear disposal and mesh size provisions, are being removed through this rulemaking for reasons stated below.

    “Port State” would be removed because the AMLR regulations do not reference this term.

    This action would revise the following definitions in 50 CFR 300.101:

    “Centralized Vessel Monitoring System (C-VMS)” and “Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)” would be revised and updated to more accurately describe these systems. For example, C-VMS is operated by the Secretariat of CCAMLR and receives position and other information from mobile transceiver units on vessels, either directly or through the flag State, but these aspects are not reflected in the current definition. The updated VMS definition would reflect the current use of enhanced mobile transceiver units, which have replaced mobile transceiver units. The revised definition reflects how such units are linked to satellites and provide automatic reports of positional and other information.

    “Convention waters” would be revised to “Convention Area” throughout the subpart to be consistent with terminology used in the Convention and in Commission adopted conservation measures.

    “Dealer” is currently defined as the person who first receives AMLR from a harvesting vessel or transshipment vessels or who imports AMLR into, or re-exports AMLR from, the United States. It would be modified to mean the person who imports AMLR into, or exports or re-exports AMLR from, the United States. It would no longer include persons that first receive AMLR from a harvesting vessel or transshipment vessel. See below for explanation of a new definition of “first receiver.”

    “Dissostichus catch document (DCD)” would be revised to update the term to reflect changes in Conservation Measure 10-05. These revisions are explained further below.

    “Landing or landed” would be revised, for purposes of catch documentation requirements to be implemented under section 300.106, in accordance with the definition provided in Conservation Measure 10-05.

    “Mobile transceiver unit” would be changed to “enhanced mobile transceiver unit or EMTU” to reflect the current technology of these systems which includes two-way communication functionality.

    “Real-time” would be revised to reflect revisions to Conservation Measure 10-04 that were adopted at the 2015 annual CCAMLR meeting. Conservation Measure 10-04 had required all vessels in the Convention Area to report positions at 4-hour intervals, but now requires position reporting from vessels in the Convention Area on an hourly basis for finfish fisheries and, as of December 1, 2019, for all other fisheries.

    “Scientific research activity” would be removed for consistency with proposed changes to § 300.103 which applies to scientific research conducted in the Convention Area. As discussed further below, revisions to regulations on scientific research conducted in the Convention Area are necessary to implement Conservation Measure 24-01 which sets forth how conservation measures apply to scientific research and requires reporting of certain research activities to the Commission.

    “Transship or transshipment” which currently, with some exceptions, means the transfer of fish or fish products from one vessel to another would be revised to reflect how that term is defined in Conservation Measure 10-09, the measure that requires notification of transshipment activities in the Convention Area. The definition would be further revised to be consistent with the definition of transshipment, provided in Conservation Measure 10-05, for purposes related to catch documentation to be implemented under proposed § 300.106.

    The action would add the following definitions:

    “First receiver” would be defined as the person who first receives AMLRs landed from a vessel licensed under § 300.107 at a U.S. port. This term is added to make a clear distinction between dealers and first receivers. This distinction is needed because dealers of AMLR will be subject to permitting requirements under the rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation (80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015) when that rule is finalized. As explained further below, first receivers of AMLR will continue to be subject to permitting requirements under the AMLRCA regulations.

    “Dissostichus export document (DED)” and “Dissostichus re-export document (DRED)” would be added to implement revisions to Conservation Measure 10-05. Currently, the regulations use the term “Dissostichus catch document” to include export and re-export documents, as well as documentation of harvest, transshipment, and landing. The new terminology clarifies that the DED documents export information and the DRED documents re-export information. The “Dissostichus catch document” or “DCD” would be defined as a document that includes information related to harvest, transshipment, and landing.

    Section 300.103 Scientific Research

    This proposed rule would revise the research notification requirements and remove paragraphs that refer to an obsolete section. These revisions are necessary to reflect Commission adopted revisions to Conservation Measure 24-01 which applies to scientific research in the Convention Area. Currently, persons planning to use a vessel for research purposes, who expect to catch less than 50 tonnes (metric tons) of AMLR, must provide notification to the Assistant Administrator at least 2 months in advance of planned research. Where catch is expected to be more than 50 tonnes, this notification must be provided at least 7 months in advance of the planned starting date for the research.

    In this proposed rule, these advance notification requirements would apply if expected catches are one tonne or more of finfish or krill, or when gear other than longline, trawl, or pot would be used to catch Dissostichus spp. For clarity, this rule would add Table 1 to the regulations, which would identify taxa-specific thresholds for advance notification of research vessel activity. Advance notification at least 2 months before the planned start of research fishing would be required for amounts of expected catch that are less than 50 tonnes of finfish in a season and no more than the amounts specified in Table 1. Advance notification of at least 7 months would be required for research that would involve expected catches more than 50 tonnes or more than the amounts specified in Table 1. CCAMLR Formats would need to be used in providing the notifications to the Assistant Administrator.

    The proposed rule would also require that research fishing not proceed until the Assistant Administrator authorizes the person in writing that he or she may proceed when the expected catch is more than 50 tonnes of fish or greater than the amounts specified in Table 1. Such authorization may be provided after the completion of review of the scientific research plan by the CCAMLR Scientific Committee and the Commission.

    Section 300.104 International Fisheries Trade Permits and AMLR First Receiver Permits

    The provisions related to AMLR dealer permits and preapprovals are currently combined. This proposed rule would clearly separate these processes because the preapproval process applies only to imports of frozen Dissostichus spp. and not to imports of fresh Dissostichus spp. or other AMLR species. As explained above, this proposed rule would also revise the definition of a “dealer” and establish a definition for “first receiver.” This would enable NMFS to apply different requirements for dealer activities (importing/exporting/re-exporting AMLR) and first receiver activities (i.e., receiving AMLR, that have not previously been landed, from a harvesting or transshipment vessel at a U.S. port of landing). Through the proposed rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation (80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015), NOAA would establish an International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP) for the import, export, and re-export of AMLR and other regulated seafood commodities that are subject to trade monitoring programs of regional fishery management organizations or arrangements and/or subject to trade documentation requirements under domestic law. The IFTP would replace the AMLR dealer permit. The IFTP would cover activities currently authorized under an AMLR dealer permit but would not apply to first receivers of AMLR. Accordingly, in anticipation of establishment of the IFTP, this proposed rule would establish a permit requirement and procedure for first receivers of AMLR that is distinct and separate from the requirement and procedure for AMLR dealers. This will enable NMFS to continue to monitor and obtain information about first receiver activities.

    Current regulations (50 CFR 300.114(k)) allow foreign entities to possess a dealer permit on the condition that the entity designate and maintain a resident agent within the United States that is authorized to accept service of process on behalf of that entity. NMFS proposes to remove section 300.114(k), as the proposed rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation (80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015) would require any person (including a resident agent of a nonresident corporation) who imports, exports or re-exports AMLR to have a valid IFTP.

    Section 300.105 Preapproval for importation of Frozen Dissostichus Species

    As mentioned, this proposed rule would create a separate section for the procedures related to issuance of a preapproval certificate for imports of frozen Dissostichus spp. This proposed rule would also change the preapproval certificate application deadline for imports of frozen Dissostichus spp. from 15 to 10 working days before the anticipated date of importation to provide a more reasonable timeframe for submitting applications while still allowing sufficient time for NMFS to evaluate them. The proposed rule includes clarification regarding when NMFS will not issue a preapproval certificate for importation of frozen Dissostichus spp., e.g., when the Dissostichus spp. was harvested or transshipped in contravention of any CCAMLR conservation measure in force at the time of harvest or transshipment. The proposed rule includes additional minor, non-substantive changes to clarify the requirements related to the importation of frozen Dissostichus spp.

    Under this proposed rule, NMFS would continue to charge a fee for reviewing and processing applications for a preapproval certificate that authorizes importation of a shipment of frozen Dissositichus spp. The methodology for calculating the fee is based on procedures in the NOAA Finance Handbook for determining administrative costs of special products and services. See NOAA Finance Handbook at Chapter 9, Section 10, “Instructions for Completing the NOAA Product/Service Cost Computation Form.” The NOAA Finance Handbook may be obtained by contacting NMFS (see ADDRESSES) or online at the NOAA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer website: http://www.corporateservices.noaa/gov/noaa/cfohome.html.

    Section 300.106 Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) Documentation and Other Requirements

    This proposed rule would provide a distinct section in the regulations for requirements under Conservation Measure 10-05, CCAMLR's electronic Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS). CCAMLR's CDS allows tracking of Dissostichus spp. from harvest through the trade cycle, including transhipment, landing, import, export, and re-export. For imports of fresh Dissostichus, spp., a report of the shipment will need to be submitted to NMFS even if the amount or value of the Dissostichus spp. is below the threshold that triggers the requirement to file entry documentation with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

    The proposed section 300.106 would contain a number of existing requirements related to CDS documents, such as the following: vessels masters must provide information on the harvest or transshipment of Dissostichus spp. and submit the DCD to NMFS and to each recipient of the catch; upon landing, first receivers must sign the DCD; and dealers must obtain necessary signatures, check the quantity of toothfish with that list on the DED or DRED and provide the DED and DRED and other information when importing, exporting, or re-exporting Dissostichus spp. The DED and DRED are new terms that the Commission incorporated into Conservation Measure 10-05 in 2014.

    This proposed rule would remove from the regulations the list of information specified in the applications for re-export of Dissostichus spp. because that information is captured in the application form that must be completed in order to receive approval to re-export or export Dissostichus spp.

    Section 300.107 Vessel Permits and Requirements

    This proposed rule would replace the term “harvesting permits” with “vessel permits.” NMFS proposes this change to ensure that the terminology encompasses vessels that engage in harvesting or associated activities such as transshipment at sea in support of harvesting. Transshipment vessels are currently required to obtain a “havesting permit” and thus this change in terminology would clarify but not change the scope of requirement. To allow time for NMFS to review permit applications and provide information to the Commission Secretariat, if appropriate, by the June 1 deadline for some fisheries, this proposed rule would change the deadline for vessel permit applications to April 1 that precedes the fishing season (generally December 1 to November 30) in which the fishing or associated activities are expected to occur. The current deadline in the regulation is June 1, which does not allow any time for review by NMFS prior to the deadline for submission of fishing notitifications to CCAMLR.

    Under this proposed rule, NMFS would accept vessel permit applications only for U.S. vessels that have been issued an International Maritime Organization or IMO number, consistent with Commission adopted revisions to Conservation Measure 10-02. IMO numbers are unique vessel identifiers that remain with the vessel and allow for tracking of the vessel regardless of any changes to its name, call sign, flag or other identifying information.

    This proposed rule would add 300.107(k) to implement Conservation Measure 10-09, which applies to transshipments in the Convention Area. Under proposed 300.107(k), a vessel operator would be required to provide advance notification of any transshipment within the Convention Area, of AMLRs or of any other goods or materials, to the CCAMLR Secretariat directly and to submit a confirmation of such notification to NMFS Headquarters.

    Additionally, this proposed rule would remove regulatory text codified at § 300.115 regarding the appointment of a designated representative for holders of permits authorizing fishing in Subarea 48.3. This requirement will be included as a vessel permit condition if necessary and applicable to the authorized fishery and gear types.

    Section 300.108 Vessel and Gear Identification

    This proposed rule would revise existing regulations to implement Commission adopted revisions to Conservation Measure 10-01 related to the marking of fishing vessels and fishing gear. Previously, this conservation measure required that fishing vessels be marked so that they can be readily identified, in accordance with internationally recognized standards such as the FAO Standard Specifications and Guidelines for the Marking and Identification of Fishing Vessels. Revisions to the conservation measure now specify the location, coloring, size, and maintenance requirements for vessel and gear markings, and the proposed rule includes these requirements.

    Section 300.109 Initiating a New Fishery

    This proposed rule would revise the deadline for notification of intent to participate in a new fishery to ensure that NMFS is able to satisfy the requirements of Conservation Measure 21-01 (Notification that members are Considering Initiating a New Fishery). Per this proposed rule, the deadline would be changed from July 1 to April 1 that precedes the fishing season (generally December 1 to November 30) in which the fishing activities are expected to occur. This revision would provide NMFS time to review the information provided by the applicant before submittal to the Commission Secretariat. Because Conservation Measure 21-01 requires that Commission members submit to the Commission Secretariat information about the vessel proposing to participate in a new fishery, this proposed rule requires that the notification shall be accompanied by a complete vessel permit application, which includes the requisite vessel information. Because bottom trawling on the high seas of the Convention Area is considered a new fishery under Conservation Measure 21-01, this proposed rule would add to § 300.109 a requirement to provide information on any fishery that uses bottom trawl gear. This proposed rule revises section 300.109(c)(1) to reflect requirements in Conservation Measure 21-01 to provide a maximum catch level for the forthcoming season instead of the current regulation requiring “minimum level of catches that would be required to develop a viable fishery.”

    Section 300.110 Exploratory Fisheries

    This proposed rule would revise the deadline for notification of intent to participate in an exploratory fishery to ensure that NMFS is able to satisfy the requirements of Conservation Measure 21-02 (Exploratory Fisheries). The deadline would be changed from July 1 to April 1 that precedes the fishing season (generally December 1 to November 30) in which the fishing activities are expected to occur. This revision would provide NMFS time to review the information prior to submission to the Commission Secretariat. Because Conservation Measure 21-02 requires that Commission members submit information about the vessel proposing to participate in an exploratory fishery to the Commission Secretariat, this rule would require that the notification shall be accompanied by a complete vessel permit application, which includes the requisite vessel information. Proposed section 300.110(e) would also require that additional information be submitted with the notification so that the United States can comply with Conservation Measure 21-02 when notifying the Commission about the permittee's intent to participate in an exploratory fishery.

    Section 300.111 Scientific Observers

    This proposed rule would maintain but reorganize the requirements related to carrying of scientific observers aboard U.S. vessels permitted to harvest AMLR in the Convention Area.

    Section 300.113 CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program Sites

    This proposed rule would remove the duration and permit modification request elements of the regulation that implements Conservation Measure 91-01 (CCAMLR Ecosystem Management Program). Duration would be specified within the CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program (CEMP) permit itself rather than by regulation. Persons seeking any modifications of their permit before it expires would need to submit a new application.

    This proposed rule removes the list of CEMP sites because these sites (Seal Islands, South Shetland Islands and Cape Shirreff and the San Telmo Islands) are no longer protected under Conservation Measure 91-01. Additionally, this rule would remove the phrase “when it enters into force” in reference to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty and its Annexes because they have entered into force.

    Section 300.114 Prohibitions

    This proposed rule would revise § 300.114, Prohibitions, by removing text regarding gear restrictions on trawl mesh size and requirements to use measures to minimize incidental mortality of seabirds and marine mammals. NMFS would implement these measures as conditions to a vessel permit if applicable to the authorized fishery and gear type. The regulations would continue to specify under proposed 300.114(l) that it is unlawful for any person to violate or attempt to violate the conditions of any permit issued under AMLRCA. Additionally, to be consistent with the IUU Fishing Enforcement Act amendments to AMLRCA section 306, 16 U.S.C. 2435, noted above, this rule would revise § 300.114 by: (1) Removing the words “knew or should have known” from the prohibition in 300.114(d) relating to trade in AMLR harvested in violation of a conservation measure that is in force with respect to the United States; and, (2) amending 300.114(e) and (h) to add “investigation” to make it unlawful for a person to refuse to allow any authorized officer to board a vessel for that purpose.

    Implementation of New or Revised Conservation Measures Adopted and Notified by the Commission

    Proposed section 300.102(d) of this rule would clarify that NMFS may apply exemptions to Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requirements when implementing conservation measures that have been adopted and notified by the Commission. This proposed approach would apply only to conservation measures that do not require the development of policy options or a regulatory framework. NMFS would provide for notice-and-comment rulemaking when implementation of a conservation measure implicates other requirements of domestic law or when NMFS needs to interpret or expand upon a conservation measure.

    Proposed section 300.102(e) would further clarify that NMFS would generally implement annual or biennial measures as conditions to vessel permits instead of through regulations. Annual or biennial measures are conservation measures that apply to the operation of the Convention's commercial or exploratory fisheries and include, among other measures, gear, catch, and effort restrictions and time and area closures. (See proposed definition below). These types of measures generally expire after one or two fishing seasons and therefore are referred to as annual or biennial measures.

    This section provides background and an explanation for the application of APA exemptions, the use of permit conditions, and generally describes the regulations that would be added to codify this approach to implementation of certain conservation measures.

    NMFS has had different practices for implementation of annual and biennial measures. The Commission adopts these and other conservation measures at its annual meeting, which is usually held in October. Shortly after the conclusion of each annual meeting, the Commission provides members formal notification of adopted conservation measures as required under the Convention's procedure for member implementation of adopted Conservation Measures at Article IX. Under the Commission's usual schedule, notification is generally provided within the first few days of November. The fishing season for fisheries managed under the Convention generally commences on December 1 and ends on November 30 of the following year.

    This tight timing has presented challenges for NMFS in implementing annual and biennial measures in a timely manner. NMFS has taken a few different approaches to address those challenges. Until 1996, NMFS promulgated regulations to implement adopted annual measures. In May of 1996, NMFS adopted a framework under which annual measures were implemented by regulatory notice rather than codified regulations. In April of 2010, NMFS rescinded that framework and stated that Commission adopted measures would be implemented through regulations or permit conditions as appropriate.

    The approach in this proposed rule—use APA exemptions and permit conditions—will help to expedite implementation of annual or biennial measures and other conservation measures with respect to vessels of the United States and persons subject to United States jurisdiction. The APA generally requires prior notice of and an opportunity to comment on proposed rules, and a 30-day delay in effectiveness of final rules. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)-(d). However, there are two APA exemptions that NMFS may apply in implementation of conservation measures. First, because NMFS implements Commission adopted measures to satisfy the obligations of the United States under the Convention, the APA foreign affairs function exception, 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is available.

    Second, the IUU Fishing Enforcement Act explicitly added to AMLRCA an exemption from APA rulemaking requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)-(d). Public Law 114-81, Title I, 106(2)(B); 16 U.S.C. 2436(b). The exemption may be applied only to implement Commission adopted measures that have been “in effect for 12 months or less.” Id.; 16 U.S.C. 2436(b)(1)(A). NMFS proposes to interpret this “in effect” text as meaning the 12-month period that commences when the Commission provides notice of adopted conservation measures under Article IX of the Convention.

    Proposed section 300.102(d) would provide that NMFS may apply either the APA foreign affairs function exception or the AMLRCA APA rulemaking exemption when implementing conservation measures that have been adopted and notified by the Commission. In either case, this proposed approach would apply only to conservation measures that do not require the development of policy options or a regulatory framework.

    Proposed section 300.102(e) would provide that NMFS may implement annual and biennial measures as conditions to vessel permits instead of through regulations. Use of permit conditions would provide actual notice of the annual and biennial measures, consistent with the APA. See 5 U.S.C. 551(a)(1). Proposed section 300.101 of the rule would define “annual or biennial measure” as a conservation measure that: (1) Applies to the operation of the Convention's commercial or exploratory fisheries such as gear, catch, and effort restrictions and time and area closures; (2) generally expires after one or two fishing season(s); and (3) does not require the development of policy options or a regulatory framework. Consistent with this approach, this rule would remove existing regulations that implemented measures that NMFS intends to implement via permit condition, specifically, restrictions on gear disposal and mesh size.

    NMFS notes that the APA exemption under AMLRCA applies only when the United States does not object to a measure. See 16 U.S.C. 2436(b)(1)(C) (applying exemption to conservation measures “with respect to which the Secretary of State, does not notify [sic] Commission in accordance with section 305(a)(1) within the time period allotted for objections under Article IX of the Convention” (emphasis added)). However, NMFS believes the introductory paragraph of section 2436(b)(1) as enacted by Congress has a typographical error: It refers to the exemption applying when the Secretary of State “notifies” the Commission of an objection. This does not make sense; the text should say “does not notify” as does section 2436(b)(1)(C). NMFS interprets the APA exemption consistent with AMLRCA section 2436(b)(1)(C).

    NMFS also notes that, if implementation of a Commission adopted measure is exempt from APA rulemaking requirements, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., would also be inapplicable to those actions.

    NMFS welcomes public comment on this proposed approach to implementation of Commission adopted measures and the regulations that would implement this approach under sections 300.102(d) and (e).

    Classification Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act, codified at 16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq., subject to further consideration following public comment.

    Executive Order 12866

    This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    This proposed rule would further modify the AMLR regulations as proposed in the rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation (80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015). It would reorganize the regulations related to the trade of Antarctic marine living resources (AMLR) and those that apply to fishing activities; establish a distinction between first receivers and dealers of AMLR to ensure that NMFS is able to regulate the activities of first receivers when dealer activities are regulated under the rule for electronic reporting of trade documentation; change the regulatory deadlines including the requirement for advance notice of intended fishing activities from June 1 to April 1 to allow NMFS time for review of vessel permit applications and associated information prior to submitting to the CCAMLR Secretariat by its deadline of June 1; require advance notification of transshipments of AMLR, bait, or fuel or other goods; and change the advance notice deadline for imports of toothfish (Dissostichus spp.) from 15 to 10 working days to provide a more reasonable timeframe for such advance notice while still allowing time for NMFS to verify information.

    Additionally, the proposed rule would implement the following revised elements of CCAMLR conservation measures:

    • Reporting requirements for vessels that conduct scientific research activities in the Convention Area;

    • A requirement that Contracting Parties provide IMO numbers for their flagged vessels that it authorizes to fish in the CCAMLR area;

    • Terminology changes relating to the Dissostichus Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) and providing for the use of the electronic CDS; and

    • Specifications for the identification markings to be put on vessels and gear.

    The proposed rule also revises regulations that specify prohibitions or unlawful acts to be consistent with the IUU Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015 amendments to AMLRCA section 306. Specifically, this rule proposes to (1) remove the words “knew or should have known” from the prohibition in 300.114(d) relating to trade in AMLR harvested in violation of a conservation measure that is in force with respect to the United States; and, (2) amending 300.114(e) and (h) to add “investigation” to make it unlawful for a person to refuse to allow any authorized officer to board a vessel for that purpose.

    The proposed rule would also establish regulations that would allow NMFS to implement CCAMLR adopted annual or biennial conservation measures through vessel permit conditions rather than regulations. Lastly, the proposed rule would clarify certain regulatory requirements, and remove or update outdated items, such as references to previously deleted sections, and outdated web and mailing addresses.

    This proposed rule would impact U.S. flagged vessels operating in the Convention Area and first receivers and dealers of AMLR. During the past several years, there have been no U.S. flagged vessels operating in the Convention Area and no U.S. entities that first receive AMLRs, but there are approximately 45 dealers who could fall within the scope of NMFS's AMLRCA regulations. Although NMFS does not have access to data about the business sizes of dealers that would be impacted by this proposed rule, it is likely that the majority would be considered small entities under the “Small Business Size Regulations” established by the SBA under 13 CFR 121.201.

    Although all regulated entities are considered small under the SBA size standard, this rule is expected to have no economic impact on these regulated entities. The creation of a distinction between first receivers and dealers of AMLR and a modification of the deadline for advance notification for imports of toothfish are administrative provisions that would only minimally change dealer practices and are not expected to change dealer costs or revenues, and thus they are expected to be cost neutral. Other proposed changes applicable to fishing operations are also expected to be cost neutral as they do not add new requirements but rather only make technical changes. These proposed changes include the change in the deadline for advance notification of intended fishing practices, revisions to requirements for scientific research fishing, and vessel marking. The requirement for advance notification for transshipments may involve some cost for transmitting information to the CCAMLR Secretariat and NMFS but, given that there have been no U.S. vessels harvesting or transshipping under these regulations for several years, any cost impacts of this requirement is expected to be absorbed into the overall, high cost of initiating operation in the Convention Area.

    NMFS' proposal that Commission adopted annual or biennial measures be implemented through vessel permits, as appropriate, is an administrative change that is expected to result in a more efficient scheme for regulating entities that fish in the Convention Area. As an administrative change, this approach to implementation of conservation measures would not increase the regulatory burden on entities that are subject to AMLRCA regulations or have any economic effects.

    Finally, the proposed rule includes technical revisions to existing regulations to make the regulations more concise, better organized, and easier for the public to use. These changes would have little or no economic impact on any small entities.

    For the above reasons, this proposed rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As a result, a regulatory flexibility analysis was not prepared.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains new collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). OMB approval of the new collections-of-information is being requested. This proposed rule also contains a collection-of-information approved by OMB under control number 0648-0194. The current, approved collection of information includes permit applications (CEMP, vessel permit, dealer permit, and pre-approval of toothfish imports), vessel and gear marking requirements, installation of and reporting through a vessel monitoring unit, import tickets, and other items. This proposed rule would add a requirement to provide advance notification of transshipments of AMLRs, bait, fuel, or other goods and materials to the CCAMLR Secretariat and to submit a confirmation of the notification to NMFS Headquarters, including information on the vessels involved in the transshipment and the details of the materials being transshipped. Public reporting burden for this proposed requirement is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by email to [email protected], or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 300

    Antarctica, Antarctic marine living resources, Catch documentation scheme, Fisheries, Fishing, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 11, 2016. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 300 as follows:

    PART 300—INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS 1. Under part 300, further revise subpart G—which was proposed to be amended on December 29, 2015 (80 FR 81251)—to read as follows: Subpart G—Antarctic Marine Living Resources Sec. 300.100 Purpose and scope. 300.101 Definitions. 300.102 Relationship to other treaties, conventions, laws, and regulations. 300.103 Scientific research. 300.104 International Fisheries Trade Permits and AMLR first receiver permits. 300.105 Preapproval for importation of frozen Dissostichus species. 300.106 Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) documentation and other requirements. 300.107 Vessel permits and requirements. 300.108 Vessel and gear identification. 300.109 Initiating a new fishery. 300.110 Exploratory fisheries. 300.111 Scientific observers. 300.112 Vessel monitoring system. 300.113 CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program sites. 300.114 Prohibitions. 300.115 Facilitation of enforcement and inspection. 300.116 Penalties. Subpart G—Antarctic Marine Living Resources Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq., 31 U.S.C. 9701 et seq.

    § 300.100 Purpose and scope.

    (a) This subpart implements the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 (AMLRCA or Act), 16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.

    (b) This subpart regulates—

    (1) The harvesting of Antarctic marine living resources and other associated activities by any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or by any vessel of the United States.

    (2) The import, export, and re-export into the United States of any Antarctic marine living resource.

    § 300.101 Definitions.

    In addition to the terms defined in § 300.2, in the Act, and in the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, done at Canberra, Australia, May 7, 1980 (Convention) the terms used in this subpart have the following meanings for purposes of this subpart. If a term is defined differently in § 300.2, than in the Act, or Convention, the definition in this section shall apply.

    ACA means the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2401, et seq.).

    Annual or biennial measure means a conservation measure that:

    (1) Applies to the operation of the Convention's commercial or exploratory fisheries such as gear, catch, and effort restrictions and time and area closures;

    (2) Generally expires after one or two fishing season(s); and

    (3) Does not require the development of policy options or a regulatory framework.

    Antarctic convergence means a line joining the following points along the parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude:

    Lat. Long. 50° S. 0. 50° S. 30° E. 45° S. 30° E. 45° S. 80° E. 55° S. 80° E. 55° S. 150° E. 60° S. 150° E. 60° S. 50° W. 50° S. 50° W. 50° S. 0.

    Antarctic marine living resources or AMLR(s) means:

    (1) The populations of finfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and all other species of living organisms, including birds, found south of the Antarctic Convergence;

    (2) All parts or products of those populations and species set forth in paragraph (1) of this definition.

    Centralized Vessel Monitoring System (C-VMS) means the system operated by the Secretariat of CCAMLR that receives reports of positional and other information from satellite-linked mobile transceiver units located on vessels, that are submitted to the CCAMLR Secretariat, either directly from the vessel or through the relevant flag State.

    Commission or CCAMLR means the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources established under Article VII of the Convention.

    Convention area means all waters south of the Antarctic Convergence.

    Dealer means a person who imports AMLRs into, or exports or re-exports AMLRs from, the United States.

    Dissostichus catch document (DCD) is a document generated through CCAMLR's electronic catch documentation scheme (CDS), containing information relating to the harvest, landing, and transshipment of Dissostichus species.

    Dissostichus export document (DED) is a document generated through the CCAMLR's electronic CDS, containing information relating to the export of Dissostichus spp.

    Dissostichus re-export document (DRED) is a document generated through CCAMLR's electronic CDS, containing information relating to the re-export of Dissostichus spp.

    Dissostichus species or Dissostichus spp. means Patagonian toothfish and Antarctic toothfish, and any parts or products therefrom.

    Enhanced mobile transceiver unit or EMTU means a transceiver or communication device, including all hardware and software, carried and operated on a vessel as part of a vessel monitoring system.

    Export means any movement of fish or fish product from a territory under the control of the State or free trade zone of landing, or, where that State or free trade zone forms part of a customs union, any other Member State of that customs union.

    First receiver means the person who first receives AMLRs landed from a vessel licensed under 50 CFR 300.107 at a U.S. port.

    Fish means finfish, mollusks, and crustaceans.

    Fishery means:

    (1) One or more stocks of fish that are treated as a unit for purposes of conservation and management and that are identified on the basis of geographical, scientific, technical, recreational, and economic characteristics.

    (2) Any fishing for such stocks.

    Harvesting vessel means any vessel of the United States (including any boat, ship, or other craft), that is used for, equipped to be used for, or of a type that is normally used for harvesting.

    Import means the physical entering or bringing of a fish or fish product into any part of the geographical territory under the control of a State, except where the catch is landed or transshipped within the definitions of landing or transshipment.

    Individual permit means a National Science Foundation (NSF) permit issued under 45 CFR part 670; or an NSF award letter (demonstrating that the individual has received an award from NSF to do research in the Antarctic); or a marine mammal permit issued under § 216.31 of this chapter; or an endangered species permit issued under § 222.21 of this chapter.

    Inspection vessel means a vessel carrying a CCAMLR inspector and displaying the pennant approved by CCAMLR to identify such vessel.

    International observer means a scientific observer operating in accordance with the CCAMLR Scheme of International Scientific Observation and the terms of a bilateral arrangement concluded between the United States and another member of CCAMLR for the placement of a U.S. national onboard a vessel flagged by another member of CCAMLR or for the placement of the national of another member of CCAMLR onboard a vessel of the United States.

    Land or Landing means to begin offloading any fish, to arrive in port with the intention of offloading any fish, or to cause any fish to be offloaded. However, for purposes of catch documentation as provided for in § 300.106, land or landing means the initial unloading or transfer of Dissostichus spp. in any form from a vessel to dockside even if such fish are subsequently transferred to a container or to another vessel in a port or free trade zone.

    National observer means a U.S. national placed and operating onboard a vessel of the United States as a scientific observer in accordance with § 300.111.

    National Seafood Inspection Laboratory (NSIL) means the NMFS laboratory located at 3209 Frederic Street Pascagoula, MS 39567, telephone (228) 769-8964, email [email protected]

    Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) refers to the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement.

    Port-to-port means from the time the vessel leaves port to the time that the vessel returns to port and at all points in between.

    Real-time means as soon as possible, but at least every hour with no more than a 1-hour delay.

    Recreational fishing means fishing with hook and line for personal use and not for sale.

    Re-export means any movement of a fish or fish product from a territory under the control of a State, free trade zone, or Member State of a customs union of import unless that State, free trade zone, or any Member State of that customs union is the first place of landing, in which case the movement is an export within the definition of export.

    Seal excluder device means a barrier within the body of a trawl comprised of a metal frame, nylon mesh, or any material that results in an obstruction to seals between the mouth opening and the cod end of the trawl. The body of the trawl net forward of the barrier must include an escape opening through which seals entering the trawl can escape.

    Specially validated dissostichus catch document (SVDCD) means a Dissostichus catch document that has been specially issued by a State to accompany seized or confiscated Dissostichus spp. offered for sale or otherwise disposed of by the State.

    Transship or transshipment means the transfer of fish or fish products, other AMLRs, or any other goods or materials directly from one vessel to another. However, for purposes of catch documentation as provided for in § 300.106, transship or transshipment means the transfer of Dissostichus spp. that has not been previously landed, from one vessel directly to another, either at sea or in port.

    Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) means a system that uses satellite-linked EMTUs installed on vessels to allow a flag State or other entity to receive automatic transmission of positional and other information related to vessel activity.

    § 300.102 Relationship to other treaties, conventions, laws, and regulations.

    (a) Other conventions and treaties to which the United States is a party and other Federal statutes and implementing regulations may impose additional restrictions on the harvesting and importation into the United States of AMLRs.

    (b) The ACA implements the Antarctic Treaty Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora (12 U.S.T. 794). The ACA and its implementing regulations (45 CFR part 670) apply to certain defined activities of U.S. citizens south of 60° S. lat.

    (c) The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 701 et seq.), and their implementing regulations also apply to the harvesting and importation of AMLRs.

    (d) Rule making exceptions. When implementing conservation measures adopted and notified by CCAMLR, NMFS may apply the following exceptions to Administrative Procedures Act (APA) rulemaking requirements at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)-(d):

    (1) The foreign affairs function exception of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1); or

    (2) The exception under subsection 307(b) of AMLRCA, 16 U.S.C. 2436(b), that provides that, notwithstanding 5 U.S.C. 553(b)-(d), NMFS may publish in the Federal Register a final regulation to implement any CCAMLR-adopted conservation measure—

    (i) That has been in effect for 12 months or less, beginning on the date that the Commission notifies the United States of the conservation measure under Article IX of the Convention; and

    (ii) With respect to which the Secretary of State does not notify the Commission in accordance with section 305(a)(1) of AMLRCA within the time period allotted for objections under Article IX of the Convention.

    (e) Annual or biennial measures. NMFS may implement annual or biennial measures adopted by CCAMLR as conditions to vessel permits issued under § 300.107, instead of through rulemaking.

    § 300.103 Scientific research.

    (a) This section applies to any person, using a vessel for research purposes, who intends to catch more than 1 tonne of finfish or krill or use gear other than longline, trawl, or pot to catch Dissostichus spp.

    (b) Any person planning to use a vessel for research purposes, when the estimated research catch is expected to be less than 50 tonnes of finfish in a season, and no more than the amounts specified in Table 1, must notify the Assistant Administrator at least 2 months in advance of the planned research using the CCAMLR Format for Notification of Research Vessel Activity, Format 1. A copy of the format is available from NMFS Headquarters. The format requires:

    (1) Name and registration number of vessel;

    (2) Division and subarea in which research is to be carried out;

    (3) Estimated dates of entering and leaving the Convention Area;

    (4) Purposes of research; and

    (5) Fishing equipment to be used (bottom trawl, midwater trawl, longline, crab pots, other).

    Table 1—Taxa-Specific Thresholds for Notification of Research Vessel Activity Taxon Gear type Expected catch Thresholds for finfish taxa: Dissostichus spp. Longline 5 tonnes. Trawl 5 tonnes. Pot 5 tonnes. Other 0 tonnes. Champsocephalus gunnari All 10 tonnes. Thresholds for non-finfish taxa: Krill
  • Squid
  • Crabs
  • All 0.1 percent of the catch limit for a given area.

    (c) Any person planning to use any vessel for research purposes, when the estimated research catch is expected to be more than 50 tonnes or greater than the amounts specified in Table 1 must report the details of the research plan to NMFS using CCAMLR Format 2 for Notification of Research Vessel Activity. The format must be submitted to Assistant Administrator at least 7 months in advance of the planned start date for the research. A copy of the format is available from NMFS Headquarters. The format requires:

    (1) Description of the main objective of the research;

    (2) Description of the fishery operations;

    (3) Description of the survey design, data collection, and analysis;

    (4) Proposed catch limit;

    (5) Description of the research capability; and

    (6) Description of the reporting for evaluation and review.

    (d) Where the expected catch is more than 50 tonnes of fish or greater than the amounts specified in Table 1, the planned fishing for research purposes shall not proceed until the Assistant Administrator authorizes the person in writing that he or she may proceed. Such authorization may be provided after completion of review of the scientific research plan by the CCAMLR Scientific Committee and Commission.

    (e) A summary of the results of any research subject to these provisions must be provided to the Assistant Administrator within 150 days of the completion of the research and a full report must be provided within 11 months.

    (f) Catch, effort, and biological data resulting from the research must be reported using the reporting format for research vessels in accordance with relevant conservation measures, with a copy to NMFS Headquarters.

    § 300.104 International Fisheries Trade Permits and AMLR first receiver permits.

    (a) General. (1) A person may import, export, or re-export AMLR into the United States only under a NMFS-issued International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP). For AMLRs to be released for entry into the United States, the product must be accompanied by a vessel permit, individual permit, AMLR first receiver permit, or IFTP.

    (2) All shipments of Dissostichus spp. must also be accompanied by accurate, complete and valid CDS documentation (including all required validations and DEDs/DREDs) as described in § 300.106, and, in the case of shipments of frozen Dissostichus species, a preapproval certificate issued under § 300.105, as well as verifiable information that the harvesting vessel was reporting to C-VMS from port-to-port, regardless of where the fish were harvested. For purposes of entry of Dissostichus spp. into the United States, NMFS will only accept electronic CDS documents described in § 300.106.

    (3) Imports of fresh or frozen Dissostichus spp. accompanied by an SVDCD are prohibited

    (b) International Fisheries Trade Permit. A person intending to import, export, or re-export AMLR must possess a valid IFTP issued under § 300.322 and file required data sets electronically with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the time, or in advance, of importation, exportation or re-exportation. “Required data set” has the same meaning as § 300.321 (see definition of “Documentation and data sets required”). See § 300.322 for IFTP application procedures and permit regulations. The IFTP holder may only conduct those specific activities stipulated by the IFTP.

    (c) AMLR First Receiver Permits. (1) General. First receivers of AMLR catch landed from a vessel permitted under § 300.107 at a U.S. port of landing must possess an AMLR first receiver permit and may only conduct those activities described in the permit. A person issued, or required to have been issued a first receiver permit under this subpart may only receive fish from a U.S. vessel that has a valid vessel permit issued under § 300.107 as well as a valid High Seas Fishing Permit issued under 50 CFR subpart Q.

    (2) Application. Applications for the AMLR first receiver permit are available from NMFS Headquarters.

    (3) Issuance. NMFS may issue an AMLR first receiver permit if the permit application is complete and NMFS determines that the activity proposed by the first receiver meets the requirements of the Act. First receivers of AMLR required to have a first receiver permit may only receive AMLR that were harvested, in a manner consistent with CCAMLR conservation measures and this subpart.

    (4) Duration. Unless revoked or suspended, an AMLR first receiver permit is valid from its date of issuance to its date of expiration.

    (5) Prohibition on transfer or assignment. AMLR first receiver permits are valid only for the person to whom NMFS issued the permit and may not be transferred or assigned.

    (6) Changes in information submitted by permit applicants or permit holders:

    (i) Changes in pending applications. Applicants for an AMLR first receiver permit must report any change in the information contained in the application to the Assistant Administrator in writing as soon as possible.

    (ii) Changes occurring after permit issuance. The person to whom NMFS issued an AMLR first receiver permit must report any change in previously submitted information to the Assistant Administrator in writing within 15 days of the change. Based on such reported information, the Assistant Administrator may revise the permit effective upon notification to the permit holder.

    (7) Fees. NMFS may charge a fee to recover the administrative expenses of permit issuance. NMFS will determine the fee in accordance with the procedures in the NOAA finance handbook, available from NMFS, for calculating administrative costs of special products and services.

    (8) Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. First receivers of AMLRs required to have a first receiver permit under this subpart must:

    (i) Accurately maintain all reports and records required by their first receiver permit and this subpart at their place of business;

    (ii) Maintain the original permit at their place of business;

    (iii) Make their permit, and all required reports and records, available for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer; and

    (iv) Within the time specified in the permit, submit a copy of such reports and records to NMFS at an address designated by NMFS.

    (d) Revision, suspension, or revocation. NMFS may revise, suspend, or revoke an IFTP, or first receiver permit, issued under this section based upon a violation of the permit, the Act, or this subpart.

    (e) A person may not import a marine mammal into the United States unless authorized and accompanied by an import permit issued under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and/or the Endangered Species Act.

    § 300.105 Preapproval for importation of frozen Dissostichus species.

    (a) A NMFS-issued preapproval certificate is required to import each shipment of frozen Dissostichus species.

    (b) Application. Application forms for a preapproval certificate are available from NMFS Headquarters and the National Seafood Inspection Laboratory. With the exception of the U.S. Customs 7501 entry number, a complete and accurate application must be received by NMFS for each preapproval certificate at least 10 working days before the anticipated date of the importation. Dealers must supply the U.S. Customs 7501 entry number at least three working days prior to the expected arrival of a shipment of frozen Dissostichus species at a U.S. port.

    (c) Fees. A person must include the processing fee with each preapproval certificate application. NMFS will determine the fee under the NOAA finance handbook procedures for calculating administrative costs of special products and services and user fees collected for administrative expenses associated with processing applications for preapproval certificates.

    (d) Issuance. NMFS may issue a preapproval certificate for importation of a shipment of frozen Dissostichus species if the preapproval application form is complete and NMFS determines that the activity proposed by the applicant meets the requirements of the Act and that the resources were not harvested in violation of any CCAMLR conservation measure or in violation of any regulation in this subpart. No preapproval will be issued for Dissostichus species without verifiable documentation that the harvesting vessel reported to C-VMS continuously and in real-time from port-to-port, regardless of where such Dissostichus species were harvested.

    (e) Duration. A preapproval certificate is valid until the Dissostichus product specified in the preapproval application is imported.

    (f) Transfer. A person may not transfer or assign a preapproval certificate.

    (g) Changes in information—(1) For pending preapproval certificates, applicants must report in writing to NMFS any changes in the information submitted in their preapproval certificate applications. NMFS may extend the processing period for the application as necessary to review and consider any changes.

    (2) Issued preapprovals. For issued preapproval certificates, the certificate holder must report in writing to NMFS any changes to information included in the preapproval certificate application. Any changes related to fish being imported, such as harvesting vessel or country of origin, type and quantity of the fish to be imported or Convention statistical subarea from which the resource was harvested, will void the preapproval certificate and the shipment may not be imported unless authorized by NMFS through issuance of a revised or new preapproval certificate.

    (3) The provision of false information in a preapproval application, or the failure to report a change in the information contained in a preapproval application, voids the application or preapproval as applicable.

    (h) NMFS will not issue a preapproval certificate for any shipment of Dissostichus species:

    (1) Identified as originating from a high seas area designated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations as Statistical Area 51 or Statistical Area 57 in the eastern and western Indian Ocean outside and north of the Convention Area;

    (2) Determined to have been harvested or transshipped in contravention of any CCAMLR Conservation Measure in force at the time of harvest or transshipment;

    (3) Determined to have been harvested or transshipped by a vessel identified by CCAMLR as having engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; or

    (4) Accompanied by inaccurate, incomplete, invalid, or improperly validated CDS documentation or by a SVDCD.

    § 300.106 Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS): documentation and other requirements.

    (a) General. (1) CCAMLR CDS document(s) must accompany all shipments of Dissostichus species as required in this section.

    (2) No shipment of Dissostichus species shall be released for entry into the United States unless accompanied by an accurate, complete, valid and validated CCAMLR CDS document.

    (3) Dissostichus species shall not be released for entry into the United States unless all of the applicable requirements of the CCAMLR Conservation Measures and U.S. regulations have been met.

    (b) Harvesting vessels. (1) A U.S. vessel harvesting or attempting to harvest Dissostichus species, whether within or outside of the Convention Area, must possess a valid vessel permit issued under § 300.107, a valid High Seas Fishing Permit issued under 50 CFR subpart Q, as well as DCD issued by NMFS, which is non-transferable. The master of the harvesting vessel must ensure that catch and other information specified on the DCD are accurately recorded.

    (2) Prior to offloading Dissostichus species, the master of the harvesting vessel must:

    (i) Electronically convey, by the most rapid means possible, catch and other information to NMFS and record on the DCD a confirmation number received from NMFS;

    (ii) Obtain on the DCD (or copies thereof) the signature(s) of the following persons: if catch is offloaded for transshipment, the master of the vessel(s) to which the catch is transferred; or if catch is offloaded for landing, the signature of both the responsible official(s) designated by NMFS in the vessel permit and the recipient of the catch at the port(s) of landing; and

    (iii) Sign the DCD (or copies thereof), electronically convey by the most rapid means possible each copy to NMFS and provide a copy to each recipient of the catch.

    (3) The master of the harvesting vessel must submit the original DCD (and all copies thereof with original signatures) to NMFS no later than 30 days after the end of the fishing season for which the vessel permit was issued and retain copies of the DCD for a period of 2 years.

    (c) Transshipment vessels. (1) A U.S. vessel transshipping or attempting to transship Dissostichus species, whether within or outside of the Convention Area, must possess a valid vessel permit issued under § 300.107 and a valid High Seas Fishing Permit issued under subpart Q of this part. The master of a U.S. vessel receiving Dissostichus species by transshipment must, upon receipt of Dissostichus species, sign each DCD provided by the master of the vessel that offloads Dissostichus species.

    (2) Prior to landing Dissostichus species, the master of the transshipping vessel must:

    (i) Obtain on each DCD (or copies thereof) the signature(s) of both the responsible official(s) designated by NMFS in the vessel permit and the recipient of the catch at the port(s) of landing and;

    (ii) Sign each DCD (or copies thereof), and electronically convey by the most rapid means possible each copy to NMFS and to the flag state(s) of the offloading vessel(s) and provide a copy to each recipient of Dissostichus species.

    (3) The master of the transshipping vessel must submit all DCDs with original signatures to NMFS no later than 30 days after offloading and retain copies for a period of 2 years.

    (d) First receivers. Any person who receives Dissostichus species landed by a vessel at a U.S. port must hold an AMLR first receiver permit issued under § 300.104 and must sign the DCD(s) provided by the master of the vessel and retain copies at their place of business for a period of 2 years. A person issued, or required to have been issued a first receiver permit under this subpart may only receive fish from a U.S. vessel that has a valid vessel permit issued under § 300.107 as well as a valid High Seas Fishing Permit issued under 50 CFR subpart Q.

    (e) Import. (1) A person who imports fresh Dissostichus species must hold an IFTP issued under § 300.322. To import frozen Dissostichus species into the United States, a person must:

    (i) Obtain a preapproval certificate issued under § 300.105 for each shipment. Among the information required on the application, applicants must provide the document number and export reference number on the DED or DRED corresponding to the intended import shipment and, if requested by NMFS, additional information for NMFS to verify that the harvesting vessel reported to the C-VMS continuously and in real-time, from port-to-port, regardless of where the fish were harvested;

    (ii) Ensure that the quantity of toothfish listed on the DED (or the Dissostichus re-export document if product is a re-export) matches the quantity listed on the preapproval application within a variance of 10 percent;

    (iii) Provide copies of the DED or DRED as needed to persons who re-export Dissostichus species.

    (2) Imports of fresh Dissostichus species do not require a preapproval certificate. If the amount or value of the fresh Dissostichus species to be imported is below thresholds that trigger the requirement to file entry documentation with U.S. Customs and Border Protection via the Automated Commercial Environment (see definition in § 300.321), the importer must complete a report of each shipment and submit the report to NMFS within 24 hours following importation. Verification of the harvesting vessel's reporting to C-VMS from port-to-port is not required for imports of fresh Dissostichus species.

    (f) Re-export. (1) To re-export Dissostichus species, a person must hold an IFTP issued under § 300.322 and:

    (i) Submit to NMFS a complete and accurate application for a NMFS Dissostichus re-export document, and

    (ii) Obtain validation by a responsible official(s) designated by NMFS and receive an electronically-generated DRED.

    (2) When applying for a re-export approval, a person must reference or include the approval number issued by NOAA, for the original validated Dissostichus import document.

    (g) Export. (1) To export U.S.-harvested Dissostichus species, the person must possess an IFTP issued under § 300.322 and:

    (i) Submit to NMFS a complete and accurate NMFS application for a DED.

    (ii) Obtain validation by a responsible official(s) designated by NMFS and receive an electronically-generated DED.

    (2) Any person who exports Dissostichus species must include the original validated DED with the export shipment.

    (h) Recordkeeping. Any person who imports, exports or re-exports Dissostichus spp. must:

    (1) Retain a copy of all CDS documents at the person's place of business for a period of 2 years from the date on the documents and provide copies as needed to NMFS; and

    (2) Make the IFTP and all CDS documents and other records and reports required by this subpart available for inspection upon request of an authorized officer.

    § 300.107 Vessel permits and requirements.

    (a) General. In addition to the High Seas Fishing Permit requirements at 50 CFR part 300, subpart Q:

    (1) Every vessel of the United States that attempts to harvest or harvests any AMLR must have a vessel permit authorizing the harvest issued under this subpart, unless the attempt or harvest occurs during recreational fishing or is covered by an individual permit. Boats launched from a vessel issued a vessel permit do not require a separate permit, but are covered by the permit issued to the launching vessel. Any enforcement action that results from the activities of a launched boat will be taken against the owner and operator of the launching vessel.

    (2) Any vessel of the United States that receives or attempts to receive any harvested AMLR from another vessel at sea, regardless of whether such transshipment occurs in the Convention Area or that receives, or attempts to receive any other goods or materials from another vessel in the Convention Area, must have a vessel permit authorizing transshipment issued under this subpart. Transshipment vessels must comply with the permitting provisions of this section. This requirement does not apply to scientific research vessels or to transshipments covered under an individual permit.

    (3) Permits issued under this section do not authorize vessels or persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to harass, capture, harm, kill, harvest, or import marine mammals. No marine mammals may be taken in the course of commercial fishing operations unless the taking is authorized under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and/or the Endangered Species Act pursuant to an exemption or permit granted by the appropriate agency.

    (b) Responsibility of owners and operators. (1) The owners and operators of vessels permitted, or required to be permitted, under this subpart are jointly and severally responsible for compliance with the Act, this subpart, and any permit issued under the Act and this subpart.

    (2) The owners and operators of each such vessel are responsible for the acts of their employees and agents constituting violations, regardless of whether the specific acts were authorized or forbidden by the owners or operators, and regardless of knowledge concerning their occurrence.

    (3) The owner of a vessel issued a vessel permit under this subpart must report any sale, change in ownership, or other disposition of the vessel to the Assistant Administrator as soon as possible but no later than 15 days after the change.

    (4) The owner and operator of a harvesting vessel issued a permit to fish for krill in the Convention Area using trawl gear must install a seal excluder device and may not possess onboard or deploy trawl gear without a seal excluder device installed.

    (c) Application. Application forms for vessel permits are available from NMFS Headquarters.

    (1) A separate, fully completed and accurate application is required for each vessel for which a permit is requested.

    (2) NMFS must receive applications for vessel permits no later than April 1 for the fishing season that will commence on or after December 1 of that year.

    (3) Applications for a permit to harvest krill must, to the extent possible, identify the products to be derived from the anticipated krill catch.

    (4) NMFS will only accept permit applications for vessels that have been issued an International Maritime Organization (IMO) number.

    (5) NMFS may charge a fee to recover the administrative expense of permit issuance. NMFS will determine the fee in accordance with procedures in the NOAA finance handbook, available from NMFS, for calculating administrative costs of special products and services and user fees.

    (d) Issuance. The Assistant Administrator may issue a vessel permit if the Assistant Administrator determines that the harvesting or transshipment activities described in the application will meet the requirements of the Act and will not:

    (1) Decrease the size of any harvested population to levels below those that ensure its stable recruitment. For this purpose, the Convention provides that its size should not be allowed to fall below a level close to that which ensures the greatest net annual increment.

    (2) Upset the ecological relationships between harvested, dependent, and related populations of AMLRs and the restoration of depleted populations to levels that will ensure stable recruitment.

    (3) Cause changes or increase the risk of changes in the marine ecosystem that are not potentially reversible over 2 or 3 decades, taking into account the state of available knowledge of the direct and indirect impact of harvesting, the effects of the introduction of alien species, the effects of associated activities on the marine ecosystem and the effects of environmental changes, with the aim of making possible the sustained conservation of AMLRs.

    (4) Violate the Convention or any conservation measures in force with respect to the United States under the Convention. The Convention and the schedule of conservation measures in force can be found on the CCAMLR Web site: www.ccamlr.org.

    (e) Duration. A vessel permit is valid from its date of issuance to its date of expiration unless it is revoked or suspended.

    (f) Transfer. Permits are not transferable or assignable. A permit is valid only for the vessel to which it is issued.

    (g) Display. Each vessel must have on board, at all times, a valid vessel permit and the vessel operator must produce it for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer or CCAMLR inspector.

    (h) Changes in information submitted by permit applicants or holders—(1) Changes in pending applications. Applicants for a vessel permit must report to the Assistant Administrator in writing any change in the information contained in the application. The processing period for the application will be extended as necessary to review the change.

    (2) Changes occurring after permit issuance

    (i) Requested changes in the location, manner, or amount of harvesting. Any changes in the location, manner or amount of harvesting must be proposed in writing to the Assistant Administrator and may not be undertaken unless authorized by the Assistant Administrator through a permit revision or issuance of a new permit. If the Assistant Administrator determines that the requested change in the location, manner, or amount of harvesting could significantly affect the status of any Antarctic marine living resource, the Assistant Administrator will treat the requested change as an application for a new permit and so notify the holder.

    (ii) Changes other than in the location, manner or amount of harvesting. For changes other than those addressed in paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this section, the owner or operator of a vessel that has been issued a vessel permit must report to the Assistant Administrator in writing any change in previously submitted information as soon as possible but no later than within 15 days after the change. Based on such reported information, the Assistant Administrator may revise the permit and any revised permit would be effective upon notification to the permit holder.

    (iii) Conditions and restrictions. The vessel permit will contain conditions and restrictions that the Assistant Administrator deems necessary for implementation of conservation measures that apply to the harvesting or transshipment activities. The Assistant Administrator may revise the vessel permit to include additional conditions and restrictions on the harvesting vessel as necessary to implement conservation measures in force with respect to the United States or to achieve the purposes of the Convention or the Act. Any additional conditions or restrictions will be effective upon notification to the permit holder.

    (j) Revision, suspension, or revocation for violations. A vessel permit may be revised, suspended, or revoked if the harvesting vessel is involved in the commission of any violation of its permit, the Act, or this subpart. The Assistant Administrator may deny a vessel permit if the applicant or harvesting vessel was previously involved in the commission of any violation of its permit, the Act, or this subpart. Failure to report a change in the information contained in an application within 15 days of the change is a violation of this subpart and voids the application or permit, as applicable. If a change in vessel ownership is not reported, the violation is chargeable to the previous owner.

    (k) Transshipment notification. The vessel operator must notify the CCAMLR Secretariat of transshipments of AMLRs, bait, or fuel, and submit a confirmation of the notification to NMFS Headquarters, no later than 72 hours before the transshipment will take place. The vessel operator must notify the CCAMLR Secretariat of transfers of all other goods, and submit a confirmation of the notification to NMFS Headquarters, no later than 2 hours before the transshipment will take place. Notifications of intended transshipments shall include the following information, for all vessels involved:

    (1) Names, registration numbers, and IMO numbers,

    (2) International radio call signs,

    (3) Flag State,

    (4) Type of vessels, length, gross registered tonnage and carrying capacity,

    (5) Proposed time and position, in latitude and longitude, of transshipment.

    (6) Details of the type and amount of catches and/or other goods, such as food stores and fuel, involved in the transshipment.

    (l) Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The operator of any vessel required to have a vessel permit under this subpart must:

    (1) Accurately maintain on board the vessel all CCAMLR reports and records required by its permit.

    (2) Make such reports and records available for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer or CCAMLR inspector.

    (3) Within the time specified in the vessel permit, submit a copy of such reports and records to NMFS.

    (4) Install a NMFS-approved EMTU on board U.S. flagged vessels harvesting AMLR for use in real-time C-VMS port-to-port reporting to a NMFS-designated land-based fisheries monitoring center or centers. The requirements for the installation and operation of the VMS are set forth in § 300.112.

    (5) Provide advance notice of the vessel's entry into port using the CCAMLR Port Inspection Report, including the written declaration that the vessel has not engaged in or supported illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing in the Convention Area and has complied with relevant CCAMLR requirements. The CCAMLR Port Inspection Report, and instructions for its submission, is available from NMFS Headquarters.

    § 300.108 Vessel and gear identification.

    (a) Vessel identification. (1) A vessel issued a permit under this subpart must be marked with the vessel's name and its International Radio Call Sign (IRCS) amidships on both the port and starboard sides of the superstructure or hull, so that it is visible at all times from an enforcement or inspection vessel. Fixtures inclined at an angle to the vessel's side or superstructure would be considered as suitable provided that the angle of inclination would not prevent sighting of the sign from another vessel or from the air. The vessel's IRCS shall be marked on the deck. Should an awning or other temporary cover be placed so as to obscure the mark on the deck, the awning or cover shall also be marked with the IRCS. The marks should be placed athwartship with the top of the numbers or letters towards the bow.

    (2) Boats, skiffs and craft carried by the vessel for fishing operations shall bear the same mark as the vessel, except that a numerical suffix specific for the boat, skiff, or craft must follow the IRCS.

    (3) The vessel identification must be in a color in contrast to the background and must be permanently affixed to the vessel in block Roman alphabet letters and Arabic numerals using good quality marine paints. The letters and numbers shall be: at least 1 meter in height (h) for the IRCS placed on the hull, superstructure and/or inclined surfaces and at least 0.3 meter for marks placed on deck. The length of the hyphen shall be half the height of the letters and numbers. The width of the stroke for all letters, numbers and the hyphen shall be h/6. The space between letters and/or numbers shall not exceed h/4 nor be less than h/6. The space between adjacent letters having sloping sides (e.g., A and V) shall not exceed h/8 nor be less than h/10. If a contrasting color is used for the background of the marks, it shall extend to provide a border around the mark of at least h/6.

    (4) The marks and the background shall be maintained in good condition at all times.

    (b) Navigational lights and shapes. Each vessel issued a vessel permit must display the lights and shapes prescribed by the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (TIAS 8587, and 1981 amendment TIAS 10672), for the activity in which the harvesting vessel is engaged (as described at 33 CFR part 81).

    (c) Gear identification. (1) The operator of each fishing vessel must ensure that all deployed fishing gear is clearly marked at all times at the surface with a buoy displaying the vessel identification of the harvesting vessel (see paragraph (a) of this section) to which the gear belongs, a light visible for 2 miles at night in good visibility, and a radio buoy.

    (2) The operator of each harvesting vessel must ensure that deployed longlines and strings of traps or pots, and gillnets are clearly marked at all times at the surface at each terminal end with a buoy displaying the vessel identification of the harvesting vessel to which the gear belongs (see paragraph (a) of this section), a light visible for 2 miles at night in good visibility, and a radio buoy.

    (3) Unmarked or incorrectly identified fishing gear may be considered abandoned and may be disposed of in accordance with applicable CCAMLR Conservation Measures in force with respect to the United States by any authorized officer or CCAMLR inspector.

    (d) Maintenance. The operator of each vessel issued a vessel permit must:

    (1) Keep the vessel and gear identification clearly legible and in good condition at all times;

    (2) Ensure that nothing on the vessel obstructs the view of the markings from an enforcement or inspection vessel or aircraft; and

    (3) Ensure that the proper navigational lights and shapes are displayed for the vessel's activity and are properly functioning.

    § 300.109 Initiating a new fishery.

    (a) A new fishery, for purposes of this section, is a fishery that uses bottom trawls on the high seas of the Convention Area or a fishery for a species, using a particular method, in a statistical subarea or division for which:

    (1) Information on distribution, abundance, demography, potential yield and stock identity from comprehensive research/surveys or exploratory fishing has not been submitted to CCAMLR;

    (2) Catch and effort data have never been submitted to CCAMLR; or

    (3) Catch and effort data from the two most recent seasons in which fishing occurred have not been submitted to CCAMLR.

    (b) Persons intending to develop a new fishery shall notify the Assistant Administrator no later than April 1 for the fishing season that will commence on or after December 1 and shall not initiate the fishery pending NMFS and CCAMLR review or until a vessel permit has been used under this subpart.

    (c) The notification shall be accompanied by a complete vessel permit application required under § 300.107 and information on:

    (1) The nature of the proposed fishery, including target species, methods of fishing, proposed region and maximum catch levels proposed for the forthcoming season;

    (2) Biological information on the target species from comprehensive research/survey cruises, such as distribution, abundance, demographic data and information on stock identity;

    (3) Details of dependent and related species and the likelihood of them being affected by the proposed fishery;

    (4) Information from other fisheries in the region or similar fisheries elsewhere that may assist in the evaluation of potential yield; and

    (5) If the proposed fishery will be undertaken using bottom trawl gear, the known and anticipated impacts of this gear on vulnerable marine ecosystems, including benthos and benthic communities.

    § 300.110 Exploratory fisheries.

    (a) An exploratory fishery, for purposes of this section, is a fishery that was previously defined as a new fishery under § 300.109.

    (b) A fishery continues to be classified by CCAMLR as an exploratory fishery until sufficient information is available to:

    (1) Evaluate the distribution, abundance, and demography of the target species, leading to an estimate of the fishery's potential yield;

    (2) Review the fishery's potential impacts on dependent and related species; and

    (3) Allow the CCAMLR Scientific Committee to formulate and provide advice to the Commission on appropriate harvest catch levels and fishing gear.

    (c) The operator of any vessel engaging in an exploratory fishery must submit, by the date specified in the vessel permit issued under § 300.107, catch, effort, and related biological, ecological, and environmental data as required by a data collection plan for the fishery formulated by the CCAMLR Scientific Committee.

    (d) In addition to the requirements in § 300.107, any person planning to enter an exploratory fishery must notify the Assistant Administrator no later than April 1 for the fishing season that will commence on or after December 1 and shall not enter the fishery pending NMFS and CCAMLR review or until a vessel permit has been used under this subpart. The Assistant Administrator will not issue a permit to enter an exploratory fishery until after the requirements of § 300.107 have been met and CCAMLR has considered the notification.

    (e) The notification shall be accompanied by a complete vessel permit application required under § 300.107 and information on:

    (1) The nature of the exploratory fishery, including target species, methods of fishing, proposed region and maximum catch levels proposed for the forthcoming season;

    (2) Specification and full description of the types of fishing gear to be used;

    (3) Biological information on the target species from comprehensive research/survey cruises, such as distribution, abundance, demographic data and information on stock identity; details of dependent and related species and the likelihood of their being affected by the proposed fishery;

    (4) Information from other fisheries in the region or similar fisheries elsewhere that may assist in the evaluation of potential yield;

    (5) If the proposed fishery will be undertaken using bottom trawl gear, information on the known and anticipated impacts of this gear on vulnerable marine ecosystems, including benthos and benthic communities; and

    (6) Any other information the Assistant Administrator requires to fully implement the relevant conservation measures.

    § 300.111 Scientific observers.

    (a) Except as otherwise specified, this section applies to both national observers and international observers, as well as to vessels of the United States carrying, or required to carry, such observers.

    (b) All vessels of the United States fishing in the Convention Area must carry one or more scientific observers as required by CCAMLR conservation measures or as specified in a vessel permit issued under this subpart.

    (c) All vessels of the United States conducting longline sink rate testing outside the Convention Area and pursuant to CCAMLR protocols must carry one or more scientific observers as specified in the vessel permit issued under this subpart.

    (d) Procurement of observers by vessel. Owners of vessels required to carry scientific observers under this section must arrange for observer services in coordination with the NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center Antarctic Ecosystem Research Division. The vessel owner is required to pay for observer services through an observer service provider who has provided observer services to the Federal government within the past year. In situations where no qualified observer is available through a qualified observer provider, the Secretary may authorize a vessel owner to arrange for an observer by alternative methods. An observer may not be paid directly by the vessel owner.

    (e) Vessel responsibilities. An operator of a vessel required to carry one or more scientific observers must:

    (1) Accommodations and food. Provide, at no cost to the observers or the United States, accommodations and food on the vessel for the observer or observers that are equivalent to those provided for officers of the vessel; and

    (2) Safe conditions. Maintain safe conditions on the vessel for the protection of observers including adherence to all U.S. Coast Guard and other applicable rules, regulations, or statutes pertaining to safe operation of the vessel and have on board:

    (i) A valid Commercial Fishing Vessel Safety Decal issued within the past 2 years that certifies compliance with regulations found in 33 CFR chapter I and 46 CFR chapter I;

    (ii) A certificate of compliance issued pursuant to 46 CFR 28.710; or

    (iii) A valid certificate of inspection pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 3311.

    (3) Health and safety regulations. Comply with the observer health and safety regulations at part 600 of this title.

    (4) Transmission of data. Facilitate transmission of observer data by allowing observers, on request, to use the vessel's communications equipment and personnel for the confidential entry, transmission, and receipt of work-related messages.

    (5) Vessel position. Allow observers access to, and the use of, the vessel's navigation equipment and personnel, on request, to determine the vessel's position, course and speed.

    (6) Access. Allow observers free and unobstructed access to the vessel's bridge, trawl or working decks, holding bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, weight scales, cargo holds, and any other space that may be used to hold, process, weigh, or store fish or fish products at any time.

    (7) Prior notification. Notify observers at least 15 minutes before fish are brought on board, or fish and fish products are transferred from the vessel, to allow sampling the catch or observing the transfer, unless the observers specifically request not to be notified.

    (8) Records. Allow observers to inspect and copy the vessel's DCD, product transfer forms, any other logbook or document required by regulations or CCAMLR conservation measures, printouts or tallies of scale weights, scale calibration records, bin sensor readouts, and production records.

    (9) Assistance. Provide all other reasonable assistance to enable observers to carry out their duties, including, but not limited to:

    (i) Measuring decks, codends, and holding bins;

    (ii) Providing the observers with a safe work area adjacent to the sample collection site;

    (iii) Collecting bycatch when requested by the observers;

    (iv) Collecting and carrying baskets of fish when requested by observers; and

    (v) Allowing observers to determine the sex of fish when this procedure will not decrease the value of a significant portion of the catch.

    (10) Transfer at sea. (i) Ensure that transfers of observers at sea via small boat or raft are carried out during daylight hours, under safe conditions, and with the agreement of observers involved.

    (ii) Notify observers at least 3 hours before observers are transferred, such that the observers can collect personal belongings, equipment, and scientific samples.

    (iii) Provide a safe pilot ladder and conduct the transfer to ensure the safety of observers during transfers.

    (iv) Provide an experienced crew member to assist observers in the small boat or raft in which any transfer is made.

    (f) Insurance. The observer service provider or vessel owner must provide insurance for national observers that provides compensation in the event of an injury or death during the entire deployment, from the point of hire location to return, equivalent to the standards of the North Pacific Groundfish Observer Program set forth in § 679.50 of this title.

    (g) Educational requirements. National observer candidates must:

    (1) Have a Bachelor's degree or higher from an accredited college or university with a major in one of the natural sciences; or

    (2) Have successfully completed a minimum of 30 semester hours or equivalent in applicable biological sciences with extensive use of dichotomous keys in at least one course.

    (h) Health requirements. National observers, and U.S. observers deployed as international observers, must have a signed and dated statement from a licensed physician that he or she has physically examined the observer. The statement must confirm that, based upon the physical examination, the observer does not have any health problems or conditions that would jeopardize that individual's safety or the safety of others while deployed, or prevent the observer from performing his or her duties satisfactorily. The statement must declare that, prior to the examination, the physician was made aware of the duties of an observer and the dangerous, remote and rigorous nature of the work. The physician's statement must be submitted to the NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center Antarctic Ecosystem Research Division program office prior to approval of an observer. The physical exam must have occurred during the 12 months prior to the observer's deployment. The physician's statement will expire 12 months after the physical exam occurred. A new physical exam must be performed, and accompanying statement submitted, prior to any deployment occurring after the expiration of the statement.

    (i) Standards of observer conduct—(1) Observers: (i) Must not have a direct financial interest in the fishery being observed, including but not limited to:

    (A) Any ownership, mortgage holder, or other secured interest in a vessel, shoreside or floating stationary processor facility involved in the catching, taking, harvesting or processing of fish;

    (B) Any business involved with selling supplies or services to any vessel, shoreside or floating stationary processing facility; or

    (C) Any business involved with purchasing raw or processed products from any vessel, shoreside or floating stationary processing facilities.

    (ii) Must not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, entertainment, loan, or anything of monetary value from anyone who either conducts activities that are regulated by NMFS or has interests that may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the observers' official duties.

    (iii) Must not serve as observers on any vessel or at any shoreside or floating stationary processing facility owned or operated by a person who previously employed the observers.

    (iv) Must not solicit or accept employment as a crew member or an employee of a vessel, shoreside processor, or stationary floating processor while employed by an observer provider.

    (2) Provisions for remuneration of observers under this section do not constitute a conflict of interest.

    (j) Standards of observer behavior. Observers must:

    (1) Avoid any behavior that could adversely affect the confidence of the public in the integrity of the CCAMLR System of Scientific Observation or of the government, including but not limited to the following:

    (2) Perform their assigned duties as described in the CCAMLR Scientific Observers Manual and must complete the CCAMLR Scientific Observer Logbooks and submit them to the CCAMLR Data Manager at the intervals specified by the Data Manager.

    (3) Accurately record their sampling data, write complete reports, and report accurately any observations of suspected violations of regulations relevant to conservation of marine resources or their environment.

    (4) Not disclose collected data and observations made on board the vessel or in the processing facility to any person, except the owner or operator of the observed vessel or processing facility or NMFS.

    (5) Refrain from engaging in any illegal actions or any other activities that would reflect negatively on their image as professional scientists, on other observers, or on the CCAMLR System of Scientific Observation as a whole. This includes, but is not limited to:

    (i) Refrain from engaging in the use, possession, or distribution of illegal drugs; or

    (ii) Refrain from engaging in physical sexual contact with personnel of the vessel or processing facility to which the observer is assigned, or with any vessel or processing plant personnel who may be substantially affected by the performance or non-performance of the observer's official duties.

    (k) Sampling station. (1) Minimum work space aboard at sea processing vessels. The observer must have a working area of 4.5 square meters, including the observer's sampling table, for sampling and storage of fish to be sampled. The observer must be able to stand upright and have a work area at least 0.9 meter (m) deep in the area in front of the table and scale.

    (2) Table aboard at-sea processing vessels. The observer sampling station must include a table at least 0.6 m deep, 1.2 m wide and 0.9 m high and no more than 1.1 m high. The entire surface area of the table must be available for use by the observer. Any area for the observer sampling scale is in addition to the minimum space requirements for the table. The observer's sampling table must be secured to the floor or wall.

    (3) Other requirement for at-sea processing vessels. The sampling station must be in a well-drained area that includes floor grating (or other material that prevents slipping), lighting adequate for day or night sampling, and a hose that supplies fresh or sea water to the observer.

    § 300.112 Vessel monitoring system.

    (a) Requirement for use. Within 30 days after NMFS publishes in the Federal Register a list of approved EMTUs and associated communications service providers for the AMLR fishery, an owner or operator of a vessel that has been issued a vessel permit under § 300.107 must ensure that such vessel has a NMFS-type-approved, operating EMTU installed and continuously operating for the duration of any fishing trip involving the harvesting of AMLR.

    (b) Installing and activating the EMTU. Only EMTUs that have been approved by NMFS for use in the AMLR fishery may be used. The vessel owner or operator shall obtain and have installed on the fishing vessel, by a qualified marine electrician and in accordance with any instructions provided by the VMS Helpdesk or OLE, a NMFS type-approved EMTU.

    (c) Interference with the EMTU. No person may interfere with, tamper with, alter, damage, disable, or impede the operation of the EMTU, or attempt any of the same.

    (d) Interruption of operation of the VMS. When a vessel's EMTU is not operating properly, the owner or operator must immediately contact OLE, and follow instructions from that office. If notified by NMFS that a vessel's EMTU is not operating properly, the owner and operator must follow instructions from that office. In either event, such instructions may include, but are not limited to, manually communicating to a location designated by NMFS the vessel's positions or returning to port until the EMTU is operable.

    (e) Access to data. OLE is authorized to receive and relay transmissions from the EMTU. OLE will share a vessel's position data obtained from the EMTU, if requested, with other NMFS offices, the USCG, and their authorized officers and designees.

    (f) Installation and operation of the VMS. NMFS has authority over the installation and operation of the EMTU. NMFS may authorize the connection or order the disconnection of additional equipment, including a computer, to any EMTU when deemed appropriate by NMFS.

    § 300.113 CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program sites.

    (a) General. (1) Any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States must apply for and be granted an entry permit authorizing specific activities prior to entering a CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program (CEMP) site designated in accordance with the CCAMLR conservation measure describing the procedure for according protection for CEMP sites.

    (2) If a CEMP site is also a site specially protected under the Antarctic Treaty (or the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty and its Annexes, such as the sites listed in 45 CFR 670.29), an applicant seeking to enter such site must apply to the Director of the NSF for a permit under applicable provisions of the ACA or any superseding legislation. The permit granted by NSF shall constitute a joint CEMP/ACA Protected Site permit and any person holding such a permit must comply with the appropriate CEMP site management plan. In all other cases, an applicant seeking a permit to enter a CEMP site must apply to the Assistant Administrator for a CEMP permit in accordance with the provisions of this section.

    (b) Responsibility of CEMP permit holders and persons designated as agents under a CEMP permit. (1) The CEMP permit holder and person designated as agents under a CEMP permit are jointly and severally responsible for compliance with the Act, this subpart, and any permit issued under this subpart.

    (2) The CEMP permit holder and agents designated under a CEMP permit are responsible for the acts of their employees and agents constituting violations, regardless of whether the specific acts were authorized or forbidden by the CEMP permit holder or agents, and regardless of knowledge concerning their occurrence.

    (c) Prohibitions regarding the Antarctic Treaty System and other applicable treaties and statutes. Holders of permits to enter CEMP Protected Sites are not authorized to undertake any activities within a CEMP Protected Site that are not in compliance with the conditions of the CEMP permit and the provisions of:

    (1) The Antarctic Treaty, including the Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora (including the Protocol on the Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty and its Annexes), as implemented by the ACA and any superseding legislation. (Persons interested in conducting activities subject to the Antarctic Treaty or the Protocol should contact the Office of Polar Programs, NSF).

    (2) The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals.

    (3) The Convention and its Conservation Measures in force, implemented under the Act.

    (d) Prohibitions on takings. Permits issued under this section do not authorize any takings as defined in the applicable statutes and implementing regulations governing the activities of persons in Antarctica.

    (e) Issuance criteria. Permits designated in this section may be issued by the Assistant Administrator upon a determination that:

    (1) The specific activities meet the requirements of the Act;

    (2) There is sufficient reason, established in the CEMP permit application, that the scientific purpose for the intended entry cannot be served elsewhere; and

    (3) The actions permitted will not violate any provisions or prohibitions of the site's management plan submitted in compliance with the CCAMLR Conservation Measure describing the procedure for according protection to CEMP sites.

    (f) Application process. An applicant seeking a CEMP permit from the Assistant Administrator to enter a CEMP site shall include the following in the application.

    (1) A detailed justification that the scientific objectives of the applicant cannot be accomplished elsewhere and a description of how said objectives will be accomplished within the terms of the site's management plan.

    (2) A statement signed by the applicant that the applicant has read and fully understands the provisions and prohibitions of the site's management plan. Prospective applicants may obtain copies of the relevant management plans and the CCAMLR Conservation Measure describing the procedure for according protection to CEMP sites by requesting them from NMFS Headquarters.

    (g) Conditions. CEMP permits issued under this section will contain special and general conditions including a condition that the permit holder shall submit a report describing the activities conducted under the permit within 30 days of the expiration of the CEMP permit.

    (h) Transfer. CEMP permits are not transferable or assignable. A CEMP permit is valid only for the person to whom it is issued.

    (i) Additional conditions and restrictions. The Assistant Administrator may revise the CEMP permit effective upon notification of the permit holder, to impose additional conditions and restrictions as necessary to achieve the purposes of the Convention, the Act and the CEMP Management Plan. The CEMP permit holder must, as soon as possible, notify any and all agents operating under the permit of any and all revisions or modifications to the permit.

    (j) Revocation or suspension. CEMP permits may be revoked or suspended based upon information received by the Assistant Administrator and such revocation or suspension shall be effective upon notification to the permit holder.

    (1) A CEMP permit may be revoked or suspended based on a violation of the permit, the Act, or this subpart.

    (2) Failure to report a change in the information submitted in a CEMP permit application within 10 days of the change is a violation of this subpart and voids the application or permit, as applicable. Title 15 CFR part 904 governs permit sanctions under this subpart.

    (k) Exceptions. Entry into a CEMP site is lawful if committed under emergency conditions to prevent the loss of human life, avoid compromising human safety, prevent the loss of vessels or aircraft, or to prevent environmental damage.

    (l) Protected sites. Sites protected by the Antarctic Treaty and regulated under the ACA are listed at 45 CFR part 670 subpart F.

    § 300.114 Prohibitions.

    In addition to the prohibitions in § 300.4, it is unlawful for any person to:

    (a) Harvest any AMLR without a permit for such activity as required by § 300.107.

    (b) Import into, or export or re-export from, the United States any AMLR: Taken by a vessel of the United States without a permit issued under this subpart or by the a foreign-flagged vessel without valid authorization from the applicable flag state to harvest those resources; without accurate, complete, valid and properly validated CDS documentation as required by § 300.106; without an IFTP as required by § 300.104; or in violation of the terms and conditions for such import, export or re-export as specified on the IFTP.

    (c) Engage in or benefit from harvesting or other associated activities in violation of the provisions of the Convention or in violation of a conservation measure in force with respect to the United States under Article IX of the Convention.

    (d) Ship, transport, offer for sale, sell, purchase, import, export, re-export or have custody, control or possession of, any AMLR that was harvested in violation of a conservation measure in force with respect to the United States under Article IX of the Convention or in violation of any regulation promulgated under the Act, without regard to the citizenship of the person that harvested, or vessel that was used in the harvesting of, the AMLR.

    (e) Refuse to allow any CCAMLR inspector or authorized officer to board a vessel of the United States or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States for the purpose of conducting any search, investigation, or inspection authorized by the Act, this subpart, or any permit issued under the Act.

    (f) Refuse to provide appropriate assistance, including access as necessary to communications equipment, to any CCAMLR inspector or authorized officer.

    (g) Refuse to sign a written notification of alleged violations of Commission measures in effect prepared by a CCAMLR inspector.

    (h) Assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with a CCAMLR inspector or authorized officer in the conduct of any boarding, search, investigation, or inspection authorized by the Act, this subpart, or any permit issued under the Act.

    (i) Use any vessel to engage in harvesting, or receive, import, export or re-export, AMLRs after the revocation, or during the period of suspension, of an applicable permit issued under the Act.

    (j) Fail to identify, falsely identify, fail to properly maintain, or obscure the identification of a harvesting vessel or its gear as required by this subpart.

    (k) Fish in an area where fishing is prohibited by the Commission, other than for scientific research purposes in accordance with § 300.103.

    (l) Violate or attempt to violate any provision of this subpart, the Act, any other regulation promulgated under the Act or the conditions of any permit issued under the Act.

    (m) Provide incomplete or inaccurate information about the harvest, transshipment, landing, import, export, or re-export of applicable species on any document required under this subpart.

    (n) Receive AMLR from a vessel, without holding an AMLR first receiver permit as required under § 300.104, or receive AMLR from a fishing vessel that does not hold a valid vessel permit issued under § 300.107.

    (o) Import, export or re-export Dissostichus spp. harvested or transshipped by a vessel identified by CCAMLR as having engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, originating from a high seas area designated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations as Statistical Area 51 or Statistical Area 57 or accompanied by inaccurate, incomplete, invalid, or improperly validated CDS documentation or import or re-export Dissostichus spp. accompanied by a SVDCD.

    (p) Import shipments of frozen Dissostichus spp. without a preapproval issued under § 300.105.

    (q) Observers. (1) Assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, harass, bribe, or interfere with an observer.

    (2) Interfere with or bias the sampling procedure employed by an observer, including physical, mechanical, or other sorting or discarding of catch before sampling.

    (3) Tamper with, destroy, or discard an observer's collected samples, equipment, records, photographic film, papers, or personal effects without the express consent of the observer.

    (4) Prohibit or bar by command, impediment, threat, coercion, or by refusal of reasonable assistance, an observer from collecting samples, conducting product recovery rate determinations, making observations, or otherwise performing the observer's duties.

    (5) Harass an observer by conduct that has sexual connotations, has the purpose or effect of interfering with the observer's work performance, or otherwise creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment.

    (6) Fish for or process fish without observer coverage required under § 300.111.

    (7) Require, pressure, coerce, or threaten an observer to perform duties normally performed by crew members, including, but not limited to, cooking, washing dishes, standing watch, vessel maintenance, assisting with the setting or retrieval of gear, or any duties associated with the processing of fish, from sorting the catch to the storage of the finished product.

    (8) Refuse to provide appropriate assistance, including access as necessary to communications equipment, to an observer.

    (r) Vessel monitoring systems. (1) Use any vessel of the United States issued, or required to be issued, an AMLR vessel permit to conduct fishing operations unless that vessel carries a NMFS-type-approved EMTU and complies with the requirements described in this subpart.

    (2) Fail to install, activate, repair or replace an EMTU prior to leaving port as specified in this subpart.

    (3) Fail to operate and maintain an EMTU on board the vessel at all times as specified in this subpart.

    (4) Tamper with, damage, destroy, alter, or in any way distort, render useless, inoperative, ineffective, or inaccurate the EMTU required to be installed on a vessel or the EMTU position reports transmitted by a vessel as specified in this subpart.

    (5) Fail to contact OLE or follow OLE instructions when automatic position reporting has been interrupted as specified in this subpart.

    (6) Register an EMTU to more than one vessel at the same time.

    (7) Connect, or leave connected, additional equipment to an EMTU without the prior approval of the OLE.

    (8) Make a false statement, oral or written, to an authorized officer regarding the installation, use, operation, or maintenance of an EMTU or communication service provider.

    (9) Fail to report to NMFS and to CCAMLR's C-VMS from port-to-port on any trip during which AMLR are, or are expected to be, harvested regardless of whether the vessel operates, or is expected to operate, inside the Convention Area.

    (s) Trawl for krill in Convention Area fisheries without a seal excluder device or possess trawl gear without a seal excluder device installed onboard a vessel permitted, or required to be permitted, under this subpart to harvest krill with trawl gear.

    (t) Harvest any AMLR in the Convention Area without a vessel permit required by this subpart.

    (u) Ship, transport, offer for sale, sell, purchase, import, export, re-export or have custody, control, or possession of, any frozen Dissostichus species without verifiable documentation that the harvesting vessel reported to CCAMLR's C-VMS continuously and in real-time, from port-to-port, regardless of where such Dissostichus species were harvested.

    § 300.115 Facilitation of enforcement and inspection.

    In addition to the facilitation of enforcement provisions of § 300.5, the following requirements apply to this subpart.

    (a) Access and records. (1) The owners and operator of each harvesting vessel must provide authorized officers and CCAMLR inspectors access to all spaces where work is conducted or business papers and records are prepared or stored, including but not limited to personal quarters and areas within personal quarters. If inspection of a particular area would interfere with specific on-going scientific research, and if the operator of the harvesting vessel makes such assertion and produces an individual permit that covers that specific research, the authorized officer or CCAMLR inspector will not disturb the area, but will record the information pertaining to the denial of access.

    (2) The owner and operator of each harvesting vessel must provide to authorized officers and CCAMLR inspectors all records and documents pertaining to the harvesting activities of the vessel, including but not limited to production records, fishing logs, navigation logs, transfer records, product receipts, cargo stowage plans or records, draft or displacement calculations, customs documents or records, and an accurate hold plan reflecting the current structure of the vessel's storage and factory spaces.

    (3) Before leaving vessels that have been inspected, the CCAMLR inspector will give the master of the vessel a Certificate of Inspection and a written notification of any alleged violations of Commission measures in effect and will afford the master the opportunity to comment on it. The ship's master must sign the notification to acknowledge receipt and the opportunity to comment on it.

    (4) Any person issued a first receiver permit under this subpart, or an IFTP under § 300.322, must as a condition of that permit, allow an authorized officer access to any facility from which they engage in the first receipt, import, export or re-export of AMLR for the purpose of inspecting the facility and any fish, equipment or records therein.

    (b) Reports by non-inspectors. All scientists, fishermen, and other non-inspectors present in the Convention Area and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are encouraged to report any violation of Commission conservation measures observed in the Convention Area to the Office of Ocean and Polar Affairs (CCAMLR Violations), Department of State, Room 5801, Washington, DC 20520.

    (c) Storage of AMLR. The operator of each harvesting vessel storing AMLR in a storage space on board a vessel must ensure that non-resource items are neither stowed beneath nor covered by resource items, unless required to maintain the stability and safety of the vessel. Non-resource items include, but are not limited to, portable conveyors, exhaust fans, ladders, nets, fuel bladders, extra bin boards, or other moveable non-resource items. These non-resource items may be in a resource storage space when necessary for the safety of the vessel or crew or for the storage of the items. Lumber, bin boards, or other dunnage may be used for shoring or bracing of product to ensure the safety of crew and to prevent shifting of cargo within the space.

    § 300.116 Penalties.

    Any person or harvesting vessel found to be in violation of the Act, this subpart, or any permit issued under this subpart will be subject to the civil and criminal penalty provisions and forfeiture provisions prescribed in the Act, 15 CFR part 904, and other applicable laws.

    [FR Doc. 2016-17129 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 140 Thursday, July 21, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Newspapers Used for Publication of Legal Notices in the Southwestern Region, Which Includes Arizona, New Mexico, and Parts of Oklahoma and Texas AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    Publication of legal notices in the listed newspapers will begin on the date of this publication and continue until further notice.

    ADDRESSES:

    Roxanne Turley, Acting Regional Administrative Review Coordinator, Forest Service, Southwestern Region, 333 Broadway SE., Albuquerque, NM 87102-3498.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Roxanne Turley, Acting Regional Administrative Review Coordinator; (505) 842-3178.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The administrative procedures at 36 CFR parts 218 and 219 require the Forest Service to publish notices in a newspaper of general circulation. The content of the notices is specified in 36 CFR parts 218 and 219. In general, the notices will identify: The decision or project, by title or subject matter; the name and title of the official making the decision; how to obtain additional information; and where and how to file comments, appeals, or objections. The date the notice is published will be used to establish the official date for the beginning of the comment, appeal, or objection period. Where more than one newspaper is listed for any unit, the first newspaper listed is the primary newspaper of record of which publication date shall be used for calculating the time period to file comment, appeal, or an objection.

    Southwestern Regional Office Regional Forester

    Notices of Availability for Comment and Decisions and Objections affecting New Mexico Forests:—“Albuquerque Journal”, Albuquerque, New Mexico, for National Forest System Lands in the State of New Mexico for any projects of Region-wide impact, or for any projects affecting more than one National Forest or National Grassland in New Mexico. Regional Forester Notices of Availability for Comment and Decisions and Objections affecting Arizona Forests: —“The Arizona Republic”, Phoenix, Arizona, for National Forest System lands in the State of Arizona for any projects of Region-wide impact, or for any projects affecting more than one National Forest in Arizona.

    Regional Forester Notices of Availability for Comment and Decisions and Objections affecting National Grasslands in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas are listed by Grassland and location as follows: Kiowa National Grassland notices published in: —“Union County Leader”, Clayton New Mexico. Rita Blanca National Grassland in Cimarron County, Oklahoma notices published in: —“Boise City News”, Boise City, Oklahoma. Rita Blanca National Grassland in Dallam County, Texas notices published in:—“The Dalhart Texan”, Dalhart, Texas. Black Kettle National Grassland in Roger Mills County, Oklahoma notices published in: —“Cheyenne Star”, Cheyenne, Oklahoma. Black Kettle National Grassland in Hemphill County, Texas notices published in: —“The Canadian Record”, Canadian, Texas. McClellan Creek National Grassland in Gray County, Texas notices published in:—“The Pampa News”, Pampa, Texas.

    Regional Forester Notices of Availability for Comment and Decisions and Objections affecting only one National Forest or National Grassland unit will appear in the newspaper of record elected by each National Forest or National Grassland as listed below.

    Arizona National Forests Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Alpine Ranger District, Black Mesa Ranger District, Lakeside Ranger District, and Springerville Ranger District are published in: —“The White Mountain Independent”, Apache County, Arizona.

    Clifton Ranger District Notices are published in:—“Copper Era”, Clifton, Arizona.

    Coconino National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Mogollon Rim Ranger District, and Flagstaff Ranger District are published in: —“Arizona Daily Sun”, Flagstaff, Arizona.

    Red Rock Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Red Rock News”, Sedona, Arizona.

    Coronado National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor and Santa Catalina Ranger District are published in: —“The Arizona Daily Star”, Tucson, Arizona.

    Douglas Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Daily Dispatch”, Douglas, Arizona; notices for projects occurring within the Peloncillo Mountain Range (the Peloncillo Ecological Management Area) are published in: —“Hidalgo County Herald”, Lordsburg, New Mexico.

    Nogales Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Nogales International”, Nogales, Arizona.

    Sierra Vista Ranger District Notices for projects east of Highway 83 are published in: —“Sierra Vista Herald”, Sierra Vista, Arizona; notices for projects west of Highway 83 are published in: —“Nogales International”, Nogales, Arizona.

    Safford Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Eastern Arizona Courier”, Safford, Arizona.

    Kaibab National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, North Kaibab Ranger District, Tusayan Ranger District, and Williams Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Arizona Daily Sun”, Flagstaff, Arizona.

    Prescott National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Bradshaw Ranger District, and Chino Valley Ranger District are published in: —“Daily Courier”, Prescott, Arizona. Verde Ranger District Notices are published in: “Verde Independent”, Cottonwood, Arizona.

    Tonto National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions, and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Cave Creek Ranger District, and Mesa Ranger District are published in: —“Arizona Capitol Times”, in Phoenix, Arizona.

    Globe Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Arizona Silver Belt”, Globe, Arizona. Payson Ranger District, Pleasant Valley Ranger District and Tonto Basin Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Payson Roundup”, Payson, Arizona.

    New Mexico National Forests Carson National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Camino Real Ranger District, Tres Piedras Ranger District and Questa Ranger District are published in: —“The Taos News”, Taos, New Mexico.

    Canjilon Ranger District and El Rito Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Rio Grande Sun”, Espanola, New Mexico.

    Jicarilla Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Farmington Daily Times”, Farmington, New Mexico.

    Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor affecting lands in New Mexico, except the National Grasslands are published in: —“Albuquerque Journal”, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

    Forest Supervisor Notices affecting National Grasslands in New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas are published by grassland and location as follows: Kiowa National Grassland in Colfax, Harding, Mora and Union Counties, New Mexico published in: —“Union County Leader”, Clayton, New Mexico. Rita Blanca National Grassland in Cimarron County, Oklahoma published in: —“Boise City News”, Boise City, Oklahoma. Rita Blanca National Grassland in Dallam County, Texas published in: —“The Dalhart Texan”, Dalhart, Texas. Black Kettle National Grassland, in Roger Mills County, Oklahoma published in:—“Cheyenne Star”, Cheyenne, Oklahoma. Black Kettle National Grassland, in Hemphill County, Texas published in: —“The Canadian Record”, Canadian, Texas. McClellan Creek National Grassland published in:—“The Pampa News”, Pampa, Texas.

    Mt. Taylor Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Cibola County Beacon”, Grants, New Mexico.

    Magdalena Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Defensor-Chieftain”, Socorro, New Mexico.

    Mountainair Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Mountain View Telegraph”, Moriarity, New Mexico.

    Sandia Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Albuquerque Journal”, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

    Kiowa National Grassland Notices are published in: —“Union County Leader”, Clayton, New Mexico.

    Rita Blanca National Grassland Notices in Cimarron County, Oklahoma are published in: —“Boise City News”, Boise City, Oklahoma while Rita Blanca National Grassland Notices in Dallam County, Texas are published in: —“Dalhart Texan”, Dalhart, Texas.

    Black Kettle National Grassland Notices in Roger Mills County, Oklahoma are published in: —“Cheyenne Star”, Cheyenne, Oklahoma, while Black Kettle National Grassland Notices in Hemphill County, Texas are published in:—“The Canadian Record”, Canadian, Texas. McClellan Creek National Grassland Notices are published in: —“The Pampa News”, Pampa, Texas.

    Gila National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Quemado Ranger District, Reserve Ranger District, Glenwood Ranger District, Silver City Ranger District and Wilderness Ranger District are published in: —“Silver City Daily Press”, Silver City, New Mexico.

    Black Range Ranger District Notices are published in: —“The Herald”, Truth or Consequences, New Mexico.

    Lincoln National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor and the Sacramento Ranger District are published in:—“Alamogordo Daily News”, Alamogordo, New Mexico.

    Guadalupe Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Carlsbad Current Argus”, Carlsbad, New Mexico.

    Smokey Bear Ranger District Notices are published in: —“Ruidoso News”, Ruidoso, New Mexico.

    Santa Fe National Forest

    Notices for Availability for Comments, Decisions and Objections by Forest Supervisor, Coyote Ranger District, Cuba Ranger District, Espanola Ranger District, Jemez Ranger District and Pecos-Las Vegas Ranger District are published in: —“Albuquerque Journal”, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

    Dated: June 27, 2016. Sandra Watts, Deputy Regional Forester, Southwestern Region.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17325 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service New Mexico Collaborative Forest Restoration Program Technical Advisory Panel AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The New Mexico Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (CFRP) Technical Advisory Panel (Panel) will meet in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Panel is established consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. App. II), and Title VI of the Community Forest Restoration Act (Pub. L. 106-393). Additional information concerning the Panel, including the meeting summary/minutes, can be found by visiting the Panel's Web site at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/r3/cfrp.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held August 8, 2016-August 10, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All meetings are subject to cancellation. For updated status of the meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hyatt Place Albuquerque/Uptown, 6901 Arvada Avenue NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Written comments may be submitted as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. All comments, including names and addresses, when provided, are placed in the record and available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received at the Cooperative and International Forestry Office. Please call ahead at to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Walter Dunn, Designated Federal Official, USDA Forest Service, 333 Broadway SE., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102, by phone at (505) 842-3425, by email at [email protected], or via fax at (505) 842-3165.

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting is to:

    (1) Review Panel Bylaws, Charter, and what it means to be a Federal Advisory Committee,

    (2) Evaluate and score the 2016 CFRP grant applicsiotns to determine which ones best meet the program objectives,

    (3) Develop prioritized 2016 CFRP project funding recommendations for the Secretary,

    (4) Develop an agenda and identify members for the 2016 CFRP Sub-Committee for the review of multi-party monitoring reports from completed projects, and

    (5) Discuss the proposal review process used by the Panel to identify what went well and what could be improved.

    The meeting is open to the public. Panel discussion is limited to Panel members and Forest Service staff. Project proponents may make brief presentations to the Panel summarizing their grant application and respond to questions of clarification from Panel members or Forest Service staff. However, the agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should submit a request in writing by August 5, 2016 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring CFRP grant application review related matters to the attention of the Panel may file written statements with the Panel staff before or after each day of the meeting. Written comments and time requests for oral comments must be sent to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    A summary of the meeting will be posted on the Web site listed above within 45 days after the meeting.

    Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: June 15, 2016. Jim Upchurch, Deputy Regional Forester.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17222 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-15-2016] Production Activity not Authorized, Foreign-Trade Zone 87—Lake Charles, Louisiana, Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC, Subzone 87E, (Assembly of Ethylene Distillation/Rectification Plant and Ethane Cracker/Reaction Unit; Production of Polyethylene) Westlake and Sulphur, Louisiana

    On March 17, 2016, Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC (Sasol) submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board for its sites within Subzone 87E in Westlake and Sulphur, Louisiana.

    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 18572-18573). Pursuant to Section 400.37, the FTZ Board has determined that further review is warranted and has not authorized the proposed activity. If the applicant wishes to seek authorization for this activity, it will need to submit an application for production authority, pursuant to Section 400.23.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17304 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-557-813] Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Malaysia: Notice of Correction to Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bryan Hansen or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3683 or (202) 482-1690, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 21, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) uploaded the unpublished preliminary results notice of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene retail carrier bags (PRCBs) from Malaysia to Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).1 On June 24, 2016, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PRCBs from Malaysia.2 Upon review of the published preliminary results notice, however, we found that it contained an inadvertent error. Accordingly, we are publishing this correction notice. The Preliminary Results contained an inadvertent error related to the signature block. Specifically, the published notice for the Preliminary Results incorrectly indicated that Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, was the signing authority when, in fact, the Preliminary Results were signed by Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.3 The due dates to file case and rebuttal briefs and request a hearing remain the dates established in the Preliminary Results.

    1See Bar code 3479952. ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. The unpublished notice is also available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building.

    2See Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Malaysia: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 81 FR 41294 (June 24, 2016) (Preliminary Results).

    3Id., at 41295.

    This correction to the Preliminary Results is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(A)(i) and (ii), 751(a)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(h) and 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17307 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-979] Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeff Pedersen or Erin Kearney, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-2769 or (202) 482-0167, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On December 7, 2012 the Department of Commerce (Department) published in the Federal Register the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the People's Republic of China (PRC) (Order).1 On December 1, 2015, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the Order.2 The Department received multiple timely requests for an administrative review of the Order. On February 9, 2016, in accordance with section 751(a) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of the initiation of an administrative review of the Order.3 The administrative review was initiated with respect to 44 companies or groups of companies, and covers the period from December 1, 2014, through November 30, 2015. Requesting parties have subsequently timely withdrawn all review requests for five companies or groups of companies for which the Department initiated a review, as discussed below.

    1See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73018 (December 7, 2012).

    2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 75058 (December 1, 2015).

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 6832 (February 9, 2016) (“Initiation Notice”).

    Rescission of Review, in Part

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party that requested the review withdraws its request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. All requesting parties withdrew their respective requests for an administrative review of the five companies or groups of companies listed in the Appendix within 90 days of the date of publication of Initiation Notice. Accordingly, the Department is rescinding this review with respect to these companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).4

    4See Appendix. As stated in Change in Practice in NME Reviews, the Department will no longer consider the non-market economy (“NME”) entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013) (“Change in Practice in NME Reviews”). The PRC-wide entity is not subject to this administrative review because no interested party requested a review of the entity. See Initiation Notice.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only reminder to importers whose entries will be liquidated as a result of this rescission notice, of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's assumption that the reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

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

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. Appendix • Jinko Solar Co., Ltd. • Jinko Solar Import and Export Co., Ltd. • JinkoSolar International Limited • Yingli Green Energy International Trading Company Limited • Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17302 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-880] Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea: Final 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) determines that heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR pipes and tubes) 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 735(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. The final dumping margins of sales at LTFV are listed below in the “Final Determination” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Eastwood or Alice Maldonado, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3874 or (202) 482-4682, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On March 1, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV of HWR pipes and tubes from Korea.1 A summary of the events that occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.2

    1See Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 10585 (March 1, 2016) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea,” dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers HWR pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and 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 it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B-8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in February and March 2016, we verified the sales and cost information submitted by mandatory respondents Dong-A Steel Company (DOSCO) and HiSteel Co., Ltd (HiSteel) for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by DOSCO and HiSteel.3

    3See Memorandum to the File from Alice Maldonado and Elizabeth Eastwood, Senior Analysts, and Whitley Herndon, Analyst, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of DOSCO America, Inc. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Korea,” dated April 6, 2016; Memorandum to the file from Alice Maldonado and Elizabeth Eastwood, Senior Analysts, and Whitley Herndon, Analyst, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of Dong-A Steel Company in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Korea,” dated April 8, 2016; Memorandum to the File, from Heidi K. Schriefer and Kristin Case, Senior Accountants, entitled, “Verification of the Cost Response of Dong-A Steel Company in the Antidumping Duty Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea,” dated April 5, 2016; Memorandum to the file from Elizabeth Eastwood and Alice Maldonado, Senior Analysts, and Whitley Herndon, Analyst, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of HiSteel Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Korea,” dated April 6, 2016; and Memorandum to the File, from Kristin L. Case, Senior Accountant, entitled, “Verification of the Cost Response of HiSteel Co., Ltd. in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Korea,” dated April 6, 2016.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations for DOSCO and HiSteel. For a discussion of these changes, see the “Margin Calculations” section of the Issues and 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 margins, and margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. For the final determination, the Department calculated the “all others” rate based on a weighted average of DOSCO's and HiSteel's margins using publicly-ranged quantities of their sales of subject merchandise.4

    4See Memorandum to the File from Alice Maldonado, Senior Analyst, entitled, “Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Korea: Calculation of the Final Margin for All Other Companies,” dated July 14, 2016. With two respondents, we 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 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).

    Final Determination

    The final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter/Manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Dong-A Steel Company 2.34 HiSteel Co., Ltd 3.82 All Others 3.24
    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of HWR pipes and tubes from Korea, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 1, 2016, the date of publication of the preliminary determination of this investigation in the Federal Register.

    Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as shown above.

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of HWR pipes and tubes from Korea no later than 45 days after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APO)

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This determination and this notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. The merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-500, grade B specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.

    Included products are those 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; and (3) none of the elements 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 • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.0 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten, 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.

    The subject merchandise is currently provided for in item 7306.61.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS 7306.61.3000. While the HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specification are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Margin Calculations V. Discussion of the Issues 1. U.S. Date of Sale 2. Weight Basis for Comparison Methodology 3. Costs for Non-Prime Merchandise 4. Differential Pricing Rulemaking 5. Differential Pricing Patterns and a Meaningful Difference 6. Verification Corrections 7. DOSCO's Constructed Export (CEP) Offset Claim 8. Raw Material Costs for DOSCO VI. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-17313 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-489-825] Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Turkey: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR pipes and tubes) from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey) as provided in section 705 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the “Final Determination” section of this notice. The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Smith or Aqmar Rahman, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1766 or (202) 482-0768, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on December 28, 2015.1 A summary of the events that occurred since the Department issued the Preliminary Determination may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum which is hereby incorporated.2 Additionally, this memorandum details the changes we made since the Preliminary Determination to the subsidy rates calculated for the mandatory respondents and all other producer/exporters. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://trade.gov/enforcement. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Turkey: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Investigation and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 80 FR 80749 (December 28, 2015) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination,” dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department has exercised its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final determination is July 14, 2016.3

    3See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & Compliance, “Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas” (January 27, 2016).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

    The Department did not receive comments regarding the scope of this investigation.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix II.

    Use of Facts Available, Including Adverse Inferences

    In making this final determination, we relied, in part, on facts available and, because MMZ Onur Boru Profil uretim San Ve Tic. A.S. (MMZ) and Ozdemir Boru Profil San ve Tic. Ltd Sti. (Ozdemir) did not act to the best of their ability to respond to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available with respect to those respondents.4 For further information, see the section “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    4See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.

    Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated rates for MMZ and Ozdemir, the two individually investigated exporters/producers of the subject merchandise that participated in this investigation. In accordance with sections 703(d) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not investigated, we apply an “all-others” rate, which is normally calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies selected as respondents by those companies' exports of the subject merchandise to the United States. The “all-others” rate does not include zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely on the facts available.5 We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of the public announcement of this final determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    5See Memorandum to the File, “Calculation of the `All-Others' Rate in the Final Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey” (July 14, 2016). We calculated a weighted average of the rates of MMZ and Ozdemir using publicly-ranged data so as not to disclose the respondents' business proprietary information.

    We determine the countervailable subsidy rates to be:

    Exporter/Producer Subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • MMZ Onur Boru Profil uretim San Ve Tic. A.S 23.37 Ozdemir Boru Profil San ve Tic. Ltd Sti 15.08 All Others 19.06
    Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our affirmative Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of merchandise under consideration from Turkey that were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after December 28, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register.

    In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after April 26, 2016, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from December 28, 2015 through April 25, 2016.

    We will issue a CVD order and reinstate the suspension of liquidation in accordance with our final determination and under section 706(a) of the Act if the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, and we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties for such entries of merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded.

    ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. The merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-500, grade B specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.

    Included products are those 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; and (3) none of the elements 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

    • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or

    • 1.25 percent of chromium, or

    • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or

    • 0.40 percent of lead, or

    • 2.0 percent of nickel, or

    • 0.30 percent of tungsten, 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.

    The subject merchandise is currently provided for in item 7306.61.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS 7306.61.3000. While the HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specification are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background A. Case History B. Period of Investigation III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences A. Application of Adverse Facts (AFA): MMZ and Ozdemir B. Selection of AFA Rates C. Corroboration of Secondary Information Used to Derive AFA Rates V. Subsidies Valuation A. Allocation Period B. Attribution of Subsidies C. Denominators D. Benchmark Interest Rates VI. Analysis of Programs A. Programs Determined to be Countervailable 1. Provision of HRS for LTAR 2. Provision of Land for LTAR 3. Deduction from Taxable Income for Export Revenue 4. Export Financing 5. Investment Encouragement Program (IEP) Customs Duty and VAT Exemptions 6. Law 6486: Social Security Premium Incentive B. Programs Determined to be Not Used VII. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: Provision of HRS for LTAR A. Whether Erdemir and Isdemir Are “Authorities” B. Whether the HRS for LTAR Program is De Facto Specific C. Whether the Department's HRS Purchase Price Comparison is Distortive Comment 2: Provision of Land for LTAR Program Comment 3: Ministerial Errors Comment 4: Treatment of Income from Services in Ozdemir's Total Sales Denominator VIII. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2016-17315 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-896] Magnesium Metal From the People's Republic of China: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (“Department”) and the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) that revocation of the antidumping duty (“AD”) order on magnesium metal from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing a notice of continuation of the AD order.

    DATES:

    Effective Date July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shanah Lee, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6386.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On February 1, 2016, the Department published the notice of initiation of the second five-year (“sunset”) review of the AD Order1 on magnesium metal from the PRC, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”).2 As a result of its review, the Department determined that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping.3 The Department, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should the AD order be revoked. On July 7, 2016, the ITC published notice of its determination, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the AD order on magnesium metal from the PRC would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.4

    1See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Magnesium Metal From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 19928 (April 15, 2005) (“Order”).

    2See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 82 FR 5418 (February 2, 2016) (“Initiation Notice”).

    3See Magnesium Metal From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Second Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 81 FR 36874 (June 8, 2016).

    4See Alloy Magnesium From China; Determination, 81 FR 44328 (July 7, 2016).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order is magnesium metal from the PRC, which includes primary and secondary alloy magnesium metal, regardless of chemistry, raw material source, form, shape, or size. Magnesium is a metal or alloy containing by weight primarily the element magnesium. Primary magnesium is produced by decomposing raw materials into magnesium metal. Secondary magnesium is produced by recycling magnesium-backed scrap into magnesium metal. The magnesium covered by this investigation includes blends of primary and secondary magnesium.

    The subject merchandise includes the following alloy magnesium metal products made from primary and/or secondary magnesium including, without limitation, magnesium cast into ingots, slabs, rounds, billets, and other shapes, magnesium ground, chipped, crushed, or machined into raspings, granules, turnings, chips, powder, briquettes, and other shapes; and products that contain 50 percent or greater, but less than 99.8 percent, magnesium, by weight, and that have been entered into the United States as conforming to an “ASTM Specification for Magnesium Alloy” 5 and are thus outside the scope of the existing antidumping orders on magnesium from the PRC (generally referred to as “alloy” magnesium).

    5 The meaning of this term is the same as that used by the American Society for Testing and Materials in its Annual Book for ASTM Standards: Volume 01.02 Aluminum and Magnesium Alloys.

    The scope of this order excludes: (1) All forms of pure magnesium, including chemical combinations of magnesium and other material(s) in which the pure magnesium content is 50 percent or greater, but less than 99.8 percent, by weight, that do not conform to an “ASTM Specification for Magnesium Alloy”; 6 (2) magnesium that is in liquid or molten form; and (3) mixtures containing 90 percent or less magnesium in granular or powder form by weight and one or more of certain non-magnesium granular materials to make magnesium-based reagent mixtures, including lime, calcium metal, calcium including lime, calcium metal, calcium silicon, calcium carbide, calcium carbonate, carbon, slag coagulants, fluorspar, nephaline syenite, feldspar, alumina (Al203), calcium aluminate, soda ash, hydrocarbons, graphite, coke, silicon, rare earth metals/mischmetal, cryolite, silica/fly ash, magnesium oxide, periclase, ferroalloys, dolomite lime, and colemanite.7

    6 The material is already covered by existing antidumping orders. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Pure Magnesium from the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation and Ukraine; Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Antidumping Duty Investigation of Pure Magnesium from the Russian Federation, 60 FR 25691 (May 12, 1995); and Antidumping Duty Order: Pure Magnesium in Granular Form from the People's Republic of China, 66 FR 57936 (November 19, 2001).

    7 This third exclusion for magnesium-based reagent mixtures is based on the exclusion for reagent mixtures in the 2000-2001 investigations of magnesium from China, Israel, and Russia. See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium in Granular Form From the People's Republic of China, 66 FR 49345 (September 27, 2001); Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium From Israel, 66 FR 49349 (September 27, 2001); Final Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium From the Russian Federation, 66 FR 49347 (September 27, 2001). These mixtures are not magnesium alloys, because they are not combined in liquid form and cast into the same ingot.

    The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under items 8104.19.00, and 8104.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS items are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

    Continuation of the Order

    As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(a), the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD Order on magnesium metal from the PRC. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect AD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise.

    The effective date of the continuation of the Order will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of the order not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of continuation.

    This five-year sunset review and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17206 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-847] Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico: Final 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) determines that heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR pipes and tubes) from Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 735(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. The final dumping margins of sales at LTFV are listed below in the “Final Determination” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Blaine Wiltse or David Crespo, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6345 or (202) 482-3693, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On March 1, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary Determination. 1 A summary of the events that occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.2

    1See Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 10587 (March 1, 2016) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, entitled, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated concurrently with this memorandum (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers HWR pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and 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 it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B-8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in February and March 2016, we conducted verification of the sales and cost information submitted by Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. (Maquilacero) and Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V. (Prolamsa) for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by Maquilacero and Prolamsa.3

    3See Memorandum to the File from Blaine Wiltse and David Crespo, Senior Analysts, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated April 15, 2016; Memorandum to the File from Frederick W. Mines, Accountant, and Robert B. Greger, Senior Accountant, entitled, “Verification of the Cost Response of Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tube from Mexico,” dated May 11, 2016; Memorandum to the File from David Crespo, Senior Analyst, and Manuel Rey, Analyst, entitled, “Verification of Prolamsa USA in the 2014-2015 Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated May 9, 2016; Memorandum to the File from David Crespo and Blaine Wiltse, Senior Analysts, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated May 11, 2016; Memorandum to the File, from David Crespo and Blaine Wiltse, Senior Analysts, entitled, “Verification of the Sales Response of a Reseller in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated May 17, 2016; and Memorandum to the File from Robert B. Greger, Senior Accountant, entitled, “Verification of Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes & Tubes From Mexico,” dated March 31, 2016.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations for Maquilacero and Prolamsa. For a discussion of these changes, see the “Margin Calculations” section of the Issues and 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 margins, and margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. For the final determination, the Department calculated the “all-others” rate based on a weighted average of Maquilacero's and Prolamsa's margins using publicly-ranged quantities of their sales of subject merchandise.4

    4See Memorandum to the File from David Crespo, Senior Analyst, entitled, “Calculation of the All-Others Rate for the Final Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Mexico,” dated July 14, 2016. With two respondents, we 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 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).

    Final Determination

    The final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter/Manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Maquilacero S.A. de C.V 3.83 Productos Laminados de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V 5.21 All Others 4.91
    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of any public announcement of this determination to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of HWR pipes and tubes from Mexico, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 1, 2016, the date of publication of the preliminary determination of this investigation in the Federal Register.

    Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as shown above.

    International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of HWR pipes and tubes from Mexico no later than 45 days after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APO)

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This determination and this notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. The merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-500, grade B specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.

    Included products are those 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; and (3) none of the elements 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 • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or • 1.25 percent of chromium, or • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or • 0.40 percent of lead, or • 2.0 percent of nickel, or • 0.30 percent of tungsten, 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.

    The subject merchandise is currently provided for in item 7306.61.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS 7306.61.3000. While the HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specification are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Margin Calculations V. Discussion of the Issues 1. Weight Basis for Comparison Methodology 2. Home Market Rebates 3. Home Market Commission Expenses 4. Miscellaneous Adjustments Resulting from Sales Verification 5. Purchases of Hot-Rolled Coils (HRC) from an Affiliated Supplier 6. Interest Income Offsets 7. Other Cost Corrections at Verification 8. Level of Trade (LOT) 9. Constructed Export Price (CEP) Offset Claim 10. Affiliated Reseller Warehousing Expenses 11. Credit Expenses 12. U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses (ISE) 13. Scrap Offset VI. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-17314 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-502] Correction to Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews 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, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4735.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On July 7, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews; 81 FR 44260 (July 7, 2016) (Initiation Notice) in which the Department inadvertently initiated an antidumping duty administrative review of Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipes and Tubes from India. The Department did not receive a request for review covering the period May 1, 2015, through April 30, 2016, with respect to any companies, as such, we are not initiating a review with respect to this order. In addition, in the Initiation Notice the Department misspelt Overseas Distribution Services Inc. as Overseas Distrubution Services Inc.1 This notice serves as a correction to the Initiation Notice.

    1See Initiation Notice, 81 FR at 44266.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17205 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC), Request for Nominations AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, DOC.

    ACTION:

    Solicitation of Nominations for Membership to the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC).

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth a request for nominations to serve on the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC). The ETTAC was established pursuant to provisions under Title IV of the Jobs Through Trade Expansion Act, 22. U.S.C. 2151, and under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2. ETTAC was first chartered on May 31, 1994. ETTAC serves as an advisory body to the Environmental Trade Working Group of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC), reporting directly to the Secretary of Commerce in his/her capacity as Chairman of the TPCC. ETTAC advises on the development and administration of policies and programs to expand U.S. exports of environmental technologies, goods, and services.

    DATES:

    Nominations for membership must be received on or before September 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please send nominations by post, email, or fax to the attention of Maureen Hinman, Designated Federal Officer/ETTAC, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4053, Washington, DC 20230; phone 202-482-0627; email [email protected]; fax 202-482-5665. Electronic responses should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Maureen Hinman, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries (OEEI), International Trade Administration, Room 4053, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. (Phone: 202-482-0627; Fax: 202-482-5665; email: [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Nominations: The Secretary of Commerce invites nominations to ETTAC of U.S. citizens who will represent U.S. environmental goods and services companies that trade internationally, or trade associations and non-profit organizations whose members include U.S. companies that trade internationally. Companies must be at least 51 percent owned by U.S. persons. No member may represent a company that is majority-owned or controlled by a foreign government entity or foreign government entities.

    Membership in a committee operating under the Federal Advisory Committee Act must be balanced in terms of economic subsector, geographic location, and company size. Committee members serve in a representative capacity and must be able to generally represent the views and interests of a certain subsector of the U.S. environmental industry. Candidates should be senior executive-level representatives from environmental technology companies, trade associations, and non-profit organizations. Members of the ETTAC must have experience in the exportation of environmental goods and/or services, including:

    (1) Air pollution control and monitoring technologies;

    (2) Analytic devices and services;

    (3) Environmental engineering and consulting services;

    (4) Financial services relevant to the environmental sector;

    (5) Process and pollution prevention technologies;

    (7) Solid and hazardous waste management technologies; and/or

    (8) Water and wastewater treatment technologies.

    Nominees will be evaluated based upon their ability to carry out the goals of the ETTAC's enabling legislation. ETTAC's current Charter is available on the internet at http://www.environment.ita.doc.gov under the tab: Advisory Committee. Appointments will be made to create a balanced Committee in terms of subsector representation, product lines, firm size, geographic area, and other criteria. Nominees must be U.S. citizens.

    All appointments are made without regard to political affiliation. Members shall serve at the pleasure of the Secretary from the date of appointment to the Committee to the date on which the Committee's charter terminates (normally two years).

    If you are interested in becoming a member of ETTAC, please provide the following information (2 pages maximum):

    (1) Name;

    (2) Title;

    (3) Work phone; fax; and email address;

    (4) Organization name and address, including Web site address;

    (5) Short biography of nominee, including written certification of U.S. citizenship (this may take form of the statement “I am a citizen of the United States”) and a list of citizenships of foreign countries;

    (6) Brief description of the organization and its business activities, including;

    (7) Company size (number of employees and annual sales);

    (8) Exporting experience;

    (9) An affirmative statement that the nominee will be able to meet the expected time commitments of Committee work. Committee work includes (1) attending in-person committee meetings approximately four times per year, (2) undertaking additional work outside of full committee meetings including subcommittee conference calls or meetings as needed, and (3) drafting or commenting on proposed recommendations to be evaluated at Committee meetings.

    Please do not send company or trade association brochures or any other information.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Edward A. O'Malley, Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17204 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-489-824] Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From the Republic of Turkey: Final 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) determines that heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes (HWR pipes and tubes) from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 735(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. The final dumping margins of sales at LTFV are listed below in the “Final Determination” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Effective July 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ross Belliveau or Rebecca Trainor, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4952 and (202) 482-4007, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On March 1, 2016,1 the Department published the Preliminary Determination. A summary of the events that occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.2

    1See Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 10583 (March 1, 2016) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey,” dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers HWR pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix II. The Issues and 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 it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B-8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in March and April 2016, we conducted verification of the sales and cost information submitted by MMZ Boru Profil Uretim Sanayi Ve Tic. A.S. (MMZ) and Ozdemir Boru Profil San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. (Ozdemir) for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by MMZ and Ozdemir.3

    3 For discussion of our verification findings with respect to each company, see the following memoranda: Memorandum to the File from Rebecca Trainor and Aqmar Rahman, “Verification of the Sales Response of MMZ Onur Boru Profil Uretim Sanayi Ve Tic. A.S. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Turkey,” dated May 16, 2016; Memorandum to the File from Gary Urso and Stephanie Arthur, “Verification of the Cost Response of MMZ Onur Boru Profil Uretim Sanayi. Ve Tic. in the Antidumping Duty Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey,” dated May 6, 2016; Memorandum to the File from Ross Belliveau, “Verification of the Sales Response of Ozdemir Boru Profil San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Turkey,” dated May 17, 2016; and Memorandum to the File from Stephanie Arthur and Gary Urso, “Verification of the Cost Response of Ozdemir Boru Profil San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. in the Antidumping Duty Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from the Republic of Turkey,” dated May 6, 2016.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination and Use of Adverse Facts Available

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations for Ozdemir. In addition, we revised the margin for MMZ to reflect the application of facts available with an adverse inference, pursuant to sections 776(a)(1), 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D), and 776(b) of the Act. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. We also revised the all-others rate as explained below.

    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 margins, and margins determined 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 dumping margin for all other producers or exporters. We calculated a margin of zero percent for the only cooperative mandatory respondent in this investigation, Ozdemir, and applied a margin based entirely on adverse facts available (AFA) for MMZ. Therefore, pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, we determine that it is reasonable to calculate the all-others rate based on a simple average of Ozdemir's zero percent margin and MMZ's AFA margin.4

    4See e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From Malaysia, 69 FR 34128 (June 18, 2004).

    Final Determination

    The final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter/Manufacturer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margins
  • (percent)
  • Cash deposit rate
  • (percent)
  • MMZ Boru Profil Uretim Sanayi Ve Tic. A.S 35.66 35.66 Ozdemir Boru Profil San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti 0.00 0.00 All Others 17.83 17.73
    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 1, 2016, the date of publication of the preliminary determination of this investigation in the Federal Register. In the event an AD order is issued, because Ozdemir's weighted-average dumping margin is zero, Ozdemir would be excluded from the AD order.

    Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as shown above, adjusted where appropriate for export subsidies found in the final determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation. Consistent with our longstanding practice, where the product under investigation is also subject to a concurrent countervailing duty investigation, we instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the amount by which the NV exceeds the U.S. price, less the amount of the countervailing duty determined to constitute any export subsidies.5 Therefore, in the event that a countervailing duty order is issued and suspension of liquidation is resumed in the companion countervailing duty investigation on HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey, the Department will instruct CBP to require cash deposits adjusted by the amount of export subsidies, as appropriate. These adjustments are reflected in the final column of the rate chart, above.6 Until such suspension of liquidation is resumed in the companion countervailing duty investigation, and so long as suspension of liquidation continues under this antidumping duty investigation, the cash deposit rates for this antidumping duty investigation will be the rates identified in the weighted-average margin column in the rate chart, above.

    5See, e.g., Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Turkey: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 80 FR 61362 (October 13, 2015) and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Critical Circumstances Determination: Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From the Republic of Korea, 77 FR 17413 (March 26, 2012).

    6See Memorandum to the File from Rebecca Trainor, “Calculation of the All Others Rate,” dated concurrently with this notice.

    International Trade Comission (ITC) Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of HWR pipes and tubes from Turkey no later than 45 days after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APO)

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This determination and this notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a nominal wall thickness of not less than 4 mm. The merchandise includes, but is not limited to, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) A-500, grade B specifications, or comparable domestic or foreign specifications.

    Included products are those 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; and (3) none of the elements 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

    • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or

    • 1.25 percent of chromium, or

    • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or

    • 0.40 percent of lead, or

    • 2.0 percent of nickel, or

    • 0.30 percent of tungsten, 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.

    The subject merchandise is currently provided for in item 7306.61.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS 7306.61.3000. While the HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specification are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Margin Calculations V. Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference VI. Discussion of the Issues 1. Assignment of Margin Based on AFA to MMZ 2. Weight Basis for Comparison Methodology 3. Calculation of Duty Drawback Adjustment 4. Which DIIBs to Include in Calculating the Duty Drawback Adjustment 5. Offset of Duty Drawback Adjustment for Related Expenses 6. Application of the Duty Drawback Adjustment in the Margin Program 7. U.S. Date of Sale 8. Short-Term Interest Rate in the Home Market 9. Returns 10. Adjustments to Ozdemir's Cost of Manufacturing 11. Reallocation of Costs for Non-Prime Merchandise VII. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-17316 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Evaluation of State Coastal Management Programs AGENCY:

    Office for Coastal Management (OCM), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office for Coastal Management will hold a second public meeting to solicit comments on the performance evaluation of the Oregon Coastal Management Program.

    DATES:

    Oregon Coastal Management Program Evaluation: The public meeting will be held on September 7, 2016, and written comments must be received on or before September 9, 2016.

    For specific dates, times, and locations of the public meetings, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the program or reserve NOAA intends to evaluate by any of the following methods:

    Public Meeting and Oral Comments: A public meeting will be held in Portland, Oregon. For the specific location, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    Written Comments: Please direct written comments to Carrie Hall, Evaluator, Planning and Performance Measurement Program, Office for Coastal Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, 11th Floor, N/OCM1, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or email comments [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Carrie Hall, Evaluator, Planning and Performance Measurement Program, Office for Coastal Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, 11th Floor, N/OCM1, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or [email protected] Copies of the previous evaluation findings and related material (including past performance reports and notices prepared by NOAA's Office for Coastal Management) may be obtained upon written request by contacting the person identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Copies of the most recent evaluation findings and most recent progress report may also be downloaded or viewed on the Internet at http://coast.noaa.gov/czm/evaluations.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 312 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) requires NOAA to conduct periodic evaluations of federally approved state and territorial coastal programs. The process includes one or more public meetings, consideration of written public comments and consultations with interested Federal, state, and local agencies and members of the public. During the evaluation, NOAA will consider the extent to which the state has met the national objectives, adhered to the management program approved by the Secretary of Commerce, and adhered to the terms of financial assistance under the CZMA. When the evaluation is completed, NOAA's Office for Coastal Management will place a notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the Final Evaluation Findings.

    Specific information on the periodic evaluation of the state and territorial coastal program that is the subject of this notice is detailed below as follows:

    Oregon Coastal Management Program Evaluation

    You may participate or submit oral comments at the public meeting scheduled as follows:

    Date: September 7, 2016.

    Time: 5:00 p.m., local time.

    Location: 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd. 1st Floor Conference Room (Room #140), Portland, Oregon 97232.

    Written public comments must be received on or before September 9, 2016.

    (Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 11.419 Coastal Zone Management Program Administration) Dated: July 14, 2016. John King, Deputy Director, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17217 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE692 Determination of Overfishing or an Overfished Condition AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This action serves as a notice that NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), has found that the Atlantic bigeye tuna stock is subject to overfishing. In addition, Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish and Gulf of Mexico red snapper continue to be overfished. NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary, notifies the appropriate fishery management council (Council) whenever it determines that overfishing is occurring, a stock is in an overfished condition, a stock is approaching an overfished condition, or when a rebuilding plan has not resulted in adequate progress toward ending overfishing and rebuilding affected fish stocks.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Regina Spallone, (301) 427-8568.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to sections 304(e)(2) and (e)(7) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1854(e)(2) and (e)(7), and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.310(e)(2), NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary, must notify Councils whenever it determines that a stock or stock complex is overfished or approaching an overfished condition; or if an existing rebuilding plan has not ended overfishing or resulted in adequate rebuilding progress. NMFS also notifies Councils when it determines a stock or stock complex is subject to overfishing. Section 304(e)(2) further requires NMFS to publish these notices in the Federal Register.

    NMFS has determined that the Atlantic bigeye tuna stock is subject to overfishing, based on a 2015 stock assessment conducted by the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS), which is the scientific body of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). The 2015 assessment also resulted in a determination of “not overfished—rebuilding” under the applicable domestic status determination criteria. NMFS manages Atlantic bigeye tuna under its 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan and amendments, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA), 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., and ICCAT's “Multi-Annual Conservation and Management Program,” adopted in 2010.

    NMFS has also determined that Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish and Gulf of Mexico red snapper continue to be overfished. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council has been informed that they must rebuild these stocks.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17163 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Estuarine Research Reserve System AGENCY:

    Stewardship Division, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Approval for the Padilla Bay, Washington National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan revision.

    SUMMARY:

    Under 15 CFR 921.33(d), notice is hereby given that the Stewardship Division, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce approves the revised Management Plan for Padilla Bay, Washington National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan. In accordance with 15 CFR 921.33(c), the Padilla Bay Reserve revised its Management Plan, which will replace the plan previously approved in 2008.

    The revised Management Plan outlines the administrative structure; the research/monitoring, stewardship, education, and training programs of the Reserve; and the plans for future land acquisition and facility development to support Reserve operations.

    The Padilla Bay Reserve takes an integrated approach to management, linking research, education, coastal training, and stewardship functions. The Reserve has outlined how it will manage administration and its core program providing detailed actions that will enable it to accomplish specific goals and objectives. Since the last Management Plan, the Reserve has built out its core programs and monitoring infrastructure; conducted an educational market analysis and needs assessment to better meet teacher needs and underserved audiences; developed a Reserve Disaster Response Plan; and improved public access to the Reserve through construction of a new boat launch ramp and enhanced trails.

    On March 10, 2016, NOAA issued a notice of a thirty day public comment period for the Padilla Bay Reserve revised plan (81 FR 12716). Responses to the written and oral comments received, and an explanation of how comments were incorporated into the final revised plan, are available in Appendix G of the revised plan.

    Since the last management plan was approved in 2008, the Padilla Bay Reserve has acquired an additional 110 acres of tidelands inside the Reserve boundary. With the approval of this management plan, the Padilla Bay Reserve will increase their total acreage to 11,966. The change is attributable to the recent acquisitions of several parcels by the Reserve state agency, totaling 110 acres. All of the proposed additions are owned by the Washington Department of Ecology and will be managed for long-term protection and conservation value. These parcels have high ecological value and will enhance the Reserve's ability to provide increased opportunities for research, education, and stewardship. The revised Management Plan will serve as the guiding document for the expanded 11,966 acre Padilla Bay Reserve. View the Padilla Bay, Washington Reserve Management Plan at http://www.padillabay.gov/pdfs/ManagementPlan_2016-2020.pdf.

    The impacts of the revised management plan have not changed and the initial Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared at the time of designation is still valid. NOAA determined that the revision of the management plan will not have a significant effect on the human environment and therefore qualifies for a categorical exclusion under NOAA Administrative Order 216-6. An environmental assessment will not be prepared.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bree Turner at (206) 526-4641 or Erica Seiden at (301) 563-1172 of NOAA's National Ocean Service, Office for Coastal Management, Stewardship Division, 1305 East-West Highway, N/ORM5, 10th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. John King, Deputy Director, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17216 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE732 Threatened Species; Take of Steelhead AGENCY:

    National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt for one scientific enhancement permit application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that NMFS has received an application from Stillwater Sciences for one U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 10(a)1(A) scientific enhancement permit (permit 20085) to conduct invasive species removal from a southern California watershed (Chorro Creek). Proposed activities within the requested permit are expected to affect the threatened Southern Central California Coast (SCCC) Distinct Population Segment of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). The public is hereby notified that the application for Permit 20085 is available for review and comment before NMFS either approves or disapproves the application.

    DATES:

    Written comments on the permit application must be received at the appropriate address, email mailbox, or fax number (see ADDRESSES) on or before August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments on the permit application should be submitted by one of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]

    Mail: Matt McGoogan, NMFS, California Coastal Area Office, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, California 90802.

    Fax (562) 980-4027.

    The permit application is available for review, by appointment, at the foregoing address or online at the Authorizations and Permits for Protected Species Web site: https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov/preview/preview_open_for_comment.cfm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matt McGoogan (phone: 562-980-4026 or email: [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Species Covered in This Notice: Threatened South Central California Coast Distinct Population Segment of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss).

    Scientific research and enhancement permits are issued in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and regulations governing listed fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR parts 222-227). NMFS issues permits based on findings that such permits (1) are applied for in good faith, (2) would not operate to the disadvantage of the listed species which are the subject of the permits, and (3) are consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. Authority to take listed species is subject to conditions set forth in the permits.

    This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(c) of the ESA. NMFS will evaluate the application, associated documents, and any comment submitted to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the ESA and Federal regulations. The final permit decisions will not be made until after the end of the 30-day comment period and consideration of any comment submitted therein. NMFS will publish notice of its final action in the Federal Register.

    Those individuals requesting a hearing on the application listed in this notice should provide the specific reasons why a hearing on the application would be appropriate (see ADDRESSES). Such a hearing is held at the discretion of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA. All statements and opinions contained in the permit action summary are those of the applicant and do not necessarily reflect the views of NMFS.

    Permit Application Received Permit 20085

    Stillwater Sciences (environmental consulting firm) has applied for a section 10(a)1(A) scientific enhancement permit (permit 20085) to conduct an invasive species management effort involving the removal of Sacramento pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus grandis) from the Chorro Creek watershed in San Luis Obispo County, California. The primary objectives of this effort involve: (1) Determining the distribution, abundance, size, and age structures of both pikeminnow and SCCC steelhead; (2) suppressing and eliminating pikeminnow from the watershed; (3) developing a plan for long-term pikeminnow management in the watershed; and (4) documenting changes in SCCC steelhead abundance and distribution in response to pikeminnow removal. Proposed enhancement activities include: (1) Conducting snorkel surveys to assess abundance and distribution of pikeminnow and SCCC steelhead; (2) using backpack electrofishing equipment, seine-nets, hook-and-line sampling, and spearfishing to capture pikeminnow; (3) anesthetizing any juvenile steelhead captured during electrofishing and seining activities prior to measuring weight and length; (4) returning any captured steelhead to Chorro Creek; and (5) humanely euthanizing and disposing of pikeminnow.

    Field activities for the proposed enhancement effort will occur during the summer and fall over five years between August 1, 2016, and December 2020. The annual take Stillwater Sciences is requesting for this effort is as follows: (1) Non-lethal capture and release of up to 1,500 juvenile steelhead while electrofishing, (2) non-lethal capture and release of up to 150 juvenile steelhead while seining, (3) non-lethal capture and release up to 5 juvenile steelhead while hook-and-line fishing, and (4) non-lethal observation of up to 2000 juvenile and 10 adult steelhead during instream snorkel surveys. The potential annual unintentional lethal take resulting from the proposed enhancement activities is up to 33 juvenile steelhead. Overall, no intentional lethal take of steelhead is proposed or expected as a result of these enhancement activities.

    The proposed scientific enhancement effort is expected to support steelhead recovery in the Chorro Creek watershed and is consistent with recommendations and objectives outlined in NMFS' South Central California Steelhead Recovery Plan. See the application for Permit 20085 for more details on the scientific enhancement proposal and related methodology.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Angela Somma, Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17214 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Order Extending the Designation of the Provider of Legal Entity Identifiers To Be Used in Recordkeeping and Swap Data Reporting Pursuant to the Commission's Regulations AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Order.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) has issued an order (“Order”) to extend the Commission's designation of the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”) and Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (“SWIFT”) joint venture (“DTCC-SWIFT”) as the provider of legal entity identifiers, or “LEIs,” pursuant to applicable provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) and the Commission's regulations. DTCC-SWIFT's designation was originally made by Commission order issued on July 23, 2012, for a term of two years. The Commission's order of July 23, 2012 was amended on June 7, 2013, an Amended and Restated Order issued on July 22, 2014 to extend DTCC-SWIFT's designation for an additional one year, and an Order was issued on July 17, 2015 to further extend DTCC-SWIFT's designation for an additional one year. This Order supersedes the Commission's Order issued on July 17, 2015 and further extends DTCC-SWIFT's designation for an additional one year while the transition to a fully operational global LEI system continues. This Order permits registered entities and swap counterparties subject to the Commission's jurisdiction to comply with the legal entity identifier requirements of parts 45 and 46 of the Commission's regulations by using identifiers issued by DTCC-SWIFT, or any other pre-Local Operating Unit (“pre-LOU”) that has been endorsed by the Regulatory Oversight Committee (“ROC”) of the global LEI system as being globally acceptable and as issuing globally acceptable legal entity identifiers.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Srinivas Bangarbale, Chief Data Officer, Office of Data and Technology, (202) 418-5315, [email protected], or Richard Mo, Attorney Advisor, Division of Market Oversight, (202) 418-7637, [email protected], Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Background A. Legal Entity Identifiers: CEA Section 21(b) and § 45.6 of the Commission's Regulations B. Order of July 17, 2015 II. Further Extension of Designation of the DTCC-SWIFT Utility III. Order I. Background A. Legal Entity Identifiers: CEA Section 21(b) and § 45.6 of the Commission's Regulations

    Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) 1 amended the CEA 2 to establish a comprehensive new regulatory framework for swaps. Amendments to the CEA included the addition of provisions requiring the retention, and the reporting to Commission-registered swap data repositories (“SDRs”), of data regarding swap transactions, in order to enhance transparency, promote standardization and reduce systemic risk.3 Pursuant to these added provisions, the Commission added to its regulations part 45,4 which sets forth recordkeeping rules, and rules for the reporting of swap transaction data to a registered SDR; and part 46,5 which sets forth recordkeeping and swap data reporting rules for historical swaps.

    1 Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).

    2 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.

    3See, e.g., the following sections added by the Dodd-Frank Act: Section 2(a)(13)(G) of the CEA, which requires all swaps, whether cleared or uncleared, to be reported to a registered SDR; new Section 21(b) of the CEA, which directs the Commission to prescribe standards for swap data reporting and attendant recordkeeping; and new Sections 4r and 2(h)(5) of the CEA, which, among other things, establish reporting requirements for swaps in effect as of the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act (“pre-enactment swaps”), as well as swaps in effect after such enactment but prior to the effective date for compliance with the Commission's final recordkeeping and swap data reporting rules (“transition swaps” and, collectively with pre-enactments swaps, “historical swaps”).

    4 Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, 77 FR 2136 (January 13, 2012).

    5 Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements: Pre-Enactment and Transition Swaps, 77 FR 35200 (June 12, 2012).

    Under the authority granted by section 21(b) of the CEA, which, among other things, directs the Commission to prescribe standards that specify the data elements for each swap that shall be collected and maintained by a registered SDR,6 the Commission, in its part 45 regulations, prescribed the use of a legal entity identifier, or “LEI,” in required recordkeeping and swap data reporting. Section 45.6 provides that each counterparty to any swap subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission shall be identified in all recordkeeping and all swap data reporting pursuant to part 45 by means of a single legal entity identifier as specified in that section.7 In adopting this requirement, the Commission highlighted the LEI as a crucial regulatory tool to facilitate data aggregation by regulators, which furthers, among other goals, the systemic risk mitigation and market manipulation prevention purposes of the Dodd-Frank Act.8

    6 CEA Section 21(b).

    7 77 FR at 2204. In addition, in part 46 of the Commission's regulations, § 46.4 provides that each counterparty to a historical swap in existence on or after April 25, 2011, for which an initial data report is required pursuant to part 46, must obtain a legal entity identifier, which must be used for purposes of recordkeeping and swap data reporting under part 46 as prescribed in § 46.4. 77 FR at 35228-9.

    8See 77 FR at 2138.

    Section 45.6 sets forth requirements that the legal entity identifier to be used to comply with the Commission's recordkeeping and swap data reporting rules must meet, including satisfaction of specified technical and governance principles. In adopting these requirements, the Commission took into consideration work that had commenced at the international level to establish a global LEI system.9 The Commission expressed its agreement that “optimum effectiveness of [the LEI] as a tool for achieving the systemic risk mitigation, transparency and market protection goals of the Dodd-Frank Act—goals shared by financial regulators world-wide—would come from creation of [an LEI] . . . that is capable of becoming the single international standard for unique identification of legal entities across the world financial sector.” 10 The Commission cited its involvement in an international initiative, coordinated by the Financial Stability Board (“FSB”),11 to establish standards, and a governance framework, for a global LEI system—including the Commission's participation in an ad hoc, expert group of regulatory authorities convened by the FSB to develop recommendations regarding the implementation of such a system.12

    9See 77 FR at 2163.

    10Id.

    11 The FSB is an international body that develops and promotes the implementation of effective regulatory, supervisory and other policies in the interest of financial stability. Established in 2009 as a successor to the Financial Stability Forum, the FSB coordinates the work of national financial authorities, international standards setting bodies and international financial institutions. Its membership includes G-20 members, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The FSB Secretariat is located in Basel, Switzerland. The FSB's Web site can be accessed at http://www.financialstabilityboard.org.

    12See 77 FR at 2162.

    B. Order of July 17, 2015

    The Commission's July 23, 2012 order was amended on June 7, 2013, and the Commission issued an Amended and Restated Order on July 22, 2014 to extend its designation of the DTCC-SWIFT utility while the terms of transition to a fully operational global LEI system were finalized and implemented. In the Amended and Restated Order, the Commission aligned the legal entity identifier terminology used therein with the terminology that is currently in use at the international level, and removed certain provisions that, given the current state of implementation of the global LEI system, were no longer applicable. On July 17, 2015 the Commission issued an Order further extending its designation of the DTCC-SWIFT utility for an additional year.

    In the preamble to the Amended and Restated Order, the Commission noted that the process to establish the global LEI system continued to move forward since the issuance of the Amendment on June 7, 2013, noting various implementation milestones,13 and that while progress towards the establishment of the global LEI system continued, the system would not be fully operational before the expiration of DTCC-SWIFT's two-year term of designation under the July 23, 2012 Order. The Commission believed it was appropriate, in order to further the smooth transition to a fully operational global LEI system, to extend its designation of the DTCC-SWIFT utility, given the significant progress made in establishing the global LEI system—including the ROC's endorsement of the DTCC-SWIFT utility as a globally acceptable pre-LOU.

    13 In the second half of 2013, the ROC adopted endorsement standards for pre-LOUs and the identifiers issued by them, and endorsed sixteen member-sponsored pre-LOUs—including DTCC-SWIFT—as globally acceptable. The Global LEI Foundation that will provide the Central Operating Unit (“COU”), managing the central operations of the global LEI system, was formally established under Swiss law. The ROC and the Global LEI Foundation are developing a framework for the transition of full operational management of the global LEI system to the COU, with supervisory oversight by the ROC in the public interest.

    II. Further Extension of Designation of the DTCC-SWIFT Utility

    Progress towards the establishment of the global LEI system continues. The Global LEI Foundation (“GLEIF”) is incorporated and has finalized the Master Agreement with pre-LOUs, including DTCC-SWIFT's Global Markets Entity Identifier (“GMEI”) utility. The ROC continues, within its authority, to facilitate that process. The finalization of the Master Agreement was the result of a deliberative process that included several multi-party discussions.14 As pre-LOUs sign the Master Agreement and go through the process to become accredited, they will become LOUs and will be under the direct operational oversight of the GLEIF, which in turn will be under the oversight of the ROC. While it is expected that DTCC-SWIFT will be accredited in the near term, given the international and deliberative nature of the process, the Commission finds it appropriate to provide sufficient time for the process to conclude successfully and smoothly.

    14 In its 2015 Annual Report, the GLEIF reported certain milestones regarding the implementation of the Master Agreement, including the arrival of an agreed framework for business operations between the GLEIF and the LOUs. See GLEIF 2015 Annual Report, available at https://www.gleif.org/content/1-about/5-governance/10-annual-report/2016-05-03_gleif_2015_annual_report_final.pdf.

    Accordingly, the Commission is issuing this Order, to further extend the Commission's designation of the DTCC-SWIFT utility while the transition to a fully operational global LEI system is implemented. The Commission is not otherwise modifying the terms or conditions found in the Amended and Restated Order.

    III. Order

    It is ordered, pursuant to Section 21(b) of the CEA and § 45.6 of the Commission's regulations that:

    1. Subject to the conditions and terms below, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”) and Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (“SWIFT”) joint venture (“DTCC-SWIFT”) is designated as the provider of legal entity identifiers (“LEIs”), to be used in recordkeeping and swap data reporting pursuant to parts 45 and 46 of the Commission's regulations.

    a. This designation is conditioned on DTCC-SWIFT's continuing compliance, for as long as it is authorized to provide LEIs by this order or any future order of the Commission, with all of the legal entity identifier requirements of part 45 of the Commission's regulations, and any related requirements as set forth in this order or in the requirements document provided to DTCC-SWIFT during the determination and designation process; including, without limitation, the requirement to be subject to supervision by a governance structure that includes the Commission and other financial regulators in any jurisdiction requiring use of legal entity identifiers pursuant to applicable law, for the purpose of ensuring that issuance and maintenance of LEIs and of associated reference data adheres on an ongoing basis to the Commission's requirements set forth in part 45.

    b. This designation is further conditioned on the requirement that, subject to applicable confidentiality laws and other applicable law, (1) DTCC-SWIFT shall make public all LEIs and associated reference data, utility operations, and identity validation processes, and (2) if DTCC-SWIFT fails to satisfy the conditions of this designation, or upon any termination of this designation pursuant to Section 2(c)(2) below, DTCC-SWIFT shall, as instructed by the Commission, pass to a successor LEI utility specified by the Commission, or to the global LEI system, free of charge, all LEIs issued by DTCC-SWIFT and associated reference data and all LEI intellectual property rights.

    c. This designation is made for a limited term, expiring on July 24, 2017 and may be terminated by the Commission on three months' notice in connection with (1) the establishment of the global LEI system, or (2) DTCC-SWIFT's exit from the global LEI system.

    2. To comply with the legal entity identifier requirements of parts 45 and 46 of the Commission's regulations:

    a. Registered entities and swap counterparties subject to the Commission's jurisdiction may use LEIs provided by DTCC-SWIFT, any other pre-Local Operating Unit (“pre-LOU”) endorsed by the Regulatory Oversight Committee of the global LEI system (“ROC”) as globally acceptable and as issuing globally acceptable LEIs, or any Local Operating Unit (“LOU”) accredited by the Global LEI Foundation (“GLEIF”). The list of pre-LOUs that are currently approved by the ROC as globally acceptable and that are issuing globally acceptable LEIs, including the Web site address via which registered entities and swap counterparties may contact each such pre-LOU, is available at http://www.leiroc.org/publications/gls/lou_20131003_2.pdf. The list of accredited LOUs can be found on the GLEIF Web site at http://www.gleif.org.

    b. As provided in § 45.6(b)(1) of the Commission's regulations, registered entities and swap counterparties subject to the Commission's jurisdiction shall be identified in all swap recordkeeping and swap data reporting by a single LEI.

    3. This Order supersedes the Commission's Order issued on July 17, 2015.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 18, 2016, by the Commission. Robert N. Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission. Appendix to Order Extending the Designation of the Provider of Legal Entity Identifiers To Be Used in Recordkeeping and Swap Data Reporting Pursuant to the Commission's Regulations—Commission Voting Summary

    On this matter, Chairman Massad and Commissioners Bowen and Giancarlo voted in the affirmative. No Commissioner voted in the negative.

    [FR Doc. 2016-17229 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Revised Collection, Comment Request: Amendments To Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Final Rule AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed amendment to an existing collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including any renewal or revision of such collection, and to allow 60 days for public comment. The Commission recently adopted a final rule regarding the reporting of cleared swap transactions (the “Cleared Swap Reporting Release”), which will require entities reporting swaps to report certain additional data elements. This Cleared Swap Reporting Release will also require registered derivatives clearing organizations (“DCOs”) to terminate “original swaps” (as defined in that final rule), which may require DCOs to connect to multiple registered swap data repositories (“SDRs”). This notice solicits comments on the proposed revisions to existing PRA collections implicated by the requirements of the Cleared Swap Reporting Release.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before September 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, regarding the burden estimated or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden. Please refer to “Cleared Swap Reporting Release” in any correspondence. Comments, identified by “OMB Collection Number 3038-0096,” may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    • The Agency's Web site, at http://comments.cftc.gov/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.

    Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as Mail above.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Please submit your comments using only one method.

    All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to http://www.cftc.gov. If you wish the Commission to consider information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted according to the procedures established in § 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.1

    1 17 CFR 145.9.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Ridenour, Special Counsel, (202) 418-5438, [email protected], or Owen Kopon, Attorney-Advisor, (202) 418-5360, [email protected], Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA, Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of Information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3 and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. To comply with this requirement, the CFTC is publishing the notice of the proposed collection of information listed below.

    1. Background a. Statutory and Regulatory History

    To enhance transparency, promote standardization, and reduce systemic risk, section 727 of the Dodd-Frank Act 2 added to the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) section 2(a)(13)(G),3 which requires all swaps, whether cleared or uncleared, to be reported to SDRs.4 SDRs are registered entities created by section 728 of the Dodd-Frank Act to collect and maintain data related to swap transactions as prescribed by the Commission, and to make such data available to the Commission and other regulators. Section 21(b) of the CEA,5 added by section 728 of the Dodd-Frank Act, directs the Commission to prescribe standards for swap data recordkeeping and reporting, which are to apply to both registered entities and counterparties involved with swaps,6 and which are to be comparable to standards for clearing organizations in connection with their clearing of swaps.7

    2See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). The text of the Dodd-Frank Act may be accessed at http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/DoddFrankAct/index.htm.

    3 7 U.S.C. 2(a)(13)(G).

    4See also 7 U.S.C. 1a(40)(E), 1a(48).

    5 7 U.S.C. 24a(b).

    6 7 U.S.C. 24a(b)(1)(A).

    7 7 U.S.C. 24a(b)(3).

    On December 20, 2011, the Commission adopted part 45 of the Commission's regulations (“Final Part 45 Rulemaking”).8 Part 45 implements the requirements of section 21 of the CEA by setting forth the manner and content of reporting to SDRs, and requires electronic reporting both when a swap is initially executed, referred to as “creation” data,9 and over the course of the swap's existence, referred to as “continuation” data.10 Additionally, part 45 sets forth varying reporting timeframes depending on the type of reporting, counterparty, execution, or product.11

    8See Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, Final Rule, 77 FR 2136 (Jan. 13, 2012).

    9See 17 CFR 45.1 (defining “required swap creation data” as all primary economic terms data for a swap in the swap asset class in question, and all confirmation data for the swap.). “Primary economic terms data” is defined as all of the data elements necessary to fully report all of the primary economic terms of a swap in the swap asset class of the swap in question, while “confirmation data” is defined as all of the terms of a swap matched and agreed upon by the counterparties in confirming the swap. Id. For cleared swaps, confirmation data also includes the internal identifiers assigned by the automated systems of the DCO to the two transactions resulting from novation to the clearing house. Id. See also 17 CFR 45.3.

    10See 17 CFR 45.1 (defining “required swap continuation data” as all of the data elements that must be reported during the existence of a swap to ensure that all data concerning the swap in the swap data repository remains current and accurate, and includes all changes to the primary economic terms of the swap occurring during the existence of the swap”). See also 17 CFR 45.4.

    11See 17 CFR 45.3(a), 45.3(b), 45.3(c), and 45.3(d).

    As part of the Commission's ongoing efforts to improve swap transaction data quality and to improve the Commission's ability to utilize the data for regulatory purposes, Commission staff has continued to evaluate issues in connection with reporting under part 45, including those related to cleared swaps in particular. To this end, the Commission published a request for comment on a variety of swap data reporting and recordkeeping provisions to help determine how such provisions were being applied, and to determine whether or what clarifications or enhancements to these provisions may be appropriate (the “IDWG Request for Comment”).12 One of the subjects of the IDWG Request for Comment was the reporting of cleared swaps, and, in particular, the manner in which the swap data reporting rules should address cleared swaps.13 After considering the comments submitted in response to the IDWG Request for Comment relating to the reporting of cleared swaps,14 the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “NPRM”) in which it proposed changes to part 45 as they relate to the reporting of cleared swaps transactions.15 In response to the NPRM, the Commission received 17 comments letters addressing its proposed revisions to part 45.16

    12See Review of Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, Request for Comment, 79 FR 16689 (Mar. 26, 2014). The IDWG Request for Comment was referred to simply as the “Request for Comment” in the NPRM.

    13 79 FR 16689, 16694.

    14 The comment file for responses to the IDWG Request for Comment is available at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1484. Commenters responding to the IDWG Request for Comment included: The American Gas Association, May 27, 2014; American Petroleum Institute, May 27, 2014; Americans for Financial Reform, May 27, 2014 (“AFR”); Australian Bankers' Association, May 27, 2014 (“ABA”); Better Markets, Inc., May 27, 2014, (“Better Markets”); B&F Capital Markets, Inc., May 27, 2014; CME Group, May 27, 2014 (“CME”); Coalition for Derivatives End-Users, May 27, 2014 (“CDEU”); Coalition of Physical Energy Companies, May 27, 2014; Commercial Energy Working Group, May 27, 2014 (“CEWG”); Commodity Markets Council, May 27, 2014 (“CMC”); The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation, May 27, 2014 (“DTCC”); EDF Trading North America, LLC, May 27, 2014; Edison Electric Institute, May 27, 2014 (“EEI”); Financial InterGroup Holdings Ltd, May 27, 2014; Financial Services Roundtable (“FSR”), May 27, 2014; Fix Trading Community, May 27, 2014; The Global Foreign Exchange Division of the Global Financial Markets Association, May 27, 2014 (“GFMA”); HSBC, May 27, 2014; Interactive Data Corporation, May 27, 2014; ICE Trade Vault, LLC, May 27, 2014 (“ITV”); International Energy Credit Association, May 27, 2014; International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc., May 23, 2014 (“ISDA”); Japanese Bankers Association, May 27, 2014 (“JBA”); Just Energy Group Inc., May 27, 2014; LCH.Clearnet Group Limited, May 29, 2014 (“LCH”); Managed Funds Association, May 27, 2014 (“MFA”); Markit, May 27, 2014; Natural Gas Supply Association, May 27, 2014 (“NGSA”); NFP Electric Associations (National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, American Public Power Association, and Large Public Power Council), May 27, 2014 (“NFPEA”); OTC Clearing Hong Kong Limited, May 27, 2014 (“OTC Hong Kong”); Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Asset Management Group, May 27, 2014 (“SIFMA”); SWIFT, May 27, 2014; Swiss Re, May 27, 2014; Thomson Reuters (SEF) LLC, May 27, 2014 (“TR SEF”); and TriOptima, May 27, 2014. Discussions of comments on reporting of cleared swaps received in response to the IDWG Request for Comment are included in the preamble to the NPRM.

    15See Amendments to Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 80 FR 52544 (Aug. 31, 2015).

    16 The comment file for responses to the NPRM is available at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1614. Commenters to the NPRM included: Better Markets, October 30, 2015; CME, October 30, 2015; COPE, October 30, 2015; CEWG, October 30, 2015; CMC, October 30, 2015; DTCC, October 30, 2015; EEI/EPSA, October 30, 2015; Eurex Clearing AG (“Eurex”); FSR, October 30, 2015; ITV, October 30, 2015; ISDA, October 30, 2015; JBA, October 30, 2015; LCH, October 30, 2015; MFA and Alternative Investment Management Association (“AIMA”), October 30, 2015; Markit, October 30, 2015; and North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc., October 30, 2015 (“Nadex”).

    On June 27, 2016, the Commission adopted the Cleared Swap Reporting Release,17 which amended certain provisions of existing part 45 as they relate to the reporting of cleared swap transactions. In the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission noted that the changes being adopted would require some revisions to the existing information collection covering obligations on reporting entities and SDRs found in part 45.18

    17See Amendments to Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Final Rule, 81 FR 41736 (June 27, 2016).

    18See Cleared Swap Reporting Release, 81 FR, at 41758.

    b. Existing PRA Collection Relating to Part 45 Reporting

    The OMB control number for the information collection associated with part 45 swaps reporting is 3038-0096. The Commission proposes to amend existing collection 3038-0096 to account for adjustments to reporting entities' swaps data reporting systems necessitated by the Cleared Swap Reporting Release. Information collection 3038-0096 19 includes an estimate of burden hours and costs associated with various requirements of part 45 swaps reporting and recordkeeping,20 including the reporting of creation data under § 45.3 and continuation data under § 45.4,21 the maintenance of an internal order management system (“OMS”), and personnel needed to maintain a compliance program in support of an OMS system.

    19 The Commission issued a notice of intent to renew information collection 3038-0096 on August 7, 2015. See Notice of Intent to Renew Collection 3038-0096, 80 FR 47477 (Aug. 7, 2015). The Commission received no comments on this notice of intent to renew. The comment file is available at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1608. The Office of Management and Budget approved without change the renewal of this information collection on December 21, 2015.

    20 Supporting documentation for the renewal of information collection 3038-0096 is available at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201508-3038-002.

    21 “Creation data” under § 45.3 includes all primary economic terms (“PET”) data fields listed in appendix 1 to part 45, as well as all “confirmation data,” which includes all terms of the swap matched and agreed upon by the parties. “Continuation data” reporting under § 45.4 requires a reporting entity to ensure that all data on a swap is kept current and accurate, including any changes to primary economic terms.

    As a result of changes to §§ 45.3 and 45.4 and to the PET fields identified in appendix A to part 45 in the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission proposes to revise collection 3038-0096. The proposed revision to the collection will add an estimate for the burden associated (a) with changing reporting systems to comply with changes to the required data to be reported under § 45.3 and § 45.4, and (b) with requirements that DCOs potentially connect to all registered SDRs. In response to the NPRM,22 the Commission received several comments on the costs associated with part 45 swaps reporting that could implicate PRA burdens, summarized below.

    22See NPRM, 80 FR 52544 (Aug. 31, 2015).

    2. PRA Burden and Benefits Associated With Cleared Swap Reporting Release  23

    23 While not connected to the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission also proposes to reduce the number of SDRs in collection 3038-0096 from 15 to 4. When submitting the original OMB information collection for part 45 reporting, the Commission had assumed that up to 15 entities would register as SDRs. Currently, there are four SDRs provisionally registered with the Commission. Three other entities had submitted SDR applications. Two withdrew applications in 2012 and 2014. One (GTR) withdrew its application and resubmitted under the corporate entity DTCC Data Repository (US) LLC, which currently operates as a provisionally registered SDR. As the Commission has not received any SDR applications since 2012, the Commission believes that four is a reasonable number of SDRs for calculating PRA burdens.

    a. Additional and Amended PET fields

    Regarding the addition of PET fields applicable to all swaps, ISDA commented that the PET field for “clearing exception or exemption type” would be “very challenging and costly” to implement.24 However, neither ISDA nor any other commenter provided information quantifying the cost to update reporting systems to account for the modified and additional PET fields. As discussed more extensively in Section III.C.9 of the NPRM,25 the information required to be reported in the modified “clearing exception or exemption type” is also already in the possession of the reporting entity; changes to reporting systems required to report this field would involve adding a known piece of information to the message reported to an SDR.

    24 ISDA Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 9.

    25See Cleared Swap Reporting Release, 81 FR, at 41767.

    Regarding new PET fields for clearing swaps, Eurex commented that DCOs would need to collect data from the original swap counterparties or trading venue to be able to report these fields.26 However, as the Commission noted in the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the information required to report these PET fields is either generated by the DCO itself (such as clearing swap unique swap identifier (“USI”), clearing member LEI, clearing member internal identifier, house/customer account flag, and receipt and clearing timestamps) or should be included in the clearing member's submission of a swap to the DCO for clearing (such as the original swap USI and original swap SDR).

    26See Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 5.

    While the Commission believes that reporting entities already possess information required to report the added and amended PET fields, the Commission proposes to amend collection 3038-0096 to account for changes that reporting entities must make to their reporting systems to comply with these new and amended fields. The Commission estimates that each reporting entity—including DCOs, swap execution facilities (“SEFs”), designated contract markets (“DCMs”), swap dealers (“SDs”), major swap participants (“MSPs”), and non-SD/MSPs with reporting obligations—would incur a burden of 200 hours to bring reporting systems in compliance with the added and amendment PET fields. The Commission also believes that SDRs would incur a burden of 200 hours to update their swap data acceptance systems to account for the added and amended PET fields. However, the Commission also anticipates that reporting entities and SDRs will need to make periodic changes to reporting systems to account for future changes to reporting obligations under part 45 and changes to reporting brought about by the evolution of products offered in the swaps market. Therefore, the Commission proposes revising collection 3038-0096 to include a recurring burden of 200 hours to cover such periodic changes. The recurring 200 burden hours would cover changes to PET fields under the Cleared Swap Reporting Release and any future changes described above. The Commission does not believe that reporting entities or SDRs would need to incur additional costs aside from these burden hours to bring reporting systems into compliance.

    b. DCO Termination of Original Swaps

    Regarding the requirement that DCOs terminate original swaps once the DCO has accepted them for clearing, some commenters raised concerns that requiring DCOs to report continuation data for original swaps to the SDR to which the original swap was reported could increase costs for DCOs as they may need to connect to SDRs to which they do not currently have a connection.27 The Commission understands that DCOs already may report terminations to the original SDR, and to the extent these reporting systems are already implemented the new rules will not introduce additional costs for these DCOs. However, the Commission recognizes that requiring DCOs to potentially connect to more than one SDR in order to report continuation data for original swaps may require an update to the existing information collection 3038-0096.

    27See e.g., Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 5, 9; LedgerX Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 2; LCH Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 3. The Commission notes that another commenter stated that “DCOs have already made connections with the major CFTC-registered SDRs.” (DTCC Oct. 30, 2015, Letter at 5).

    In response to the NPRM, the Commission received three comments concerning the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments to § 45.4 in two different contexts. LCH and Eurex expressed concerns with the infrastructure required to have the DCO connected to every SDR chosen by the SD/MSP for which the DCO clears and report terminations according to the technical requirements of each SDR.28 Eurex specifically indicated that the cost of implementing the required infrastructure would have significant time and financial costs. In commenting on the IDWG Request for Comment, one foreign central counterparty now acting pursuant to a DCO Exemptive Order cited a specific cost for connecting to a new SDR as involving at least 150 working days.29 Assuming an 8-hour work day, this would be the equivalent of 1,200 hours for a connection to an SDR.

    28See Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 4-5; LCH Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 3.

    29See OTC Hong Kong May 27, 2014 Letter, at 2-3 (contending that setup, application development, and testing to interface with each SDR is likely to require at least 150 man-days, and that a more cost-effective framework would be to require the original counterparty to report termination of the alpha once it receives confirmation that the alpha has been accepted for clearing, and that the original counterparty would already have in place technical and operational interfaces with the SDR of its choice. The commenter also contended that the burden on DCOs of additional reporting outweighs the benefits to the CFTC).

    The Commission estimates the cost and hours burden associated with connecting DCOs to all SDRs according to the OTC Hong Kong comment letter. Considering that there are only four registered SDRs, each DCO could at most be required to connect to four SDRs. However, the number of connections likely would be less than four as not every DCO clears swaps for every asset class, and not every SDR accepts data for every asset class. Further, the number of connections could be limited to the extent that the DCO clears swaps for clearing members that choose to report original swaps to a limited number of SDRs. Additionally, the Commission assumes economies of scale when DCOs connect to more than one SDR. While connections to different SDRs could present different technological challenges, the DCO would be able to use the same programmers, analysts, and other personnel when implementing connections to all required SDRs. Therefore, the Commission estimates a one-time hours burden of 3,000 hours per DCO to comply with the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, beyond the existing burden in collection 3038-0096.

    The Commission also intends to amend collection 3038-0096 to include recurring costs for DCOs associated with SDR connections. Existing collection 3038-0070 (relating to real-time reporting) estimates an annual cost of $100,000 to maintain an SDR connection for SEFs, DCMs, SDs, MSPs, and non-SD/MSP reporting entities, but does not specifically cover DCOs. The Commission proposes to include the same recurring SDR connectivity burdens for DCOs within collection 3038-0096, scaled to account for connections to multiple SDRs and resulting economies of scale. The Commission estimates that DCOs would incur annual costs of $250,000 to maintain connections to multiple SDRs, to allow the DCO to terminate all original swaps accepted for clearing.

    3. Burden Statement

    The Commission estimates the average increase in the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Additional and amended PET fields:

    Affected entities Burden type SDRs, SEFs, DCMs, DCOs, SD/MSPs, non-SD/MSP reporting entities Burden per
  • respondent
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Total burden
    One-time hours burden 0 hours 449 0 hours. One-time costs $0 449 $0. Recurring hours burden 200 hours 449 89,900 hours. Recurring costs $0 449 $0.

    Termination of original swaps:

    Affected entities Burden type DCOs Burden per
  • respondent
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Total burden
    One-time hours burden 3,000 hours 12 36,000 hours. One-time costs $0 12 $0. Recurring hours burden 0 hours 12 0 hours. Recurring costs $250,000 12 $3,000,000.
    4. Request for Comment

    The NPRM on cleared swap reporting requested comments on the burden associated with the added and amended PET fields, and on DCOs reporting original swap terminations.30 Those comments may be found on the Commission's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov, at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1614. All comments received in response to the NPRM will be considered, along with the comments received in response to this notice, in determining the Commission's submission to OMB regarding revisions to existing information collections to account for changes adopted in the Cleared Swap Reporting Release.

    30See 77 FR 25320 at 25328.

    The Commission invites comments on:

    • Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have a practical use;

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

    • Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Ways to minimize the burden of 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.

    Specifically, the Commission invites comments on the following questions:

    1. The Commission has proposed including a 200 hour recurring burden in the collection to account for periodic changes to reporting systems brought about by changes to PET terms (such as those under the Cleared Swap Reporting Release) as well as other periodic changes. Does this estimate accurately estimate the burden associated with the periodic updating of reporting systems to ensure continued compliance with part 45 reporting obligations?

    2. Given that not every DCO clears swaps in every asset class, and that not every SDR accepts data for every asset class, to how many SDRs must DCOs typically connect to properly report original swap terminations?

    3. Can DCOs take advantage of economies of scale in terms of personnel and/or equipment when connecting to more than one SDR?

    4. Given that original swap termination messages under revised § 45.4 would need to be submitted daily—not, as with creation data, as soon as technologically practicable—are DCOs able to submit original swap terminations through methods less expensive than full connections to SDRs that are used for reporting creation data and real-time reporting? If so, what are the costs associated with such connections?

    5. In the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission encouraged DCOs and SDRs to standardize original swap termination messages. Are DCOs and SDRs working towards such a standardized message? What cost savings could be associated with such standardized messages?

    6. Would a standardized termination message allow DCOs to use connection methods less expensive than full connections to SDRs that are used for reporting creation data and real-time reporting?

    7. As noted in footnote 23, the Commission is proposing to reduce the number of SDRs used for PRA burden calculations from 15 to four. Would this change accurately reflect the current state of the data reporting industry?

    8. The Commission received comments on the hours burden associated with establishing a DCO connection to an SDR, but not a cost estimate. Do the proposed revisions to the PRA, which include an hours burden for establishing a connection, and a cost burden for maintaining a connection, accurately reflect the PRA burden on DCOs?

    (Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Dated: July 15, 2016. Robert N. Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17208 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION [Docket No. CPSC-2009-0073] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request—Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act; Compliance Form AGENCY:

    Consumer Product Safety Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“Commission” or “CPSC”) announces that the Commission has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of approval of a collection of information regarding a form used to verify whether pools and spas are in compliance with the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act. In the Federal Register of April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24068), the CPSC published a notice to announce the agency's intention to seek extension of approval of the collection of information. The Commission received no comments. Therefore, by publication of this notice, the Commission announces that CPSC has submitted to the OMB a request for extension of approval of that collection of information, without change.

    DATES:

    Written comments on this request for extension of approval of information collection requirements should be submitted by August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments about this request by email: [email protected] or fax: 202-395-6881. Comments by mail should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the CPSC, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. In addition, written comments that are sent to OMB also should be submitted electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, under Docket No. CPSC-2009-0073.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information contact: Robert H. Squibb, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7815, or by email to: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    CPSC has submitted the following currently approved collection of information to OMB for extension:

    Title: Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act Verification of Compliance Form.

    OMB Number: 3041-0142.

    Type of Review: Renewal of collection.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion.

    Affected Public: Public pools and spa facilities.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 200 pools or facilities.

    Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours to inspect a pool or spa facility.

    Total Estimated Annual Burden: The total testing burden hours are 600 (200 inspections × 3 hours per inspection).

    General Description of Collection: On December 19, 2008, the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act (“Act”) became effective (Pub. L. 110-140). The Act applies to public pools and spas and requires that each swimming pool and spa drain cover manufactured, distributed, or entered into commerce in the United States shall conform to the entrapment protection standards of the ASME/ANSI A112.19.8 performance standard or any successor standard regulating such swimming pool or drain cover pursuant to section 1404(b) of the Act.

    On August 5, 2011, the Commission published a final rule incorporating by reference ANSI/APSP-16 2011 as the successor standard, effective September 6, 2011. 76 FR 47436. The Act requires that, in addition to having the anti-entrapment devices or systems, each public pool and spa in the United States with a single main drain other than an unblockable drain shall be equipped with one or more of the following devices or systems designed to prevent entrapment by pool or spa drains including a safety vacuum release system, suction-limiting vent system, gravity drainage system, automatic pump shut-off system or drain disablement. CPSC will collect information through the verification of compliance form to identify drain covers, pools, and spas that do not meet the performance requirements in ANSI/APSP-16 2011 and the Act.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Todd A. Stevenson, Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17215 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities and Technical Assistance on State Data Collection—National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments AGENCY:

    Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Overview Information:

    Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities and Technical Assistance on State Data Collection—National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments.

    Notice inviting applications for a new award for fiscal year (FY) 2016.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326G. DATES: 

    Applications Available: July 21, 2016.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 22, 2016.

    Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Programs: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities by providing technical assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research. The purpose of the Technical Assistance on State Data Collection program is to improve the capacity of States to meet the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data collection and reporting requirements.

    Priorities: This notice contains two absolute priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), Absolute Priority 1 is from allowable activities specified or otherwise authorized in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (see sections 663 and 681(d) of the IDEA, 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d)). Absolute Priority 2 is from the notice of final priorities and requirements for the Technical Assistance on State Data Collection program (NFP) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

    Absolute Priorities: These priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet these priorities.

    These priorities are:

    Absolute Priority 1—Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities—National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments.

    Background:

    The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments (Center).

    Section 612(a)(16) of the IDEA requires that all students with disabilities are included in all general State and districtwide assessments, including assessments described under section 1111 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), with appropriate accommodations and alternate assessments where necessary and as indicated in their respective individualized education programs. In accordance with Federal law, there are multiple ways for students with disabilities to participate in State and districtwide assessments: General assessments, general assessments with accommodations, and alternate assessments that are based on alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities.

    Further, research shows that (1) instruction for students with disabilities is increasingly aligned with State academic content standards, (2) State and districtwide assessment data are more frequently used to make educational decisions for these students, and (3) participating in State and districtwide assessments and being included in accountability systems may have positive effects on educational results for students with disabilities (Aron & Loprest, 2012; Courtade, Spooner, & Browder, 2012; Kurz, Elliott, Lemons, Zigmond, Kloo, & Kettler, 2014). However, teachers cannot simply wait until the results of State and districtwide assessments become available to make educational decisions. In addition to analyzing results from State (typically summative) assessments, formative assessments are increasingly being used before, during, and after instruction to help teachers understand their students' learning and improve their own instructional practices (Conderman & Hedin, 2012).

    Despite the progress State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) have made in including students with disabilities in assessments and accountability systems, SEAs and LEAs continue to face challenges, such as integrating data from dissimilar tests (e.g., general, accommodated, and alternate) into a single accountability system, developing consistent SEA and LEA policies on assessment accommodations that provide maximum accessibility while maintaining test reliability and validity, and analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data to improve instruction and accountability for students with disabilities.

    Furthermore, one of the most complex challenges faced by SEAs and LEAs is developing and administering English language proficiency (ELP) assessments to students who are both English Learners (ELs) and students with disabilities (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). Properly identifying these students is also a significant challenge if their disabilities are masked by their limited English proficiency, or vice versa. Improper identification may lead to inappropriate instruction, assessment, and accommodation for these students. Linguistic and cultural biases may also affect the validity of assessment for ELs with disabilities (Lane & Leventhal, 2015).

    Finally, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) notes that in many schools, there may be unnecessary testing and insufficient clarity of purpose applied to the task of assessing students, including students with disabilities, consuming too much instructional time and creating undue stress for educators and students. (For more information, see the Department's February 2, 2016, letter to Chief State School Officers available at: www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/saa/16-0002signedcsso222016ltr.pdf.)

    These and other complex challenges will continue to arise in this dynamic landscape as States adopt college- and career-ready academic content standards and develop new, valid, more instructionally useful and inclusive assessments aligned to these standards. Developing these new assessments has been and will continue to be challenging and time-consuming, and States and LEAs need support in identifying and implementing effective practices for including children with disabilities in State and districtwide assessments. Moreover, methods for analyzing and effectively using State and districtwide assessment data to improve instruction and accountability for students with disabilities will continue to need further development and refinement. In this regard, the Department notes that SEA personnel also need assistance in analyzing and using assessment data to better achieve the State Identifiable Measurable Result(s) (SIMR), which were described in their IDEA Part B State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs) that were developed in accordance with section 616(b) of IDEA and the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) guidance on Indicator B-17 of the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2013 through FFY 2018 IDEA Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR).1 In addition, SEA personnel need assistance to provide TA to LEAs to analyze and use State and districtwide assessment data to improve instruction of students with disabilities to better achieve the SIMR.

    1 In accordance with section 616(b) of the IDEA, States must have in place a performance plan that evaluates the State's efforts to implement the requirements and purposes of Part B of the IDEA and describes how the State will improve such implementation. As part of the SPP/APR, each State shall establish measurable and rigorous targets for each indicator established by the Secretary. In the Results Driven Accountability System, OSERS required States under Indicator 17 to develop a State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) as part of their FFY 2013 through FFY 2018 IDEA Part B SPPs/APRs. The SSIP must include: (1) FFY 2013 baseline data expressed as a percentage and aligned with the State-identified Measurable Result(s) (SIMR) for children with disabilities; (2) measurable and rigorous targets (expressed as a percentage) for each of the five years for FFY 2014 through FFY 2018, with the FFY 2018 target reflecting improvement over the FFY 2013 baseline data; and (3) a plan that includes an explanation of how the improvement strategies were selected and will lead to measurable improvement in the SIMR.

    Priority:

    The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to support the establishment and operation of a National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments (Center) to address national, State, and local assessment issues related to students with disabilities. The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes to ensure the inclusion of students with disabilities in State and districtwide assessments and accountability systems:

    Knowledge Development Outcomes

    (a) Increased body of knowledge to collect, analyze, synthesize, and disseminate relevant information regarding State and districtwide assessment of students with disabilities on topics such as:

    (1) The inclusion of students with disabilities in accountability systems;

    (2) Assessment accommodations;

    (3) Alternate assessments;

    (4) Universal design of assessments;

    (5) Technology-based assessments;

    (6) Formative assessments;

    (7) Competency-based assessments;

    (8) Methods for analyzing and reporting assessment data;

    (9) Application of growth models in assessment programs;

    (10) Uses of formative and summative assessment data to inform instructional programs for students with disabilities; and

    (11) Assessing ELs with disabilities, including ensuring that all ELs with disabilities receive appropriate accommodations, as needed, on ELP assessments, and that the results of ELP assessments for students with disabilities are validly used in making accountability determinations under the ESEA.

    Note: In order to meet the requirements of paragraph (a), the Center will conduct a comprehensive review of existing research on practices supported by evidence available from a variety of reliable sources, such as findings from research funded by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), including the National Research and Development Center on Assessment and Accountability for Special Education (NCASSE) and other federally funded and non-federally funded sources.

    (b) Increase the capacity of SEA and LEA personnel to assess SEA and LEA needs, and track SEA and LEA activities and trends, related to including students with disabilities in State and districtwide assessments, including, as appropriate, improving the skills of SEA and LEA personnel related to any of the topics listed in paragraph (a) of the Knowledge Development Outcomes section of this priority.

    Technical Assistance and Dissemination Outcomes

    (a) Increased capacity of SEA and LEA personnel, to collect and analyze formative and summative assessment data on the performance of students with disabilities.

    (b) Increased capacity of SEA and LEA personnel to use formative and summative assessment data to evaluate and improve educational policies and increase accountability for students with disabilities.

    (c) Increased capacity of LEA personnel to use formative and summative assessment results in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities; and

    (d) Increased awareness of SEA and LEA personnel, and national policymakers, regarding how students with disabilities are included in and benefit from current and emerging approaches to State and districtwide assessment, including topics listed in paragraph (a) of the Knowledge Development Outcomes section of this priority.

    In addition to these program requirements, to be considered for funding under this absolute priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements under Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2 Common Requirements.

    Absolute Priority 2— Targeted and Intensive Technical Assistance to States on the Analysis and Use of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to Support Implementation of States' Identified Measurable Result(s).

    Background

    The purpose of this priority is to assist States in analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data to support the implementation of the SIMR as described in their SSIP.

    As detailed in the background section for Absolute Priority 1, research indicates that SEAs and LEAs continue to face challenges in analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data to improve instruction and accountability for students with disabilities. SEAs also need assistance analyzing State assessment data submitted as part of the SSIP and the SIMR in accordance with section 616 of IDEA and OSEP guidance. Beginning in the FFY 2013 SPP/APR, States must provide, as part of Phase I of the SSIP, a statement of the result(s) the State intends to achieve through implementation of the SSIP, which is referred to as the SIMR for Children with Disabilities. The State must establish “measurable and rigorous” targets for each successive year of the SPP (FFYs 2014 through 2018). The end target (for FFY 2018) must demonstrate improvement over the FFY 2013 baseline data. At least 42 States have focused their SIMR on improving academic achievement as measured by assessment results for children with disabilities. These States will need assistance in analyzing and using State assessment data to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities.

    Priority

    The purpose of this priority is to (1) assist States in analyzing and using assessment data to better achieve the SIMR as described in their IDEA Part B SSIPs, and (2) assist State efforts to provide TA to LEAs in analyzing and using State and districtwide assessment data to better achieve the SIMR, as appropriate. The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

    (a) Increased capacity of SEA personnel to analyze and use assessment data to better achieve the SIMR described in the IDEA Part B SSIP, including using assessment data to evaluate and improve educational policy, inform instructional programs, and improve instruction for students with disabilities; and

    (b) Increased capacity of SEA personnel to provide TA to LEAs in the analysis and use of State and districtwide assessment data to improve instruction of students with disabilities and better achieve the SIMR.

    Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2 Common Requirements:

    In addition to the program requirements contained in both absolute priorities, to be considered for funding applicants must meet the following application and administrative requirements.2

    2 Paragraph (b)(5)(iv) only applies to Absolute Priority 2.

    Applications that:

    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance of the Project,” how the proposed project will—

    (1) Address the needs of SEAs and LEAs to analyze and use formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

    (i) Present applicable national, State, and local data demonstrating the needs of SEAs and LEAs to analyze and use formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

    (ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy initiatives related to analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

    (iii) Describe the current level of implementation related to analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities.

    (2) Improve the analysis and use of formative and summative assessment data to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities.

    (b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Project Services,” how the proposed project will—

    (1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

    (i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

    (ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the intended recipients (e.g., by creating materials in formats and languages accessible to the stakeholders served by the intended recipients);

    (2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

    (i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

    (ii) The logic model by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes;

    (3) Use a conceptual framework to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

    Note: While section 77.1(c) of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) contains a definition for “logic model,” OSEP, based upon its experience in this area, has been using the above definition as standard language for the OSEP Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) program priorities. OSEP's definition establishes a difference between logic models and conceptual frameworks whereas 34 CFR 77.1(c) considers the model to be one and the same. The following Web sites provide more information on logic models: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

    (4) Be based on current research and make use of practices supported by evidence. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

    (i) The current research on the effectiveness of analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities; and

    (ii) How the proposed project will incorporate current practices supported by evidence in the development and delivery of its products and services;

    (5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

    (i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base on analyzing and using formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

    (ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,3 which must identify the intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

    3 “Universal, general TA” means TA and information provided to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time, invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This category of TA also includes information or products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the TA center's Web site by independent users. Brief communications by TA center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also considered universal, general TA.

    (iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,4 which must identify—

    4 “Targeted, specialized TA” means TA services based on needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively individualized. A relationship is established between the TA recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can also be considered targeted, specialized TA.

    (A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach; and

    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level; and

    (iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,5 which must identify—

    5 “Intensive, sustained TA” means TA services often provided on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA center staff and the TA recipient. “TA services” are defined as negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.

    (A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this approach;

    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of SEA and LEA personnel to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the SEA and LEA levels;

    (C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs (and LEAs, in conjunction with SEAs) to build training systems that include professional development based on adult learning principles and coaching; and

    (D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, schools, and families) to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support the collection, analysis, and use of formative and summative assessment data in instructional decision-making to improve teaching and learning for students with disabilities;

    (E) Its proposed plan for collaborating and coordinating with Department-funded TA investments and IES research and development investments, where appropriate, in order to align complementary work and jointly develop and implement products and services to meet the purposes of this priority;

    (6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

    (i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

    (ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and

    (iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes.

    (c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Evaluation Plan,” include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must describe: Measures of progress in implementation, including the extent to which the project's products and services have reached its target population; and measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's activities in order to assess the effectiveness of those activities.

    In designing the evaluation plan, the project must—

    (1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP),6 the project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:

    6 The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per year and required to participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP's Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development; Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology, Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and unbiased technical assistance in designing the evaluations with due consideration of the project's budget. CIPP does not function as a third-party evaluator.

    (i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the grant application to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;

    (ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in the grant application consistent with the logic model (e.g., preparing evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes, developing quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate, and progress toward achieving intended outcomes, selecting respondent samples if appropriate, designing instruments or identifying data sources, and identifying analytic strategies); and

    (iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the grant application such that it clearly—

    (A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completion of the plan;

    (B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the second project year for use during the project's intensive review for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

    (C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project officer, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the performance measures to be addressed in the project's Annual Performance Report;

    (2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks described in paragraph (1) of this section; and

    (3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section and implementing the evaluation plan.

    (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of Project Resources,” how—

    (1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

    (2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

    (3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

    (4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

    (e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Management Plan,” how—

    (1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

    (i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

    (ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

    (2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated to the project and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

    (3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality; and

    (4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

    (f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

    (1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its intended outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative and summative evaluations of the project.

    (2) Include, in Appendix A, a conceptual framework for the project;

    (3) Include, in Appendix A, person-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

    (4) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

    (i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.

    Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee's project director or other authorized representative;

    (ii) A two and a half day project directors' meeting in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;

    (iii) Three trips annually to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

    (iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

    (5) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with OSEP.

    Note: With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period; and

    (6) Maintain a Web site that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility.

    Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project

    In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), as well as—

    (a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

    (b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

    (c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's products and services and the extent to which the project's products and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

    References Aron, L., & Loprest, P. (2012). Disability and the education system. The Future of Children, 22(1), 97-122. Conderman, G., & Hedin, L. (2012). Classroom assessments that inform instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48(4), 162-168. Courtade, G, Spooner, F., Browder, D., & Jimenez, B. (2012). Seven reasons to promote standards-based instruction for students with severe Disabilities: A Reply to Ayres, Lowrey, Douglas, & Sievers (2011). Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 47(1), 3-13. Kurz, A., Elliott, S., Lemons, C., Zigmond, N., Kloo, A., & Kettler, R. (2014). Assessing opportunity-to-learn for students with disabilities in general and special education classes. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 40(1), 24-39. Lane, S., & Leventhal, B. (2015). Psychometric challenges in assessing English language learners with disabilities. Review of Research in Education, 39, 165-214. U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Questions and Answers Regarding Inclusion of English Learners with Disabilities in English Language Proficiency Assessments and Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives. Retrieved from: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sfgp/elswdfaq7182014.doc.

    Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to Absolute Priority 1 in this notice.

    Program Authority: For Absolute Priority 1, 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481; for Absolute Priority 2, 20 U.S.C. 1411(c) and 1416(i).

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR 300.702. (e) The NFP, published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants except federally recognized Indian tribes.

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education (IHEs) only.

    II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.

    Estimated Available Funds: $2,000,000.

    Note: Applicants must submit a separate Form 524b budget and budget narrative for Absolute Priority 1 only and a separate Form 524b budget and budget narrative for Absolute Priority 2 only. The Secretary will reject any application that does not separately address all the elements of Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2 and include separate budgets and budget narratives for Absolute Priority 1 only and Absolute Priority 2 only.

    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.

    Estimated Range of Awards: $2,000,000.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $2,000,000.

    Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a budget for either Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2 that exceeds $1,000,000 for a single budget period of 12 months, and we will reject and not review any application that proposes a total budget that exceeds $2,000,000 for a single budget period of 12 months. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.

    Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 60 months.

    III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; Indian tribes or tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

    3. Other General Requirements:

    (a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).

    (b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding must, with respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to Absolute Priority 1, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

    IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.

    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at its email address: [email protected]

    If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.326G.

    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements concerning the content and form of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition.

    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit Part III to no more than 50 pages, using the following standards:

    • A “page” is 8.5” × 11”, on one side only, with 1” margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

    • Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

    • Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

    • Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font (including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.

    The page limit and double-spacing requirements do not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the page limit and double-spacing requirements do apply to all of Part III, the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

    We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit in the application narrative section, or if you apply standards other than those specified in this notice and the application package.

    3. Submission Dates and Times:

    Applications Available: July 21, 2016.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 22, 2016.

    Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to Other Submission Requirements in section IV of this notice.

    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

    Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice.

    4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to make an award by the end of FY 2016.

    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the Department of Education, you must—

    a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

    b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database;

    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and

    d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.

    You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be created within one to two business days.

    If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.

    The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.

    Note: Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can access the information in, and submit an application through, Grants.gov.

    If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.

    Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.

    In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov, you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.

    7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section.

    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.

    Applications for grants under the National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments competition, CFDA number 84.326G, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

    You may access the electronic grant application for the National Technical Assistance Center to Increase the Participation and Improve the Performance of Students with Disabilities on State and Districtwide Assessments competition at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.326, not 84.326G).

    Please note the following:

    • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    • Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if it is received—that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.

    • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

    • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 system home page at www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.

    • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format.

    • You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: The Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.

    • You must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in a read-only, non-modifiable Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note that this could result in your application not being considered for funding because the material in question—for example, the application narrative—is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material from other formats to PDF. Additional, detailed information on how to attach files is in the application instructions.

    • Your electronic application must comply with any page-limit requirements described in this notice.

    • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.

    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.

    These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.

    • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.

    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice.

    If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine whether your application will be accepted.

    Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

    Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

    • You do not have access to the Internet; or

    • You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system; and

    • No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.

    If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

    Address and mail or fax your statement to: David Egnor, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-5076. FAX: (202) 245-7617.

    Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.

    b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.326G), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

    (1) A private metered postmark.

    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

    We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.

    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.326G), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.

    Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

    (2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

    V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.

    2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past, the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process, while permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.

    4. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

    5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $150,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2), we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through SAM. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

    Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

    VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

    If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

    3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

    (b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

    4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. For purposes of this priority, the Center will use these measures, which focus on the extent to which projects provide high-quality products and services, the relevance of project products and services to educational and early intervention policy and practice, and the use of products and services to improve educational and early intervention policy and practice.

    Projects funded under this competition are required to submit data on these measures as directed by OSEP.

    Grantees will be required to report information on their project's performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).

    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

    In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    VII. Agency Contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Egnor, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5163, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7334.

    If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    VIII. Other Information

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    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 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: July 18, 2016. Sue Swenson, Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17324 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2016-ICCD-0085] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Upward Bound and Upward Bound Math Science Annual Performance Report AGENCY:

    Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before September 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2016-ICCD-0085. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E347, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Kenneth Waters, 202-453-6273.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Title of Collection: Upward Bound and Upward Bound Math Science Annual Performance Report.

    OMB Control Number: 1840-0831.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Private Sector.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 975.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 16,575.

    Abstract: The purpose of the Upward Bound (UB) Program is to generate in program participants the skills and motivation necessary to complete a program of secondary education and to enter and succeed in a program of postsecondary education.

    Authority for this program is contained in title IV, part A, subpart 2, chapter 1, section 402C of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008. Eligible applicants include institutions of higher education, public or private agencies or organizations, including community-based organizations with experience in serving disadvantaged youth, secondary schools, and combinations of institutions, agencies, organizations, and secondary schools.

    UB Program participants must be potential first-generation college students, low-income individuals, or individuals who have a high risk for academic failure, and have a need for academic support in order to pursue successfully a program of education beyond high school.

    Required program services include: (1) Academic tutoring; (2) advice and assistance in secondary and postsecondary course selection; (3) preparation for college entrance exams and completing the college admission applications; (4) information on federal student financial aid programs including (a) federal Pell grant awards, (b) loan forgiveness, and (c) scholarships; (5) assistance completing financial aid applications; (6) guidance on and assistance in: (a) Secondary school reentry, (b) alternative education programs for secondary school dropouts that lead to the receipt of a regular secondary school diploma, (c) entry into general educational development (GED) programs or, (d) entry into postsecondary education; (7) education or counseling services designed to improve the financial and economic literacy of students or the students' parents, including financial planning for postsecondary education; and (8) projects funded for at least two years under the program must provide instruction in mathematics through pre-calculus; laboratory science; foreign language; composition; and literature.

    Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17210 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION National Assessment Governing Board Quarterly Board Meeting AGENCY:

    National Assessment Governing Board, U.S. Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of open and closed meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the agenda for the August 4-6, 2016 Quarterly Board Meeting of the National Assessment Governing Board (hereafter referred to as Governing Board). This notice provides information to members of the public who may be interested in attending the meeting or providing written comments on the meeting. The notice of this meeting is required under § 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

    DATES:

    The Quarterly Board Meeting will be held on the following dates:

    • August 4, 2016 from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    • August 5, 2016 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    • August 6, 2016 from 7:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Sofitel Chicago Water Tower, 20 East Chestnut Street, Chicago, IL 60611

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Munira Mwalimu, Executive Officer/Designated Federal Official of the Governing Board, 800 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 825, Washington, DC 20002, telephone: (202) 357-6938, fax: (202) 357-6945.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Statutory Authority and Function: The Governing Board is established under the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act, Title III of Public Law 107-279. Information on the Governing Board and its work can be found at www.nagb.gov.

    The Governing Board is established to formulate policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The Governing Board's responsibilities include the following: Selecting subject areas to be assessed, developing assessment frameworks and specifications, developing appropriate student achievement levels for each grade and subject tested, developing standards and procedures for interstate and national comparisons, improving the form and use of NAEP, developing guidelines for reporting and disseminating results, and releasing initial NAEP results to the public.

    August 4-6, 2016 Committee Meetings

    The Governing Board's standing committees will meet to conduct regularly scheduled work based on agenda items planned for this Quarterly Board Meeting and follow-up items as reported in the Governing Board's committee meeting minutes available at http://nagb.gov/what-we-do/board-committee-reports-and-agendas.html.

    Detailed Meeting Agenda: August 4-6, 2016

    August 4: Assessment Development Committee (ADC): Closed Session: 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

    August 4: Committee on Standards, Design and Methodology (COSDAM): Open Session: 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

    August 4: Reporting and Dissemination (R&D) Committee: Open Session: 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

    August 4: Executive Committee: Open Session: 4:30 p.m.-5:20 p.m.; Closed Session: 5:20 p.m.-6:00 p.m.

    August 5: Full Governing Board and Committee Meetings:

    Full Governing Board: Open Session: 8:30 a.m.-10:15 a.m.; 12:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

    ADC: Open Session: 10:30 a.m.-11:25 a.m.; Closed Session: 11:25 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

    R&D Committee: Open Session 10:30 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

    COSDAM: Open Session: 10:30 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

    August 6: Full Governing Board and Committee Meetings:

    Nominations Committee: Closed Session: 7:30 a.m.-8:15 a.m.

    Full Governing Board: Open Session: 8:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.

    On August 4, 2016, the ADC will meet in closed session from 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. to review the following secure NAEP test items: 2017 reading items at grades 4 and 8; 2017 writing items at grades 4 and 8; 2017 mathematics items at grades 4 and 8; and 2019 reading pilot items for grade 4. This meeting must be conducted in closed session because the test items are secure and have not been released to the public. Public disclosure of the secure test items would significantly impede implementation of the NAEP assessment program if conducted in open session. Such matters are protected by exemption 9(B) of § 552b(c) of Title 5 of the United States Code.

    On August 4, the COSDAM will meet in open session from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. to conduct regularly scheduled work and the R&D Committee will meet in open session from 2:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. to conduct regularly scheduled work.

    The Executive Committee will meet in open session on August 4 from 4:30 p.m. to 5:20 p.m. to discuss the nomination of the Governing Board's Vice Chair, the Strategic Vision initiative, and NAEP research grants. The Executive Committee will meet thereafter in closed session from 5:20 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. During the closed session, the Executive Committee will receive and discuss independent government cost estimates and implications for implementing NAEP's Assessment Schedule through 2024. This meeting must be conducted in closed session because public disclosure of this information would likely have an adverse financial effect on the NAEP program by providing confidential cost details and proprietary contract costs of current contractors to the public. Discussion of this information would be likely to significantly impede implementation of a proposed agency action if conducted in open session. Such matters are protected by exemption 9(B) of § 552b(c) of Title 5 of the United States Code.

    On August 5, the full Governing Board will meet in open session from 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. The Governing Board will review and approve the August 4-6, 2016 Governing Board meeting agenda and meeting minutes from the May 2016 Quarterly Board Meeting. The Governing Board will then receive welcoming remarks from policymakers representing the Illinois Department of Education and Chicago Public Schools. This session will be followed by a report from the Executive Director of the Governing Board, William Bushaw, followed by updates on the work of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) and National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) provided by the Acting Commissioner of NCES, Peggy Carr. The Governing Board will recess for committee meetings at 10:15 a.m. which are scheduled to take place from 10:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m.

    The COSDAM and R&D Committees will meet in open session from 10:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. The ADC will meet in open session from 10:30 a.m. to 11:25 a.m. and thereafter in closed session from 11:25 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. to review assessment items for the NAEP transition to digital-based assessments (DBA). The review will include secure items in reading, mathematics and science at grades 4 and 8 from the 2016 pilot, in preparation for the 2017 operational assessment. The committee's reviews and discussions on secure test items cannot be discussed in an open meeting to protect the confidentiality of the secure assessment materials. Premature disclosure of these results would significantly impede implementation of the NAEP assessment program, and is therefore protected by exemption 9(B) of § 552b(c) of Title 5 of the United States Code.

    Following the committee meetings on August 5, the full Governing Board will meet in open session from 12:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    From 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m., the Governing Board will have a panel discussion on secondary researchers' use of NAEP data, to be moderated by Governing Board member Andrew Ho, Chair of the COSDAM. Following this session and a break of 30 minutes, the Governing Board will discuss the draft Strategic Vision document from 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., with an overview provided by the Governing Board's Vice Chair, Lucille Davy. After the overview, the Governing Board will convene in three small groups to discuss the draft Strategic Vision. Members of the public are welcome to observe the breakout sessions. The August 5 session of the Governing Board meeting will adjourn at 4:30 p.m.

    On August 6, the Nominations Committee will meet in closed session from 7:30 a.m. to 8:15 a.m. The committee will discuss planning for the Governing Board's annual call for nominations for Governing Board terms beginning in October 2017. The 2017 call for nominations is scheduled to start in September 2016. The Nominations Committee's discussions pertain solely to internal personnel rules and practices of an agency and information of a personal nature where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. As such, the discussions are protected by exemptions 2 and 6 of § 552b(c) of Title 5 of the United States Code.

    The full Governing Board will meet in open session on August 6, from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. The session will begin with remarks by outgoing Governing Board member Anitere Flores from 8:30 a.m. to 8:40 a.m., followed by full Governing Board discussion on the Strategic Vision from 8:40 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. Thereafter, the Governing Board will have a short break and reconvene from 10:00 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. The Governing Board will receive an update on committee reports and take action on the election of the Board Vice Chair. From 10:45 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. the Governing Board will receive a briefing from NCES staff on contextual variables, an Inside NAEP series. The August 6, 2016 meeting is scheduled to adjourn at 12:00 p.m.

    Access to Records of the Meeting: Pursuant to FACA requirements, the public may also inspect the meeting materials at www.nagb.gov beginning on Thursday, August 5, 2016 by 10:00 a.m. ET. The official verbatim transcripts of the public meeting sessions will be available for public inspection no later than 30 calendar days following the meeting.

    Reasonable Accommodations: The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. If you will need an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in an alternate format), notify the contact person listed in this notice at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting date. Although we will attempt to meet a request received after that date, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

    Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the Adobe Web 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.

    Authority:

    Pub. L. 107-279, Title III—National Assessment of Educational Progress § 301.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. William J. Bushaw, Executive Director, National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), <E T="03">U.S. Department of Education.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2016-17331 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity Meeting AGENCY:

    National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI), Office of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of an open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the agenda, date, time, dial-in procedures, and procedures to request to make oral comments for the August 23, 2016 meeting of the NACIQI. The notice of this meeting is required under § 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and § 114(d)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965, as amended.

    DATES:

    The NACIQI meeting will be held on August 23, 2016, from 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference.

    Dial-In Procedures

    The meeting will be conducted via telephone conference. Participants and members of the public should dial: 888-566-6510 and enter code 9937417 when prompted. Participation in the meeting will be on a first-come first-served basis with the first 300 hundred callers accommodated. The meeting will also be hosted via webinar at: https://educate.webex.com/educate/e.php?MTID=m114df4b98257cd8e99b5aede5c9fd598.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Hong, Executive Director/Designated Federal Official, NACIQI, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 6W250, Washington, DC 20202, telephone: (202) 453-7805, or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Meeting Agenda: Below is a list of agencies, including their current and requested scopes of recognition, that are scheduled for review by NACIQI during the August 23, 2016 meeting. The meeting will be conducted in accordance with the review procedures outlined in the March 18, 2016 Federal Register notice (Vol. 81, No. 53).

    Applications for Renewal of Recognition 1. Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges

    Scope of recognition: The accreditation of private, postsecondary, non-degree-granting institutions and degree-granting institutions in the United States, including those granting associate, baccalaureate and master's degrees, that are predominantly organized to educate students for occupational, trade and technical careers, and including institutions that offer programs via distance education.

    2. American Osteopathic Association, Osteopathic College Accreditation

    Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Provisional Accreditation”) throughout the United States of freestanding institutions of osteopathic medicine and of osteopathic medical programs leading to the degree of Doctor of Osteopathy or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine.

    Title IV Note: Only freestanding schools or colleges of osteopathic medicine may use accreditation by this agency to establish eligibility to participate in Title IV programs.

    3. Council on Occupational Education

    Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidacy Status”) throughout the United States of postsecondary occupational education institutions offering non-degree and applied associate degree programs in specific career and technical education fields, including institutions that offer programs via distance education.

    4. Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools, Accreditation Commission

    Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidate” Status) of Christian postsecondary institutions in the United States that offer certificates, diplomas, and associate, baccalaureate, and graduate degrees, including institutions that offer distance education.

    Compliance Reports Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

    Scope of recognition: The accreditation and preaccreditation (“Candidacy Status”) of postsecondary degree-granting educational institutions in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, and the accreditation of programs offered via distance education within these institutions. (Compliance report on 34 CFR 602.24(a) and 602.24(b) for findings affirmed on appeal by the Secretary. Please see http://oha.ed.gov/secretarycases/2014-7-O-S.pdf for the Secretary's appeal decision.)

    Submission of requests to make an oral comment regarding a specific accrediting agency under review: Pre-registered third-party oral commenters will have the opportunity to make a three-minute oral comment concerning one of the agencies scheduled for review at the August 23, 2016 meeting. These oral commenters are listed on the June 22-24, 2016 agenda, which is available at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/naciqi-dir/2016-spring/naciqi-agenda-june-2016.pdf

    Oral comments about agencies undergoing review must relate to the Criteria for Recognition of Accrediting Agencies, which is available at: http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html. Oral commenters may also register on August 23, 2016 to make an oral comment during NACIQI's deliberations concerning a particular agency or institution scheduled for review, by calling (202) 453-7615 from 7:30 a.m.-8:30 a.m. Eastern Time. The requestor must provide his or her name, title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, and telephone number. A total of up to fifteen minutes during each agency review will be allotted for oral commenters who register on August 23, 2016 by 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time. Individuals will be selected on a first-call, first-served basis. If selected, each commenter may not exceed three minutes. The oral comments made will become part of the official record and will be considered by the Department and NACIQI in their deliberations. No individual in attendance or making oral presentations may distribute written materials at the meeting.

    Access to Records of the Meeting: The Department will post the official report of the meeting on the NACIQI Web site 90 calendar days after the meeting. Pursuant to the FACA, the public may also inspect the materials at 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC, by emailing [email protected] or by calling (202) 453-7110 to schedule an appointment.

    Reasonable Accommodations: If you will need an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in an alternate format), notify the contact person listed in this notice at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting date. Although we will attempt to meet a request received after that date, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

    Electronic Access to This Document

    The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free at the Adobe Web 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.

    Delegation of Authority: The Secretary of Education has delegated authority to Lynn B. Mahaffie, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Policy, and Innovation, to perform the duties of Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.

    Authority:

    20 U.S.C. 1011c.

    Lynn B. Mahaffie, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Policy, and Innovation, delegated the duties of Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17233 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP16-479-000] Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on July 11, 2016, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia), pursuant to its blanket certificate authorization granted in Docket No. CP83-76-000,1 filed an application in accordance to sections 157.205 and 157.213(b) of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, requesting authority to modify certain natural gas storage facilities in the Pavonia Storage Field located in Ashland County, Ohio (Pavonia). The proposed construction is an effort to recovery the overall field deliverability at the Pavonia, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.

    1 22 FERC ¶ 62,029 (1983).

    Currently, the Pavonia consists of 298 active wells and 2 observation wells and is operated with a total storage capacity of 45.4 Bcf, including 20.8 Bcf of base gas and 24.6 Bcf of working gas. Over time, the sub grade soil conditions around the reservoir degrade and cause restriction of gas flow through the existing vertical wells. Columbia proposes to construct a 540-foot horizontal well (Pavonia 12595) within a geological-favorable area of the Pavonia peaking group, 220 feet of 6-inch storage pipeline (SLW-12595), and appurtenances. The main purpose of the proposed facilities is to maintain field performance late in the withdrawal season when reservoir pressure is lowest. It is estimated that the new horizontal well will provide 25 MMcf/day at the wellhead. Columbia's request seeks no change in the certificated physical parameters, including total inventory, reservoir pressure, and capacity. The construction of the proposed facilities will cost approximately $2,750,000.

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Matthew J. Agen, Senior Counsel, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 5151 San Felipe, Suite 2400, Houston, Texas 77056, or by phone at (713) 386-3619; email [email protected]

    This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or call toll-free at (866) 208-3676, or, for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages interveners to file electronically.

    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.

    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after 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 and pursuant to section 157.205 of the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), 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 filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17219 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14789-000] Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund IV, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On June 27, 2016, the Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund IV, LLC filed an application for a preliminary permit under section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act proposing to study the feasibility of the proposed Mississippi River Lock and Dam 26 Project No. 14789-000, to be located at the existing Mississippi River Lock and Dam No. 26 on the Mississippi River, near the City of West Alston, in St. Charles County, Missouri and the City of Alton, in Madison County, Illinois. The Mississippi River Lock and Dam No. 26 is owned by the United States government and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

    The proposed project would consist of: (1) A new 750-foot-long by 22-foot-wide by 66-foot-high steel frame modular hydropower system containing fifty 1.5-megawatt (MW) hydropower turbines for a total combined generating capacity of 75 MW; (2) a new 550-foot-long by 750-foot-wide tailrace; (3) a new 50-foot by 100-foot switchyard; (4) a new 5.2-mile-long, 69-kilovolt (kV) or 115 kV transmission line; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The project would have an estimated annual generation of 427,050 megawatt-hours.

    Applicant Contact: Mr. Wayne F. Krouse, P.O. Box 43796, Birmingham, AL 35243; telephone (877) 556-6566, extension 709.

    FERC Contact: Tyrone A. Williams, (202) 502-6331.

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-14789-000.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14789) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17221 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 77-282] Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

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

    a. Type of Application: Application for Temporary Variance of Minimum Flow Requirements.

    b. Project No.: 77-282.

    c. Date Filed: July 6, 2016.

    d. Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (licensee).

    e. Name of Project: Potter Valley Project.

    f. Location: Eel River and East Fork Russian River in Lake and Mendocino Counties, California.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Elizabeth Rossi, Senior License Coordinator, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Mail Code: N13E, P.O. Box 770000, San Francisco, CA 94177, Phone: (415) 973-2032.

    i. FERC Contact: Mr. John Aedo, (415) 369-3335, or [email protected].

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests, and recommendations is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission (August 15, 2016). The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests, comments, or recommendations using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-77-282) on any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or recommendations filed.

    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests a temporary variance of the minimum flow requirements in the Eel River below Scott Dam and the East Branch of the Russian River. The licensee explains that Lake Pillsbury only filled to 80 percent this year due to: Dry spring conditions; the April 1, 2016 closure schedule of the spillway gates for dam safety purposes; and minimum and supplemental flow releases. Therefore, in order to conserve water resources, ensure that adequate water is available for minimum flow releases and regular water deliveries later in the year, and avoid Lake Pillsbury bank sloughing and water turbidity, the licensee proposes to reduce minimum flow releases at the project. Specifically, the licensee proposes to reduce flows in the Eel River below Scott Dam from the required 60 cubic feet per second (cfs) normal year requirement to the 20 cfs critical year requirement. The licensee would also reduce minimum flows in the East Branch Russian River from the 75 cfs normal year requirement to the 25 cfs dry year requirement, and possibly the 5 cfs critical year requirement, depending on storage conditions and in consultation with the resource agencies and stakeholders. In conjunction with the proposed variance, the licensee proposes to provide no more than 50 cfs to the Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) through the East Branch Russian River.

    The licensee also proposes to establish a Potter Valley Drought Working Group, comprised of the resource agencies and stakeholders, which would meet twice monthly during the variance to determine appropriate release levels within the framework of the proposed variance. The licensee requests that once a flow is established, that a 24-hour average flow be used as the compliance criteria for the corresponding compliance point. Finally, the licensee proposes to file monthly compliance reports with the Commission, and to provide bi-monthly email reports to the resource agencies and stakeholders.

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

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which are the subject of proposed action. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17220 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9949-37-OARM] Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Notification of Public Advisory Committee Teleconference AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Public Advisory Committee Teleconference.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the Good Neighbor Environmental Board (Board) will hold a public teleconference on Friday, August 26 from 12:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. For further information regarding the teleconference and background materials, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at the number and email provided below.

    Background: The Good Neighbor Environmental Board is a federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463. By statute, the Board is required to submit an annual report to the President on environmental and infrastructure issues along the U.S. border with Mexico.

    Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of this teleconference is to continue discussion on the Good Neighbor Environmental Board's Seventeenth Report to the President, which will focus on climate change resilience in the U.S.-Mexico border region.

    General Information: The agenda and teleconference materials, as well as general information about the Board, can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/faca/gneb. If you wish to make oral comments or submit written comments to the Board, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at least five days prior to the teleconference.

    Meeting Access: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at (202) 564-4330 or email at [email protected]. To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: July 12, 2016. Ann-Marie Gantner, Designated Federal Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17276 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0452; FRL-9948-85] Notice of Receipt of Requests To Voluntarily Cancel Certain Pesticide Registrations AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is issuing a notice of receipt of request by registrants to voluntarily cancel certain pesticide registrations and amend one pesticide registration. The amendment request would delete dodecylguanidine hydrochloride (DGH) use in disposable diapers. EPA intends to grant these requests at the close of the comment period for this announcement unless the Agency receives substantive comments within the comment period that would merit its further review of the requests, or unless the registrants withdraw their requests. If these requests are granted, any sale, distribution, or use of products listed in this notice will be permitted after the registrations have been cancelled only if such sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the terms as described in the final order.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0452, by one of the following methods:

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

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

    Submit written withdrawal request by mail to: Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. ATTN: Rachel Ricciardi.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rachel Ricciardi, Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 347-0465; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental and human health advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    II. What action is the Agency taking?

    This notice announces receipt by the Agency of requests from registrants to cancel 176 pesticide products registered under FIFRA section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a) and amend one product registration for DGH by deleting the specific use listed in Table 2 of this unit. The registrations to cancel pesticide products are listed in sequence by registration number in Table 1 of this unit.

    Unless the Agency determines that there are substantive comments that warrant further review of the requests or the registrants withdraw their requests, EPA intends to issue an order in the Federal Register canceling the affected registrations.

    Table 1—Registrations With Pending Requests for Cancellation Registration No. Product name Active ingredient 211-40 Q4.5-5.0PB-4.5 Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 211-50 Q5.5-5.5NPB-2.5HW 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 498-197 Spray Disinfectant Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); and Ethanol. 777-44 Lysol Deodorizing Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 875-194 Divosan Quat-Klenz Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C12, 30%C14, 5%C16, 5%C18). 1022-592 Secure 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Carbamic acid, butyl-, 3-iodo-2-propynyl ester. 1043-19 Staphene Disinfectant Spray and Deodorizer Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18); o-Phenylphenol; 4-tert-Amylphenol; 2-Benzyl-4-chlorophenol; and Ethanol. 1043-77 Powder Keg Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 1258-1275 A-Breeze Solid PHMB Poly(iminoimidocarbonyliminoimidocarbonyliminohexamethylene) hydrochloride. 1258-1277 Vantocil S Microbiocide Poly(iminoimidocarbonyliminoimidocarbonyliminohexamethylene) hydrochloride. 1258-1325 Baquacide 795 Swimming Pool Algicide 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 1459-72 Bullen Ready To Use Disinfectant Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14). 1677-205 A-215 Glutaraldehyde. 1677-206 A-245 Glutaraldehyde. 1839-85 Aerosol Surface Disinfectant Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); and Isopropyl alcohol. 1839-102 CD 4.5 (D & F) Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 1839-112 PT 4.0 Pine Scent Disinfectant/Detergent Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); and Pine Oil. 1839-128 BTC 99 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 1839-138 10% BTC 99 Industrial Water Cooling Tower Algaecide 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 1839-188 Aerosol SDAS Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); Isopropyl alcohol; Triethylene glycol; and Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14). 2296-102 NAC Pine Odor Disinfectant Pine oil and 2-Benzyl-4-chlorophenol. 2296-104 NACA Pine Oil Disinfectant Pine oil. 2296-105 Pine-Act Pine oil and 2-Benzyl-4-chlorophenol. 2296-112 Mint Quat 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 3573-69 Z-1 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 3573-74 Cougar 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Chlorhexidine diacetate. 3862-11 Pine Odor Disinfectant Pine oil and Sodium 2-benzyl-4-chlorophenate. 3862-76 Lemon DS-32 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18). 4313-93 Ocide Plus Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); and Ethanol. 4822-554 AD-SS-06 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 5736-61 HDC V2 1:64 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16) and 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 5736-104 Hospital Disinfectant Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16) and 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 5736-105 Liquid Disinfectant Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 5736-106 Foaming Aerosol Disinfectant Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 5741-16 PSQ Disinfectant Cleaner 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 5813-28 Pine-Sol Pine oil. 5813-33 Clean-O-Pine Cone Concentrated Disinfectant Pine oil. 5813-36 Pine Sol Cleaner Disinfectant Pine oil. 5813-41 Clorox Pine Oil Pine oil. 5813-54 Pine-Sol Cleaner Disinfectant 1 Pine oil. 5813-56 Pine-Sol Cleaner Disinfectant 6 Pine oil. 5813-83 Clorox Losenip Pine oil. 6198-11 Q-IV 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6243-3 Auto-chlor DS-33 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 6718-24 Amway Pursue Disinfectant Cleaner 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-18 Bardac-22 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-19 Bardac-20 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-28 Lonza Disinfectant Cleaner (19-A) 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-30 Lonza Mildew Preventative 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-41 Lonza Mildew Preventative B-20 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 6836-48 Bardac 2250-7.5 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-68 Bardac 20W 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 6836-74 Lonza Formulation S-39 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 6836-87 Lonza DC-102 Quaternary Pine Oil 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); and Pine oil. 6836-89 205M Sanitizer 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 6836-108 Lonza Carpet Sanitizer CS-202 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 6836-163 Bio-Quat 50-MAB Alkyl * dimethyl ethyl ammonium bromide * (90% C14, 5% C16, 5% C12). 6836-167 Bio-Guard M-7 Disinfectant Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (58%C14, 28%C16, 14%C12). 6836-204 Lonza Formulation DC-110N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-205 Lonza Formulation DC-108N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-206 Lonza Formulation DC-109N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-231 Jordaquat 358 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 6836-267 Lonza Formulation DCN 400-256 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-268 Lonza Formulation DCN 400-128 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 6836-269 Lonza Formulation DCN 400-64 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 7124-39 Pool Brite Winterizer Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); Dialkyl * methyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C18, 5% C12); and EDTA, copper salt. 7124-105 Poly Clear Poly(iminoimidocarbonyliminoimidocarbonyliminohexamethylene) hydrochloride. 7364-37 Green Algae Treatment 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 7405-39 Chemi-Cap Germicidal Multi-Purpose Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18). 8155-12 Sanitizer Virucidal Husky 803 S/V Disinfectant 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 8155-17 Carpet Sanitizer Husky C/S Carpet Extraction Concentrate 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 8155-19 *New Power Husky 315 *N/P Bowl Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14); Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12); and Hydrochloric acid. 8155-22 Husky 805 C/D 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 8155-23 Husky 806 H/D/N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 8155-24 Husky 800 N/D 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 9613-5 Crystal—Aqua Swimming Pool Algaecide Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 25%C12, 15%C16). 9613-13 Bison SP-5 Swimming Pool Algaecide Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 25%C12, 15%C16). 9688-287 Chemsico Insecticide RTU LG o-Phenylphenol, sodium salt and lambda-Cyhalothrin. 9886-2 Unipine 85 Pine oil. 9886-4 Unipine 80 Pine oil. 9886-10 Unipine 60 Pine oil. 9886-12 Uniclean 30/60 Pine oil. 9886-16 Uniclean 19.9/60 Pine oil. 9886-17 Uniclean 19.9/85 Pine oil. 10088-101 Bafix Germicidal Spray and Wipe Bathroom Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10088-102 Wint Mint Disinfectant Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-20 Maquat LC-12S-10% Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C18). 10324-39 Maquat MQ2525M-P40 Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-49 Maquat LC12-50% Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C8, C10, and C18). 10324-64 Maquat 3.8-MN 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-65 Maquat 80 Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-68 Maquat TC76-50% P Dialkyl * methyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C18, 5% C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-73 Maquat MQ615-CT 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-76 Maquat MC6025-10% Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 25%C12, 15%C16). 10324-77 Maquat 50-CT Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-78 Maquat 75 Dialkyl * methyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60% C14, 30% C16, 5% C18, 5% C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-79 Maquat 3.8-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-82 Maquat 1.8-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-83 Maquat 7.0-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-84 Maquat 2.5-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-86 Maquat 2.56-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); and 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 10324-90 Maquat LC12S Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C18). 10324-102 Maquat MQ2525M-10% S&W Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-109 Maquat 615-LR 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-118 Maquat 256 EBC Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-119 Maquat 128 EBC Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-120 Maquat 64 EBC Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-124 Pine Odor D-Synfect 7 Disinfectant Cleaner Deodorant Pine oil and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (58%C14, 28%C16, 14%C12). 10324-131 Maquat A 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-134 Maquat 256-1010N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 10324-143 Maquat 10-B Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-144 Maquat 256 MN-FCS 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-146 Maquat 128-1010N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 10324-147 Maquat 64-1010N 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 10324-163 Maquat 12 MN 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-168 Maquat 615 SRTU-200 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-170 Maquat 64-PDX Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-171 Maquat 128-PD-X Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-172 Maquat 128-X Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-173 Maquat 64-X Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-179 Maquat 32 MN-FCS 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-180 Maquat 64 MN-FCS 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-181 Maquat 128 MN-FCS 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-183 Maquat Deter Antimicrobial Agent Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-189 Maquat 21.3-NHQ 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 10324-190 Maquat 14.0-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 10324-191 Maquat 3.5-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 10324-192 Maquat 1.75-M 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 10324-193 Maquat LC12S-40%-LF Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C18). 10324-202 Maquat 25.6-X Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 10324-204 Maquat LC12S-50% EUFC Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C18). 10324-205 Maquat LC12S-10%FC Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (67%C12, 25%C14, 7%C16, 1%C18). 10324-213 Maquat 7.5-S 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 10324-215 Bol Maid 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Hydrochloric acid. 10324-216 Betco Pull 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); and Hydrochloric acid. 11668-10 T & R Brand Pine Disinfectant Pine oil. 11668-13 El Pinol 60 Pine oil. 11694-88 Do It All Germicidal Foaming Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 11694-98 Medaphene Plus Disinfectant Deodorant o-Phenylphenol and Ethanol. 15136-10 Med-Chem Germicidal Solution Sodium carbonate and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 15300-8 Chemtreat CL-200 Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 39967-96 N-1386 Technical Bis(trichloromethyl) sulfone. 39967-97 N-1386 Hexylene Glycol Bis(trichloromethyl) sulfone. 39967-109 N-1386 PEG-EU 20 Bis(trichloromethyl) sulfone. 41550-1 R.P.S. Humidifier Bacteria-Algae Treatment Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14) and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 47033-12 AQB-004 Microbiocide Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 47371-23 FMB 210-15 Quat Concentrated Germicide 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-47 FMB 210-8 Quat 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-52 HS-210 Mildew Preventative 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-53 Formulation HS 210-15 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-58 HS-210 Swimming Pool Algaecide 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-59 FMB 210-100 Quat Concentrated Germicide 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 47371-71 Huntington FMB 302-8 Quat Concentrated Germicide 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride. 47371-86 TB-A23 Disinfectant Bowl Cleaner 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Hydrochloric acid. 47371-87 TB-A32 Disinfectant Bowl Cleaner 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Hydrochloric acid. 49827-2 Pine Glo Pine oil. 51219-1 Refresh BTC 1100. 51219-3 ACTABS BTC 1100. 51219-4 ACTABS XX BTC 1100. 53053-5 Envirosystems Bioshield 7200 1-Octadecanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-(3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl)-, chloride. 53053-6 Envirosystems Proshield 5000 1-Octadecanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-(3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl)-, chloride. 53053-7 Envirosystems Bioshield 75 1-Octadecanaminium,N,N-dimethyl-N-[3-(trihydroxysilyl)propyl],chloride. 53053-8 Envirosystems Proshield 5000D 1-Octadecanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-(3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl)-, chloride. 55195-4 Coldcide 0.25% Disinfecting Wipes o-Phenylphenol; 4-tert-Amylphenol; and Glutaraldehyde. 58044-3 Consan Triple Action 20 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18); Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C12, 30%C14, 17%C16, 3%C18); and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12). 60061-78 NP-1 Plus Saptain Control Chemical 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride and Carbamic acid, butyl-, 3-iodo-2-propynyl ester. 66243-3 Clean Control Corp 1-Decanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; 1-Octanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-octyl-, chloride; and Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 67619-15 Needle Pine oil. 67619-19 Snip Pine oil. 70627-3 NADBC-101 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (60%C14, 30%C16, 5%C18, 5%C12) and Alkyl * dimethyl ethylbenzyl ammonium chloride * (68%C12, 32%C14). 70627-10 Johnson's Forward Cleaner Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16). 70627-21 Virex II/128 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16) and 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride. 70627-55 Closure Central 25 Sodium chlorite. 74655-6 Spectrum RX-38 Bis(trichloromethyl) sulfone and Methylene bis(thiocyanate). 84398-1 CZL Oxidize 7.5 Sodium chlorite. 86130-5 FCB-15 Alkyl * dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride * (50%C14, 40%C12, 10%C16); 1-Decanaminium, N-decyl-N,N-dimethyl-, chloride; and Glutaraldehyde. Table 2—Product Registration With Pending Use Deletion Registration No. Product name Active ingredient Use to be deleted 39967-107 N-2000 Antimicrobial Dodecylguanidine hydrochloride Disposable diapers.

    Table 3 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record for all registrants of the products in Table 1 and Table 2 of this unit, in sequence by EPA company number. This number corresponds to the first part of the EPA registration numbers of the products listed in Table 1 and Table 2 of this unit.

    Table 3—Registrants Requesting Voluntary Cancellation EPA Company No. Company name and address 211 Central Solutions, Inc., 401 Funston Road, Kansas City, KS 66115. 498 Chase Products Co., P.O. Box 70, Maywood, IL 60153. 777 Reckitt Benckiser, LLC., 399 Interpace Parkway, Parsippany, NJ 07054. 875 Diversey, Inc., 8310 16th Street, MS 707, Sturtevant, WI 53177. 1022 IBC Manufacturing Co., 416 E. Brooks Road, Memphis, TN 38109. 1043 Steris Corporation, P.O. Box 147, St. Louis, MO 63166. 1258 Arch Chemicals, Inc., 1200 Bluegrass Lakes Parkway, Alpharetta, GA 30004. 1459 The Bullen Companies, 1640 Delmar Drive, P.O. Box 37, Folcroft, PA 19032. 1677 Ecolab, Inc., 370 North Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. 1839 Stepan Company, 22 W. Frontage Road, Northfield, IL 60093. 2296 National Chemical Laboratories, Inc., 401 N. 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19123. 3573 The Proctor & Gamble Company, 5299 Spring Grove Avenue, F&HC PS&RA, Cincinnati, OH 45217. 3862 ABC Compounding Co., Inc, P.O. Box 16247, Atlanta, GA 30321. 4313 Carroll Company, 2900 W. Kingsley Road, Garland, TX 75041. 4822 S.C. Johnson & Son Inc., 1525 Howe Street, Racine, WI 53403. 5736 Diversey, Inc., 8310 16th Street, MS 707, Sturtevant, WI 53177. 5741 Spartan Chemical Company, Inc., 1110 Spartan Drive, Maumee, OH 43537. 5813 Clorox Co., The, P.O. Box 493, Pleasanton, CA 94566. 6198 National Chemicals Inc., 105 Liberty Street, P.O. Box 32, Winona, MN 55987. 6243 Auto-Chlor System, 746 Poplar Avenue, Memphis, TN 38105. 6718 Access Business Group International LLC, 7575 E. Fulton Road, MC 50-1A, Ada, MI 49355. 6836 Lonza Inc., 90 Boroline Road, Allendale, NJ 07401. 7124 Alden Leeds Inc., 55 Jacobus Avenue, South Kearny, NJ 07032. 7364 GLB Pool & Spa, 90 Boroline Road, Allendale, NJ 07401. 7405 CPC Aeroscience, Inc., P.O. Box 667770, Pompano Beach, FL 33066. 8155 Canberra Corporation, 3610 N. Holland-Sylvania Road, Toledo, OH 43615. 9613 Bison Labs Inc., 80 Leslie Street, Buffalo, NY 14211. 9688 Chemsico, P.O. Box 142642, St. Louis, MO 63114. 9886 IFF Chemical Holdings, Inc., 2051 North Lane Avenue, Jacksonville, FL 32254. 10088 Athea Laboratories Inc., P.O. Box 240014, Milwaukee, WI 53224. 10324 Mason Chemical Company, 723 W. Algonquin Road, Suite B, Arlington Heights, IL 60005. 11668 T & R Chemicals, Inc., 700 Celum Road, Clint, TX 79836. 11694 ITW Pro Brands, 805 East Old 56 Highway, Olathe, KS 66061. 15136 Medical Chemical Corp., 19430 Van Ness Ave., Torrance, CA 90501. 15300 Chemtreat, Inc., 5640 Cox Road, Glen Allen, VA 23060. 39967 Lanxess Corporation, 111 RIDC Park West Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15275. 41550 RPS Products Inc., 281 Keyes Avenue, Hampshire, IL 60140. 47033 Cascade Water Services, Inc., 113 Bloomingdale Road, Hicksville, NY 11801. 47371 H&S Chemicals Division, 90 Boroline Road, Allendale, NJ 07401. 49827 Pine Glo Products, Inc., 414 S. Main Street, P.O. Box 429, Rolesville, NC 27571. 51219 The Rectorseal Corp., 2601 Spenwick Drive, Houston, TX 77055. 53053 Indusco Ltd., 12733 Director's Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192. 55195 Colcide, Inc., 12549 Ansin Circle Drive, Potomac, MD 20854. 58044 Parkway Research, 2935 South Koke Mill Road, Springfield, IL 62711. 60061 Kop-Coat, Inc, 436 Seventh Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15219. 66243 Clean Control Corp., 5145 Forest Run Trace—Suite B, Alpharetta, GA 30022. 67619 Clorox Professional Products Co, C/O PS&RC, P.O. Box 493, Pleasanton, CA 94566. 70627 Diversey, Inc., 8310 16th Street, MS 707, Sturtevant, WI 53177. 74655 Solenis, LLC., 7910 Baymeadows Way, Suite 100, Jacksonville, FL 32256. 84398 CZL, LLC, P.O. Box 339, Calhoun, GA 30703. 86130 Flowchem Technologies, 289 Cutlass LP, Rayne, LA 70578. III. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)) provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter, the EPA Administrator may approve such a request.

    Section 6(f)(1)(B) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)(B)) requires that before acting on a request for voluntary cancellation, EPA must provide a 30-day public comment period on the request for voluntary cancellation or use termination. In addition, FIFRA section 6(f)(1)(C) (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)(C)) requires that EPA provide a 180-day comment period on a request for voluntary cancellation or termination of any minor agricultural use before granting the request, unless:

    1. The registrants request a waiver of the comment period, or

    2. The EPA Administrator determines that continued use of the pesticide would pose an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment.

    None of the registrations in Table 1 and Table 2 of Unit II. are for minor agricultural use. Accordingly, EPA will provide a 30-day comment period on the proposed requests.

    IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request

    Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for cancellation or use deletion must submit such withdrawal in writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If the products have been subject to a previous cancellation action, the effective date of cancellation and all other provisions of any earlier cancellation action are controlling.

    V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products that are currently in the United States and that were packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation action. EPA proposes to include the following provisions for the treatment of any existing stocks of the products listed in Table 1 and Table 2 of Unit II.

    A. For Products 10324-64, 10324-73, 10324-79, 10324-82, 10324-83, 10324-84, 10324-86, 10324-109, 10324-131, 10324-134, 10324-144, 10324-146, 10324-147, 10324-163, 10324-168, 10324-179, 10324-180, 10324-181, 10324-189, 10324-190, 10324-191, 10324-192, 10324-213, 10324-215, 10324-216

    The registrant has requested to the Agency via letter to sell existing stocks for an 18-month period for products 10324-64, 10324-73, 10324-79, 10324-82, 10324-83, 10324-84, 10324-86, 10324-109, 10324-131, 10324-134, 10324-144, 10324-146, 10324-147, 10324-163, 10324-168, 10324-179, 10324-180, 10324-181, 10324-189, 10324-190, 10324-191, 10324-192, 10324-213, 10324-215, 10324-216. Because the Agency has identified no significant potential risk concerns associated with these pesticide products, upon cancellation, EPA anticipates allowing registrants to sell and distribute existing stocks of these products for 1 year and 6 months after publication of the Cancellation Order in the Federal Register. Thereafter, registrants will be prohibited from selling or distributing the pesticides identified in Table 1 of Unit II., except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17 or for proper disposal. Persons other than registrants will generally be allowed to sell, distribute, or use existing stocks until such stocks are exhausted, provided that such sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompanied, the canceled products.

    B. For All Other Products Identified in Table 1 and Table 2 of Unit II.

    Because the Agency has identified no significant potential risk concerns associated with these pesticide products, upon cancellation of the products or uses identified in Table 1 and Table 2 of Unit II., EPA anticipates allowing registrants to sell and distribute existing stocks of these products for 1 year after publication of the Cancellation Order in the Federal Register. Thereafter, registrants will be prohibited from selling or distributing the pesticides identified in Table 1 and Table 2 of Unit II., except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o) or for proper disposal. Persons other than registrants will generally be allowed to sell, distribute, or use existing stocks until such stocks are exhausted, provided that such sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompanied, the canceled products.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: July 11, 2016. Steve Knizner, Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17266 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9949-35-OA] Notification of a Teleconference of the Science Advisory Board Biogenic Carbon Emissions Panel AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public teleconference of the SAB Biogenic Carbon Emissions Panel to review EPA's Framework for Assessing Biogenic CO 2 Emissions from Stationary Sources (November 2014).

    DATES:

    The public teleconference will be held on Wednesday, October 12, 2016, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).

    ADDRESSES:

    The public teleconference will be held by telephone only.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Any member of the public wishing further information regarding the public teleconference may contact Dr. Holly Stallworth, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), SAB Staff Office, by telephone/voice mail at (202) 564-2073 or via email at [email protected] General information concerning the EPA Science Advisory Board can be found at the EPA SAB Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDAA) codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and technical peer review, advice, consultation, and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on the technical basis for EPA actions. As a Federal Advisory Committee, the SAB conducts business in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App. 2) and related regulations. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the SAB Biogenic Carbon Emissions Panel will hold a public teleconferences to consider comments from chartered SAB members on its February 8, 2016 draft report on EPA's Framework for Assessing Biogenic CO 2 Emissions from Stationary Sources (November 2014). The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies.

    As noticed in 80 FR 8867-8868, a face-to-face meeting of the Biogenic Carbon Emissions Panel was held on March 25 and 26, 2015 and a teleconference was held on May 29, 2015. Subsequent teleconferences were held on July 6, 2015, August 6, 2015 and September 9, 2015. Background on the current advisory activity can be found on the SAB Web site at http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/fedrgstr_activites/Biogenic%20CO2%20Framework?OpenDocument.

    Availability of the meeting materials: Agendas and meeting materials will be posted on the SAB Web site prior to each teleconference. To locate these materials, go to http://www.epa.gov/sab and click on the meeting date on the right hand side. EPA's review document, charge to the Panel and other background materials are also available at the URL above. For questions concerning EPA's Framework for Assessing Biogenic CO 2 Emissions from Stationary Sources (November 2014), please contact Sara Ohrel, Climate Change Division, at [email protected] or (202) 343-9712.

    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office. Federal advisory committees and panels, including scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to EPA. Members of the public can submit relevant comments on the topic of this advisory activity, including the charge to the panel and the EPA review documents, and/or the group conducting the activity, for the SAB to consider during the advisory process. Input from the public to the SAB will have the most impact if it consists of comments that provide specific scientific or technical information or analysis for the SAB panel to consider or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information.

    Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation will be limited to three minutes per speaker for each teleconference. Interested parties should contact Dr. Holly Stallworth, DFO, in writing (preferably via email), at the contact information noted above, by October 5, 2016 to be placed on the list of public speakers for the teleconference. Written Statements: Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office in advance of each teleconference according to the same deadline listed above for requesting oral comments. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO, preferably in electronic format via email. It is the SAB Staff Office general policy to post written comments on the Web page for the advisory meeting or teleconference. Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web sites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the SAB Web site. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit permission of the copyright holder.

    Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Dr. Stallworth at the phone number or email address noted above, at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Thomas H. Brennan, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17278 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0804] Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before August 22, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email [email protected]; and to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected] Include in the comments the OMB control number as shown in the “Supplementary Information” section below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web page called “Currently Under Review,” (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the “Select Agency” box below the “Currently Under Review” heading, (4) select “Federal Communications Commission” from the list of agencies presented in the “Select Agency” box, (5) click the “Submit” button to the right of the “Select Agency” box, (6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for the OMB control number of this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC submission to OMB will be displayed.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0804.

    Title: Universal Service—Rural Health Care Program.

    Form Numbers: FCC Forms 460, 461, 462, 463, 465, 466, and 467.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; federal government; and state, local, or Tribal governments.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 19,484 respondents; 137,846 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.1-40 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion, one-time, annual, quarterly, and monthly reporting requirements.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 214, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 218-220, 254, 303(r), 403 and 405.

    Total Annual Burden: 289,484 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not requesting that the respondents submit confidential information to the Commission. Respondents may, however, request confidential treatment for information they believe to be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules. We note that the universal service administrator, the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), must preserve the confidentiality of all data obtained from respondents and contributors to the universal service support program mechanism; must not use the data except for purposes of administering the universal service support program; and must not disclose data in company-specific form unless directed to do so by the Commission.

    Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to revise the information collection requirements contained in this collection. There is a change in the reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    This collection is utilized for the rural health care (RHC) support mechanism of the Commission's universal service fund (USF). The collection of the information is necessary so that the Commission and USAC will have sufficient information to determine if entities are eligible for funding pursuant to the RHC universal service support mechanism, to determine if entities are complying with the Commission's rules, and to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. In addition, the information is necessary in order to allow the Commission to evaluate the extent to which the RHC Programs are meeting the statutory objectives specified in section 254(h) of the 1996 Act, and the Commission's own performance goals for the Healthcare Connect Fund. This information collection is being revised to: (1) Eliminate the information requirement for the Internet Access Program; (2) extend some of the existing collection requirements for the Healthcare Connect Fund, the 2006 Pilot Program, and the Telecommunications Program; and (3) revise some of the existing information collection requirements for the Healthcare Connect Fund and the Telecommunications Programs. This information collection is organized by program indicating which information collection requirements are being eliminated, extended, and/or revised for each RHC Program. The Healthcare Connect Fund includes FCC Forms 460, 461, 462, and 463, and the Telecommunications Program includes FCC Forms 465, 466, 467. At the time of the Commission's last information collection submission, 2006 Pilot Program participants were using the FCC Forms for the Telecommunications and Internet Access Programs. 2006 Pilot Program participants and former 2006 Pilot Program participants, however, can now seek funding from the Healthcare Connect Fund and the Telecommunications Programs using the forms for those programs. The revisions to these FCC Forms, where applicable, are intended to make the RHC Program information requests consistent between the programs, to the extent possible. Since the last revision to this information collection, USAC has upgraded its information technology environment to create an integrated online application and administrative process for the Healthcare Connect Fund and all Healthcare Connect Fund forms are being submitted and processed via the online portal. Similarly, the information collection requirements associated with the Telecommunications Program have also been placed online. Taken as a whole, the implementation of these automated systems should reduce administrative burdens and costs for applicants, service providers, and USAC. Since the application processes have now been automated, the Commission will, in this information collection request, submit templates describing the type of information that will be requested from RHC Program participants, rather than submitting paper forms. As part of this information collection, we propose to make the revisions to this information collection and all RHC forms processed via the online portal effective January 1, 2017. The current FCC Forms will remain in effect until that date.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17180 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0010] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before September 19, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0010.

    Title: Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations, FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323 (formerly FCC Form 323); Section 73.3615, Ownership Reports; Section 74.797, Biennial Ownership Reports.

    Form Number: FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323 (formerly FCC Form 323).

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; not-for-profit institutions; State, Local, or Tribal Governments.

    Number of Respondents: 4,340 respondents; 4,340 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1.5 to 2.5 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; biennial reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 257, 303(r), 307, 309, and 310.

    Total Annual Burden: 9,620 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $10,093,220.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: The Commission is drafting a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for the personally identifiable information (PII) that is covered by the system of records notice (SORN), FCC/MB-1, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations. Upon completion of the PIA, it will be posted on the FCC's Web site, as required by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum, M-03-22 (September 22, 2003).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323 (formerly FCC Form 323) collects two types of information from respondents: PII in the form of names, addresses, job titles and demographic information; and FCC Registration Numbers (FRNs).

    The FCC/MB-1 SORN, which was approved on December 21, 2009 (74 FR 59978), covers the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on Form 2100, Schedule 323, as required under the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a). The Commission is drafting a privacy statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need to obtain the information and the protections that the Commission has in place to protect the PII.

    FRNs are assigned to applicants who complete FCC Form 160 (OMB Control No. 3060-0917). Form 160 currently requires applicants for FRNs to provide their Taxpayer Information Number (TIN) and/or Social Security Number (SSN). The FCC's electronic Commission Registration System (CORES) then provides each registrant with a CORES FRN, which identifies the registrant in his/her subsequent dealings with the FCC. This is done to protect the individual's privacy. The Commission maintains a SORN, FCC/OMD-9, Commission Registration System (CORES), to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on Form 160. Form 160 includes a privacy statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place to protect the PII.

    The Commission is revising Form 160 to enable applicants to obtain a Restricted Use FRN, which may be used on Form 2100, Schedule 323 to identify an individual reported as an attributable interest holder. The revised Form 160 will require applicants for Restricted Use FRNs to provide an alternative set of identifying information that does not include the individual's full SSN: His/her full name, residential address, date of birth, and only the last four digits of his/her SSN. Restricted Use FRNs may be used in lieu of CORES FRNs only on broadcast ownership reports and only for individuals (not entities) reported as attributable interest holders. The Commission is revising FCC/OMD-9 SORN to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on the revised Form 160.

    Needs and Uses: On January 20, 2016, the Commission released a Report and Order, Second Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration in MB Docket Nos. 07-294, 10-103, and MD Docket No. 10-234 (Second Report and Order). The Second Report and Order refines the collection of data reported on FCC Form 323, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations, and FCC Form 323-E, Ownership Report for Noncommercial Broadcast Stations. Specifically, the Second Report and Order implements a Restricted Use FRN (RUFRN) within the Commission's Registration System (CORES) that individuals may use solely for the purpose of broadcast ownership report filings; eliminates the availability of the Special Use FRN (SUFRN) for broadcast station ownership reports, except in very limited circumstances; prescribes revisions to Form 323-E that conform the reporting requirements for noncommercial educational (NCE) broadcast stations more closely to those for commercial stations; and makes a number of significant changes to the Commission's reporting requirements that reduce the filing burdens on broadcasters, streamline the process, and improve data quality. These enhancements will enable the Commission to obtain data reflecting a more useful, accurate, and thorough assessment of minority and female broadcast station ownership in the United States while reducing certain filing burdens.

    Licensees of commercial AM, FM, and full power television broadcast stations, as well as licensees of Class A and Low Power Television stations, must file FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323 (formerly FCC Form 323) every two years. Biennial Ownership Reports shall provide information accurate as of October 1 of the year in which the Report is filed. Form 2100, Schedule 323 shall be filed by December 1 in all odd-numbered years.

    In addition, Licensees and Permittees of commercial AM, FM, and full power television stations must file Form 2100, Schedule 323 following the consummation of a transfer of control or an assignment of a commercial AM, FM, or full power television station license or construction permit; a Permittee of a new commercial AM, FM, or full power television station must file Form 2100, Schedule 323 within 30 days after the grant of the construction permit; and a Permittee of a new commercial AM, FM, or full power television broadcast station must file Form 2100, Schedule 323 to update the initial report or to certify the continuing accuracy and completeness of the previously filed report on the date that the Permittee applies for a license to cover the construction permit.

    In the case of organizational structures that include holding companies or other forms of indirect ownership, a separate Form 2100, Schedule 323 must be filed for each entity in the organizational structure that has an attributable interest in the Licensee or Permittee.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17179 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0084] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before September 19, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0084.

    Title: Ownership Report for Noncommercial Educational Broadcast Stations, FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E (formerly FCC Form 323-E); Section 73.3615, Ownership Reports.

    Form Number: FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E (formerly FCC Form 323-E).

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents: 2,636 respondents; 2,636 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 to 1.5 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; biennial reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 257, 303(r), 307, 308, 309, and 310.

    Total Annual Burden: 3,867 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $2,319,900.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: The Commission is drafting a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for the personally identifiable information (PII) that is covered by the system of records notice (SORN), FCC/MB-1, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations. The Commission is also revising the FCC/MB-1 SORN to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E. The PIA will address the PII that is covered by the FCC/MB-1 SORN, as revised. Upon completion of the PIA, it will be posted on the FCC's Web site, as required by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum, M-03-22 (September 22, 2003).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E (formerly FCC Form 323-E) collects two types of information from respondents: PII in the form of names, addresses, job titles and demographic information; and FCC Registration Numbers (FRNs).

    The Commission is revising the FCC/MB-1 SORN to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E, as required under the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a). The Commission is also drafting a privacy statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place to protect the PII.

    FRNs are assigned to applicants who complete FCC Form 160 (OMB Control No. 3060-0917). Form 160 currently requires applicants for FRNs to provide their Taxpayer Information Number (TIN) and/or Social Security Number (SSN). The FCC's electronic Commission Registration System (CORES) then provides each registrant with a CORES FRN, which identifies the registrant in his/her subsequent dealings with the FCC. This is done to protect the individual's privacy. The Commission maintains a SORN, FCC/OMD-9, Commission Registration System (CORES), to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 160. FCC Form 160 includes a privacy statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place to protect the PII.

    The Commission is revising Form 160 to enable applicants to obtain a Restricted Use FRN, which may be used on Form 2100, Schedule 323-E to identify an individual reported as an attributable interest holder. The revised Form 160 will require applicants for Restricted Use FRNs to provide an alternative set of identifying information that does not include the individual's full SSN: His/her full name, residential address, date of birth, and only the last four digits of his/her SSN. Restricted Use FRNs may be used in lieu of CORES FRNs only on broadcast ownership reports and only for individuals (not entities) reported as attributable interest holders. The Commission is revising the FCC/OMD-9 SORN to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the PII that individual respondents may submit on the revised Form 160.

    Needs and Uses: On January 20, 2016, the Commission released a Report and Order, Second Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration in MB Docket Nos. 07-294, 10-103, and MD Docket No. 10-234 (323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order). The 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order refines the collection of data reported on FCC Form 323, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations, and FCC Form 323-E, Ownership Report for Noncommercial Broadcast Stations. Specifically, the 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order implements a Restricted Use FRN (RUFRN) within the Commission's Registration System (CORES) that individuals may use solely for the purpose of broadcast ownership report filings. In light of the Commission's adoption of the RUFRN requirement, the 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order eliminates the availability of the Special Use FRN (SUFRN) for broadcast station ownership reports, except in very limited circumstances. The 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order also prescribes revisions to Form 323-E that conform the reporting requirements for noncommercial educational broadcast stations more closely to those for commercial stations, including information about the race, gender, and ethnicity of existing, reportable interest holders; the use of a unique identifier; and the biennial filing requirement. In addition, the 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order makes a number of significant changes to the Commission's reporting requirements that reduce the filing burdens on broadcasters, streamline the process, and improve data quality. These enhancements will enable the Commission to obtain data reflecting a more useful, accurate, and thorough assessment of minority and female broadcast station ownership in the United States while reducing certain filing burdens.

    Licensees of noncommercial educational AM, FM, and television broadcast stations must file FCC Form 2100, Schedule 323-E (formerly FCC Form 323-E) every two years. Pursuant to the new filing procedures adopted in the 323/CORES Order and Reconsideration Order, Form 2100, Schedule 323-E shall be filed by December 1 in all odd-numbered years. Biennial Ownership Reports shall provide information accurate as of October 1 of the year in which the Report is filed.

    In addition, Licensees and Permittees of noncommercial educational AM, FM, and television stations must file Form 2100, Schedule 323-E following the consummation of a transfer of control or an assignment of a noncommercial educational AM, FM, or television station license or construction permit; a Permittee of a new noncommercial educational AM, FM, or television station must file Form 2100, Schedule 323-E within 30 days after the grant of the construction permit; and a Permittee of a new noncommercial educational AM, FM, or television station must file Form 2100, Schedule 323-E to update the initial report or to certify the continuing accuracy and completeness of the previously filed report on the date that the Permittee applies for a license to cover the construction permit.

    In the case of organizational structures that include holding companies or other forms of indirect ownership, a separate Form 2100, Schedule 323-E must be filed for each entity in the organizational structure that has an attributable interest in the Licensee or Permittee.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17178 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:09 a.m. on Tuesday, July 19, 2016, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters related to the Corporation's supervision, corporate, and resolution activities.

    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig, seconded by Director Thomas J. Curry (Comptroller of the Currency), concurred in by Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters which were to be the subject of this meeting on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10).

    Dated: July 19, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17401 Filed 7-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10373, Colorado Capital Bank, Castle Rock, Colorado

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Colorado Capital Bank, Castle Rock, Colorado (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Colorado Capital Bank on July 8, 2011. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17211 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL [Docket No. FFIEC-2016-0002] Notice of Availability of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Filing Instructions Guides for HMDA Data Collected in 2017 and 2018 AGENCY:

    Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The FFIEC announces the availability of the Filing Instructions Guide (FIG) for Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data collected in 2017 and the Filing Instructions Guide for Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data collected in 2018. The FIGs provide a compendium of resources to help covered financial institutions file with the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) HMDA data collected in 2017 and 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The FIGs for HMDA data collected in 2017 and 2018 are available for download on the Bureau's Web site at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/hmda. These materials are also accessible from the FFIEC's Web site at http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Byrne, [email protected] or (855) 438-2372.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The FFIEC 1 is publishing this notice of availability to inform the public of the availability of the FIG for HMDA data collected in 2017 and the FIG for HMDA data collected in 2018. Each filing instructions guide is a compendium of resources to help covered financial institutions file with the Bureau HMDA data collected in 2017 and 2018.

    1 The FFIEC, established in 1979, is an interagency body empowered to prescribe uniform principles and standards for the Federal examination of financial institutions and to make recommendations to promote uniformity in the supervision of such institutions. See 12 U.S.C. 3301.

    Beginning with HMDA data collected in 2017, responsibility for receiving and processing HMDA data will transfer from the Federal Reserve Board (Board) to the Bureau. The member agencies of the FFIEC—the Bureau, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Board, and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)—as well as the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), have agreed that, for HMDA data collected in or after 2017, filing data with the Bureau will be deemed data submission to the appropriate Federal agency.

    The FIGs for HMDA data collected in 2017 and 2018 provide summaries of changes to the submission processes for filing with the Bureau. The FIGs also include file specifications, which provide information regarding, for example, valid values, how to format loan/application registers, and how to file HMDA data collected in 2017 and 2018 with the Bureau. The 2018 FIG includes data specifications with instructions on entering data in the loan/application register for HMDA data collected in 2018. The 2017 FIG includes edit specifications, which list the edits that financial institutions must clear on HMDA data before filing it with the Bureau. The 2018 FIG notes that edit specifications for data collected in 2018 will be provided at a later date.

    [End of proposed text.]

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. Judith E. Dupre, FFIEC Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17234 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7535-01-P; 6714-01-P; 6210-01-P; 4810-33-P; 4810-AM-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreement Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreement under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. A copy of the agreement is available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 012426.

    Title: The OCEAN Alliance Agreement.

    Parties: COSCO Container Lines Co., Ltd.; CMA CGM S.A.; Evergreen Marine Corporation (Taiwan) Ltd. acting on its own behalf and/or on behalf of other members of the Evergreen Line Joint Service Agreement (ELJSA); and Orient Overseas Container Line Limited and OOCL (Europe) Limited, acting as one party.

    Filing Party: Mark J. Fink, Esq. and Robert K. Magovern, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 Nineteenth St. NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Synopsis: The agreement would authorize the Parties to share vessels with one another, charter and exchange space on one another's vessels, and enter into cooperative working arrangements in connection with the Parties' services and operations in the trades between Asia, Northern Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East, Canada, Central America, and the Caribbean on the one hand, and the U.S. on the other hand.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Karen V. Gregory, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17237 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-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 August 18, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. Wintrust Financial Corporation, Rosemont, Illinois; to acquire 100 percent of First Community Financial Corporation, Elgin, Illinois, and thereby indirectly acquire First Community Bank, Elgin, Illinois.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. Adage, LLC, Ogallala, Nebraska; to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of 68.85 percent of the voting shares of Adbanc, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Adams Bank & Trust, both of Ogallala, Nebraska.

    C. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Gerald C. Tsai, Director, Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579:

    1. Luther Burbank Corporation, Santa Rosa, California; to become a bank holding company upon the conversion of Luther Burbank Savings, Santa Rosa, California, from a savings bank into a commercial bank.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 18, 2016. Margaret Shanks, Deputy Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17271 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-16-0215; Docket No. CDC-2016-0066] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing efforts to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on the proposed revision of the National Death Index (NDI). The NDI is a national data base containing identifying death record information submitted annually to NCHS by all the state vital statistics offices, beginning with deaths in 1979. Searches against the NDI file provide the states and dates of death, and the death certificate numbers of deceased study subjects. Using the NDI Plus service, researchers have the option of also receiving cause of death information for deceased subjects.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before September 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2016-0066 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact the Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    National Death Index (NDI), (OMB No. 0920-0215, Expiration 10/31/2016)—Revision—National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Section 306 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C.), as amended, authorizes that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting through NCHS, shall collect statistics on the extent and nature of illness and disability of the population of the United States.

    The National Death Index (NDI) is a national data base containing identifying death record information submitted annually to NCHS by all the state vital statistics offices, beginning with deaths in 1979. Searches against the NDI file provide the states and dates of death, and the death certificate numbers of deceased study subjects.

    Using the NDI Plus service, researchers have the option of also receiving cause of death information for deceased subjects, thus reducing the need to request copies of death certificates from the states. The NDI Plus option currently provides the International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes for the underlying and multiple causes of death for the years 1979-2015. Health researchers must complete administrative forms in order to apply for NDI services, and submit records of study subjects for computer matching against the NDI file. A three-year Revision request is submitted to update the three data collection forms submitted by NDI users when applying for use of the NDI and when actually using the service. The form updates include editorial changes needed to capture current modes of data transfer and service payment options, direction clarifications, the inclusion of an item to capture any resulting publications, as well as, additional terms and condition associated with the confidentiality agreement. There is no cost to respondents except for their time. The total estimated annual burden hours are 507, an increase of 325 hours due to an anticipated increase of both the number of applicants and an overall average increased time to complete the application form.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Researchers Application Form 100 1 4.5 450 Researchers Repeat Request Form 70 1 18/60 21 Researchers Data Transmittal Form 120 1 18/60 36 Total 507
    Jeffrey M. Zirger, Acting 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. 2016-17170 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Advisory Committee; Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration, Renewal AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; renewal of advisory committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the renewal of the Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner). The Commissioner has determined that it is in the public interest to renew the Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration for an additional 2 years beyond the charter expiration date. The new charter will be in effect until June 26, 2018.

    DATES:

    Authority for the Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration will expire on June 26, 2018, unless the Commissioner formally determines that renewal is in the public interest.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rakesh Raghuwanshi, Office of the Chief Scientist, Office of the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, Bldg. 1, Rm. 3309, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-4769, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.65 and approval by the Department of Health and Human Services pursuant to 45 CFR part 11 and by the General Services Administration, FDA is announcing the renewal of the Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration. The committee is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to provide advice to the Commissioner. The Science Board advises the Commissioner or designee in discharging responsibilities as they relate to helping to ensure safe and effective drugs for human use and, as required, any other product for which FDA has regulatory responsibility. The Science Board shall provide advice to the Commissioner and other appropriate officials on specific complex scientific and technical issues important to FDA and its mission, including emerging issues within the scientific community. Additionally, the Science Board will provide advice that supports the Agency in keeping pace with technical and scientific developments, including in regulatory science; and input into the Agency's research agenda; and on upgrading its scientific and research facilities and training opportunities. It will also provide, where requested, expert review of Agency-sponsored intramural and extramural scientific research programs.

    The Committee shall consist of a core of 21 voting members including a Chair and Co-Chair. The members, Chair and Co-Chair are selected by the Commissioner or designee from among authorities knowledgeable in the fields of food science, safety, and nutrition; chemistry; pharmacology; translational and clinical medicine and research; toxicology; biostatistics; medical devices; imaging; robotics; cell and tissue based products; regenerative medicine; public health and epidemiology; international health and regulation; product safety; product manufacturing sciences and quality; and other scientific areas relevant to FDA regulated products such as systems biology, informatics, nanotechnology, and combination products. Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms of up to 4 years. Almost all non-Federal members of this committee serve as Special Government Employees. The core of voting members may include one technically qualified member, selected by the Commissioner or designee, who is identified with consumer interests and is recommended by either a consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested persons. The Committee may also include technically qualified federal members.

    Further information regarding the most recent charter and other information can be found at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/ScienceBoardtotheFoodandDrugAdministration/ucm115356.htm or by contacting the Designated Federal Officer (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In light of the fact that no change has been made to the committee name or description of duties, no amendment will be made to 21 CFR 14.100.

    This document is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app.). For general information related to FDA advisory committees, please visit us at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17182 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2005-D-0155 (formerly 2005D-0219)] General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs Used in Food-Producing Animals; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft revised guidance for industry #3 entitled “General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs Used in Food-Producing Animals.” This draft revised guidance describes the type of information that FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) recommends sponsors provide to address the human food safety of new animal drugs used in food-producing animals.

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by September 19, 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-2005-D-0155 for “General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs used in Food-Producing Animals.” 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.

    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Policy and Regulations Staff (HFV-6), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julia Oriani, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-151), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-0788, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft revised guidance for industry #3 entitled “General Principles for Evaluating the Human Food Safety of New Animal Drugs used in Food-Producing Animals.” This draft revised guidance is intended to inform sponsors of the scientific data and/or information that may provide an acceptable basis to determine that the residue of a new animal drug in or on food, when consumed, presents a reasonable certainty of no harm to humans. This guidance describes a recommended approach for providing human food safety scientific data and/or information. CVM acknowledges that alternate approaches also may be appropriate and encourages sponsors to discuss with CVM whether an alternate approach may be appropriate for specific new animal drugs.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This level 1 draft revised guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft revised guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on the type of information sponsors provide to address the human food safety of new animal drugs used in food-producing animals. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 514 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0032.

    IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17188 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. 2013-N-0093] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Evaluation of the Program for Enhanced Review Transparency and Communication for New Molecular Entity New Drug Applications and Original Biologics License Applications in Prescription Drug User Fee Acts AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA).

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0746. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Evaluation of the Program for Enhanced Review Transparency and Communication for New Molecular Entity New Drug Applications (NME NDAs) and Original Biologics License Applications (BLAs) in Prescription Drug User Fee Acts (OMB Control Number 0910-0746)—Extension

    As part of its commitments in the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) V, FDA established a new review Program to promote greater transparency and increased communication between the FDA review team and the applicant on the most innovative products reviewed by the Agency. The Program applies to all NME NDAs and original BLAs that are received from October 1, 2012, through September 30, 2017. The Program is described in detail in section II.B of the document entitled “PDUFA Reauthorization Performance Goals and Procedures Fiscal Years 2013 through 2017” (the Commitment Letter) (available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/UCM270412.pdf.

    The goals of the Program are to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the first review cycle and decrease the number of review cycles necessary for approval so that patients have timely access to safe, effective, and high-quality new drugs and biologics. A key aspect of the Program is an interim and final assessment that will evaluate how well the parameters of the Program have achieved the intended goals. The PDUFA V Commitment Letter specifies that the assessments be conducted by an independent contractor and that they include interviews of pharmaceutical manufacturers who submit NME NDAs and original BLAs to the Program in PDUFA V. The contractor for the assessments of the Program is Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), and the statement of work for the assessments is available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/UCM304793.pdf.

    In accordance with the PDUFA V Commitment Letter, FDA contracted with ERG to conduct independent interviews of applicants after FDA issues a first-cycle action for applications reviewed under the Program. The purpose of these interviews is to collect feedback from applicants on the success of the Program in increasing review transparency and communication during the review process. ERG will anonymize and aggregate sponsor responses prior to inclusion in the assessments and any presentation materials at public meetings. FDA will publish ERG's assessments, with interview results and findings, in the Federal Register for public comment.

    Description of Respondents: The respondents to this collection of information are sponsor representatives for NME NDAs and original BLAs.

    In the Federal Register of December 10, 2015 (80 FR 76699), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed extension of this collection of information. No comments were received.

    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Portion of study Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden
  • per response
  • Total hours
    Pre-test 5 1 5 1.5 7.50 Interviews 135 1 135 1.5 202.50 Total 210 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    FDA typically reviews approximately 40 to 45 NME NDAs and original BLAs per year. ERG interviews 1 to 3 sponsor representatives at a time for each application that receives a first-cycle action from FDA, up to 135 sponsor representatives per year. ERG conducts a pretest of the interview protocol with five respondents. FDA estimates that it will take 1.0 to 1.5 hours to complete the pretest, for a total of a maximum of 7.5 hours. We estimate that up to 135 respondents will take part in the post-action interviews each year, with each interview lasting 1.0 to 1.5 hours, for a total of a maximum of 202.5 hours. Thus, the total estimated annual burden is 210 hours. FDA's burden estimate is based on prior experience with similar interviews with the regulated community.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17185 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-E-0406] Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; QUTENZA AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for QUTENZA and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug product.

    DATES:

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by September 19, 2016. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period by January 17, 2017. See “Petitions” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    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-2010-E-0406 for “Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; QUTENZA.” 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:

    Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.

    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human drug product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.

    Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).

    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product QUTENZA (capsaicin). QUTENZA is indicated for management of neuropathic pain associated with postherpetic neuralgia. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for QUTENZA (U.S. Patent No. 6,239,180) from NeurogesX, Inc., and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration and also requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period. In a letter dated June 23, 2016, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of QUTENZA represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, FDA also determined the product's regulatory review period.

    II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for QUTENZA is 2,944 days. Of this time, 2,547 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 397 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:

    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective: October 27, 2001. The applicant claims September 27, 2001, as the date the investigational new drug application (IND) became effective. However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date was October 27, 2001, which was 30 days after FDA receipt of the IND.

    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to the human drug product under section 505(b) of the FD&C Act: October 16, 2008. The applicant claims October 13, 2008, as the date the new drug application (NDA) for QUTENZA was initially submitted. However, FDA records indicate that NDA 22-395 was submitted on October 16, 2008.

    3. The date the application was approved: November 16, 2009. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that NDA 22-395 was approved on November 16, 2009.

    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,687 days of patent term extension.

    III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.

    Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17187 Filed 7-20-16; 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 Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Harnessing Big Data to Halt HIV/AIDS.

    Date: July 22, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 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: Jose H. Guerrier, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5218, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1137, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 14, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17175 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review Amended; Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, August 03, 2016, 12:30 p.m. to August 03, 2016, 05:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which was published in the Federal Register on July 14, 2016, 81 FR 45512.

    The Meeting will begin at 11:00 a.m. The meeting date and location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17176 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2016-0656] Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee; Vacancies AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Request for applications.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard seeks applications for membership on the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee. The Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee provides advice and makes recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security through the Coast Guard Commandant on matters relating to Great Lakes pilotage, including review of proposed Great Lakes pilotage regulations and policies.

    DATES:

    Completed applications should reach the Coast Guard on or before August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Applicants should send a cover letter expressing interest in an appointment to the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee that also identifies which membership category the applicant is applying under, along with a resume detailing the applicant's experience via one of the following methods:

    By Email: [email protected].

    By Fax: (202) 372-8387, ATTN: Ms. Michelle Birchfield.

    By Mail: Commandant (CG-WWM-2), U.S. Coast Guard, Attention: Ms. Michelle Birchfield, Alternate Designated Federal Officer, Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-7509.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Michelle Birchfield, Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee Alternate Designated Federal Officer, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-7509; telephone 202-372-1537, fax 202-372-8387, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee is a federal advisory committee established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix). The Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee operates under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 9307, and makes recommendations to the Secretary and the Coast Guard on matters relating to the Great Lakes.

    Meetings of the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee will be held with the approval of the Designated Federal Officer. The Committee is required to meet at least once per year. Additional meetings may be held at the request of a majority of the Committee or at the discretion of the Designated Federal Officer. Further information about the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee is available by going to the Web site: https://www.facadatabase.gov. Click on the search tab and type “Great Lakes” into the search form. Then select “Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee” from the list.

    Individuals shall serve terms of office of three years and may be reappointed to one additional term, serving not more than six consecutive years. All members serve at their own expense but may receive reimbursement for travel and per diem from the Federal Government.

    We will consider applicants for two positions that expire or become vacant on September 30, 2016.

    • One member representing the interests of Great Lakes ports, and

    • One member representing the interests of shippers whose cargoes are transported through Great Lakes ports.

    To be eligible, applicants shall have at least five years of practical experience in maritime operations.

    The Department of Homeland Security does not discriminate in selection of Committee members on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, disability and genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, or other non-merit factor. The Department of Homeland Security strives to achieve a widely diverse candidate pool for all of its recruitment actions.

    If you are interested in applying to become a member of the Committee, send your cover letter and resume to Ms. Michelle Birchfield, Alternate Designated Federal Officer of the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee via one of the transmittal methods in the ADDRESSES section by the deadline in the DATES section of this notice. Email submittals will receive email receipt confirmation.

    Dated: July 14, 2016. J.G. Lantz, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Regulations and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17239 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5909-N-49] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Family Self-Sufficiency Program Demonstration AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5533. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on May 6, 2016 at 81 FR 27466.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program Demonstration.

    OMB Control Number: 2528-0296.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Description of the Need for Information and Proposed Use: The Department is conducting this study under contract with MDRC and its subcontractors (Branch Associates and M. Davis and Company, Inc.). The project is an evaluation of the Family Self-Sufficiency Program operated at Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) across the United States. The study will use random-assignment methods to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. FSS has operated since 1992 and serves voucher holders and residents of public housing. The FSS model is essentially a five-year program, and includes case management plus an escrow account. FSS case managers create a plan with families to achieve goals and connect with services that will enhance their employment opportunities. Families accrue money in their escrow accounts as they increase their earnings. To date, HUD has funded two other studies of the FSS program, but neither can indicate how well families would have done in the absence of the program. A random assignment model is needed because participant self-selection into Family Self Sufficiency program limits the ability to know whether program features rather than the characteristics of the participating families caused tenant income gains. Random assignment will limit the extent to which selection bias is driving observed results. The demonstration will document the progress of a group of FSS participants from initial enrollment to program completion (or exit). The intent is to gain a deeper understanding of the program and illustrate strategies that assist participants to obtain greater economic independence. While the main objective of FSS is stable, suitable employment, there are many interim outcomes of interest, including: Getting a first job; getting a higher paying job; self-employment/small business ownership; no longer needing benefits provided under one or more welfare programs; obtaining additional education, whether in the form of a high school diploma, higher education degree, or vocational training; buying a home; buying a car; setting up savings accounts; or accomplishing similar goals that lead to economic independence.

    Data collection will include the families that are part of the treatment and control groups. Data will be gathered through surveys.

    Members of the Affected Public:

    Families receiving subsidized housing and enrolled in the FSS program (treatment group) 1,281 Families receiving subsidized housing and not enrolled in the FSS program (control group) 1,270

    Estimation of the total number of hours needed to prepare the information collection including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:

    Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average burden/response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    36-Month Survey 2,551 1 45 minutes (.75) 1,913 Total 1,913
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Anna P. Guido, Department Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17294 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR- 5921-N-09] Privacy Act of 1974; Notice of a Computer Matching Program Between the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Education (ED) AGENCY:

    Office of Administration, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a Computer Matching Program between HUD and ED.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503), and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines on the Conduct of Matching Programs (54 FR 25818 (June 19, 1989); and OMB Bulletin 89-22, “Instructions on Reporting Computer Matching Programs to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Congress and the Public,” HUD is issuing a public notice of its intent to conduct a recurring computer matching program with ED for the purpose of incorporating ED debtor files into the Credit Alert Verification Reporting System (CAIVRS), which is a HUD computer information system.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: The effective date of the matching program shall begin August 22, 2016, or at least 40 days from the date that copies of the Computer Matching Agreement, signed by both HUD and ED Data Integrity Boards (DIBs), are sent to OMB and Congress, whichever is later, provided that no comments that would result in a contrary determination are received.

    Comments Due Date: August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this notice to the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, Room 10110, SW., Washington, DC 20410. Communications should refer to the above docket number and title. A copy of each communication submitted will be available for public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. weekdays at the above address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact the “Recipient Agency” Acting Departmental Privacy Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 10139, Washington, DC 20410, telephone number (202) 402-6147 or the “Source Agency” Department of Education, Federal Student Aid/Borrower Services, 830 First Street NE., Room UCP-41F2, Washington, DC 20202, telephone number (202) 377-3436. [These are not a toll-free numbers.] A telecommunication device for hearing- and speech-impaired individuals (TTY) is available at (800) 877-8339 (Federal Relay Service).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    HUD's CAIVRS database includes delinquent debt information from the Departments of Education (ED), Veteran's Affairs (VA), Justice (DOJ), the Small Business Administration (SBA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This data match will allow the prescreening of applicants for Federal direct loans or Federally guaranteed loans, for the purpose of determining the applicant's credit worthiness, by ascertaining whether the applicant is delinquent or in default on a loan owed directly to, or Federally guaranteed by, the Federal government. Lending Federal agencies and authorized private lending institution will be able to use the CAIVRS debtor file to verify that the loan applicant is not in default, or delinquent on a Federal direct or Federally guaranteed loan, prior to granting the applicant a loan. The CAIVRS database contains Personally Identifiable Information (PII) contributed by participating Federal agencies, including Social Security Numbers (SSNs) and other records of borrowers delinquent or in default on debts owed to, or guaranteed by HUD and other Federal agencies. Authorized users may not deny, terminate, or make a final decision concerning any loan assistance to an applicant or take other adverse action against such applicant based on the information produced by data matches conducted under CAIVRS, until such authorized users have independently verified such adverse information.

    Reporting of Matching Program

    In accordance with Public Law 100-503, the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 as amended, and OMB Bulletin 89-22, “Instructions on Reporting Computer Matching Programs to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Congress and the Public,” copies of this notice and report are being provided to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight Government Reform, the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and OMB.

    Authority:

    HUD has authority to collect and review mortgage data pursuant to the National Housing Act, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., and related laws. The Department of Education (ED) oversees and manages Federal student aid programs pursuant to the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, 20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq. This computer matching will be conducted pursuant to Pub. L. 100-503, “The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988,” as amended, and OMB Circulars A-129 (Managing Federal Credit Programs). One of the purposes of all Executive departments and agencies is to implement efficient management practices for Federal Credit Programs. OMB Circular A-129 was issued under the authority of the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, as amended; the Budget and Accounting Act of 1950, as amended; the Debt Collection Act of 1982, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996; Section 2653 of Pub. L. 98-369; the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as amended; the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act of 1990, the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended; Executive Order 8248; the Cash Management Improvement Act Amendments of 1992; and pre-existing common law authority to charge interest on debts and to offset payments to collect debts administratively.

    Objectives To Be Met by the Matching Program

    The objective of this matching program is to give program agencies access to a system that allows them to prescreen applicants for loans made, or loans guaranteed, by the Federal Government to ascertain if the applicant is delinquent in paying a debt owed to or guaranteed by the Federal Government. As part of this process, HUD will be provided access to ED's debtor data for prescreening purposes.

    The use of CAIVRS will allow HUD to better monitor its credit programs and to reduce the credit extended to individuals with outstanding delinquencies on debts owed to HUD and other Federal agencies. ED expects that its participation in CAIVRS will further other Federal agencies' efforts to reduce credit risks through loan prescreening, and prompt student loan defaulters, who are denied credit by other Federal agencies, to make arrangements to repay their defaulted student loans.

    Under this computer matching program, HUD/CAIVRS receives limited information on borrowers who have defaulted on loans administered by participating Federal agencies each month. The information includes: Borrower ID Number—The Social Security Number (SSN), Employer Identification Number (EIN) or Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) of the borrower on a delinquent or defaulted Federal direct loan or Federally guaranteed loan. Federal agency personnel and authorized lenders must enter a user authorization code followed by either a SSN or EIN to access CAIVRS. Only the following information is returned or displayed:

    ○ Yes/No as to whether the holder of that SSN/EIN is in default on a Federal loan; and

    ○ If Yes, then CAIVRS provides to the lender:

    ○ Loan case number;

    ○ Record type (claim, default, foreclosure, or judgment);

    ○ Agency administering the loan program;

    ○ Phone number at the applicable Federal agency (to call to clear up the default); and

    ○ Confirmation Code associated with the query.

    Federal law mandates the suspension of the processing of applications for Federal credit benefits (such as government-insured loans) if the applicants are delinquent on Federal or Federally guaranteed debt. Processing may continue only after the borrower satisfactorily resolves the debt (e.g., pays in full or renegotiates a new payment plan). To remove a CAIVRS sanction, the borrower must contact the Federal agency that reported their SSN or EIN to HUD/CAIVRS using the information provided.

    Records To Be Matched

    HUD will use records from the Single Family Default Monitoring System (SFDMS/F42D (72 FR 65350 November 20, 2007)), and Single Family Insurance System—Claims Subsystem (CLAIMS/A43C (72 FR65348 November 20, 2007)), as combined in CAIVRS to provide an up-to-date dataset to be used in records matching. SFDMS maintains data on mortgages that are 90 or more days delinquent. The Mortgagee or Servicer must submit a Monthly Delinquent Loan Report (HUD-92068-A) to HUD on a monthly basis until the mortgage status has been completed by all Mortgagees, or is otherwise terminated or deleted. Mortgagees and Servicers provide default data to HUD via Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) or using the Internet via FHA Connection, through which the data is sorted, pre-screened, key entered, edited, and otherwise processed. Reports are generated for HUD Headquarters and Field Offices to review.

    CLAIMS provides automated receipt, tracking and processing of form HUD-27011, Single Family Application for Insurance Benefits. CLAIMS provides online update and inquiry capability to Single Family Insurance and Claims databases, and to cumulative history files. Claim payments are made by Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) via an HDS platform (IBM mainframe/Treasury interface) on a daily basis.

    For the actual data match, ED will use records from the system of records entitled “Title IV Program Files” (18-11-05), originally published in the Federal Register on June 4, 1999 (64 FR 30163), and subsequently amended on December 27, 1999 (64 FR 72407). However, the ED records from which the match information is compiled are maintained in the “Student Financial Assistance Collection Files” system of records (18-11-07), 64 FR 30166 (June 4, 1999), as amended, 64 FR 72407 (December 27, 1999). The ED routine use for this match is published as “routine use number one” in the system of records notice for the “Student Financial Assistance Collection Files” (18-11-07), which permits disclosures of the pertinent information to HUD.

    Notice Procedures

    HUD and ED have separate procedures for notifying individuals that their records will be matched to determine whether they are delinquent or in default on a Federal debt. HUD will notify individuals at the time of application for a HUD/FHA mortgage, and ED will notify individuals at the time of application for Title IV, Higher Education Act (HEA) Federal student loan. The application for Title IV, HEA program assistance explains that as part of the application process, ED may disclose information from that application to other Federal agencies under a published “routine use” without the applicants' consent, as permitted by law. HUD and ED published a notice concerning routine use disclosures in the Federal Register to inform individuals that a computer match may be performed to determine a loan applicant's credit status with the Federal Government. The Privacy Act also requires that a copy of each Computer Matching Agreement entered into with a recipient agency shall be available upon request to the public.

    Categories of Records/Individuals Involved

    Data elements disclosed in computer matching governed by this Agreement are Personally Identifiable Information (PII) from the specified ED system of record. The data elements supplied by ED to CAIVRS are the following:

    • Borrower ID Number—The Social Security Number (SSN), Employer Identification Number (EIN) or Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) of the borrower on a delinquent or defaulted federal direct loan or Federally guaranteed loan.

    • Case Number—A reference number issued by the reporting agency for the delinquent or defaulted federal direct loan or Federally guaranteed loan.

    • Agency Code—A code assigned to the reporting agency.

    • Type Code—A code that indicates the type of record—claim, default, foreclosure, or judgment.

    • Borrower ID Type—A code that indicates whether the Borrower ID Number is a SSN, EIN, or TIN.

    Period of the Match

    Matching will begin at least 40 days from the date that copies of the Computer Matching Agreement, signed by HUD and ED DIBs, are sent to both Houses of Congress and OMB; or at least 30 days from the date this notice is published in the Federal Register, whichever is later, provided that no comments that would result in a contrary determination are received. The matching program will be in effect and continue for 18 months with an option to renew for 12 additional months unless one of the parties to the Agreement advises the other in writing to terminate or modify the Agreement.

    Dated: June 22, 2016. Patricia A. Hoban-Moore, Chief Administrative Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17255 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5918-N-01] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Promise Zones Reporting AGENCY:

    Office of Field Policy and Management, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: September 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-5534 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brooke M. Bohnet, Senior Management Analyst, Field Operations Division, Field Policy and Management, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Brooke Bohnet at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-6693. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Bohnet.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Promise Zones Reporting.

    OMB Approval Number: 2501-New.

    Type of Request: New Collection.

    Form Number: HUD-XXXX Monthly Grant Report.

    HUD-XXXX Quarterly and Annual Strategic Plan.

    HUD-XXXX Non-Federal Investments.

    HUD-XXXX New Neighborhood Amenities.

    HUD-XXXX Annual Report.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use: This collection is a new collection that will be collecting information for reporting purposes. This collection will reference the actual application collection that was approved under OMB 2501-033. HUD designated fourteen communities as urban Promise Zones between 2014 and 2016. Under the Promise Zones initiative, the federal government will invest and partner with high-poverty urban, rural, and tribal communities to create jobs, increase economic activity, improve educational opportunities, leverage private investment, and reduce violent crime. Additional information about the Promise Zones initiative can be found at www.hud.gov/promisezones, and questions can be addressed to [email protected] The federal administrative duties pertaining to these designations shall be managed and executed by HUD for ten years from the designation dates pursuant The Promise Zone Initiative supports HUD's responsibilities under sections 2 and 3 of the HUD Act, 42 U.S.C. 3531-32, to assist the President in achieving maximum coordination of the various federal activities which have a major effect upon urban community, suburban, or metropolitan development; to develop and recommend the President policies for fostering orderly growth and development of the Nation's urban areas; and to exercise leadership, at the direction of the President, in coordinating federal activities affecting housing and urban development. To facilitate communication between local and federal partners, HUD proposes that Promise Zone Lead Organizations submit minimal reports and documents to support collaboration and problem solving between local and federal partners. These reports will also assist in communications and stakeholder engagement, both locally and nationally.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): Fourteen Promise Zone Lead Organizations.

    Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of
  • response
  • Responses per
  • annum
  • Burden hour
  • per response
  • Annual burden
  • hours
  • Hourly cost
  • per response
  • Annual cost
    Monthly Federal Grants Update 14 12 168 2 336 $30 $10,080 Quarterly Report: Quarterly and Annual Strategic Plan 14 4 56 10 560 30 16,800 Quarterly Report: Non-Federal Investments 14 4 56 15 840 30 25,200 Quarterly Report: New Neighborhood Amenities 14 4 56 4 224 30 6,720 Annual Report 14 4 56 20 1,120 30 33,600 Public Communications Materials 14 4 56 5 280 30 8,400 Total 100,800
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 15, 2016. Nelson R. Bregón, Associate Assistant Deputy Secretary for Office Field Policy Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17299 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5909-N-51] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Public Housing Agency Executive Compensation Information AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Colette Pollard at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-3400. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on April 26, 2016 at 81 FR 24633.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Public Housing Agency Executive Compensation Information.

    OMB Approval Number: 2577-0272.

    Type of Request: Revision of previously approved collection.

    Form Number: HUD-52725.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use: Pursuant to PIH Notice 2015-14, HUD collects information on the compensation provided by Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) to the top management official, top financial official, and highest compensated employee, similar to the information that non-profit organizations receiving federal tax exemptions are required to report to the IRS annually. Because PHAs receive significant direct federal funds HUD has been collecting compensation information to enhance regulatory oversight by HUD, as well as state and local authorities. HUD provides the information collected to the public. The compensation data collected includes base salary, bonus, and incentive and other compensation, and the extent to which these payments are made with Section 8 and 9 appropriated funds.

    Respondents: Public Housing Agencies.

    Estimate Number of Respondents: Approximately 4000.

    Estimate Number of Responses: Approximately 4000.

    Frequency of Response: Annual.

    Average Hours per Response: 30 minutes.

    Total Estimated Burden: The total burden hours is estimated to be 2000 hours annually. The total burden cost is estimated to be $45,200.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Colette Pollard, Department Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17257 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5909-N-52] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Emergency Solutions Grant Data Collection AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5533. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on May 16, 2016 at 81 FR 30338.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Emergency Solutions Grant Data Collection.

    OMB Control Number: 2506-0089.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Request: Revision of currently approved.

    Description of the Need for Information and Proposed Use: This submission is to request an extension of a currently approved collection for the reporting burden associated with program and recordkeeping requirements that Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program recipients will be expected to implement and retain. This submission is limited to the recordkeeping burden under the ESG entitlement program. To see the regulations for the ESG program and applicable supplementary documents, visit the ESG page on the HUD Exchange at https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/esg/. The statutory provisions and the implementing interim regulations (also found at 24 CFR 576) that govern the program requiring these recordkeeping requirements.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): ESG recipient and subrecipient lead persons.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: The ESG record keeping requirements include 18 distinct activities. Each activity requires a different number of respondents ranging from 20 to 78,000. There are 78,000 unique respondents.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 526,116.

    Frequency of Response: Each activity also has a unique frequency of response, ranging from once annually to monthly.

    Average Hours per Response: Each activity also has a unique associated number of hours of response, ranging from 15 minutes to 12 hours and 45 minutes.

    Total Estimated Burdens: The total number of hours needed for all reporting is 387,552 hours.

    Exhibit A-1—Estimated Annual Burden Hours for ESG Data Collection Information collection Number of
  • respondent
  • Response
  • frequency
  • (average)
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Burden
  • hours per
  • response
  • Total
  • annual
  • hours
  • Hourly
  • rate **
  • Burden cost
  • per instrument
  • A B C D E F 576.100(b)(2) Emergency Shelter and Street Outreach Cap 360 1 360 1.00 360 $37.13 $13,366.80 576.400(a) Consultation with Continuums of Care 360 1 360 6.00 2,160 37.13 80,200.80 576.400(b) Coordination with other Targeted Homeless Services 2,360 1 2,360 8.00 18,880 37.13 701,014.40 576.400(c) System and Program Coordination with Mainstream Resources 2,360 1 2,360 16.00 37,760 37.13 1,402,028.80 576.400(d) Centralized or Coordinated Assessment 2,000 1 2,000 3.00 6,000 37.13 222,780.00 576.400(e) Written Standards for Determining the Amount of Assistance 808 1 808 5.00 4,040 37.13 150,005.20 576.400(f) Participation in HMIS 78,000 1 78,000 0.50 39,000 37.13 1,448,070.00 576.401(a) Initial Evaluation 50,000 1 50,000 1.00 50,000 37.13 1,856,500.00 576.401(b) Recertification 20,000 2 40,000 0.50 20,000 37.13 742,600.00 576.401(d) Connection to Mainstream Resources 78,000 3 234,000 0.25 58,500 37.13 2,172,105.00 576.401(e) Housing retention plan 50,000 1 50,000 0.75 37,500 37.13 1,392,375.00 576.402 Terminating Assistance 808 1 808 4.00 3,232 37.13 120,004.16 576.403 Habitability review 52,000 1 52,000 0.60 31,200 37.13 1,158,456.00 576.405 Homeless Participation 2,360 12 28,320 1.00 28,320 37.13 1,051,521.60 576.500 Recordkeeping Requirements 2,360 1 2,360 12.75 30,090 37.13 1,117,241.70 576.501(b) Remedial Actions 20 1 20 8.00 160 37.13 5,940.80 576.501(c) Recipient Sanctions 360 1 360 12.00 4,320 37.13 160,401.60 576.501(c) Subrecipient Response 2,000 1 2,000 8.00 16,000 37.13 594,080 Total 78,000 526,116 387,522 14,388,691.86 Annualized Cost @$37.13/hr (GS-12): $14,388,691.86.
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    C. Authority

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 18, 2016. Anna P. Guido, Department Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17256 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5909-N-50] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance—Technical Submission AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD has submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: August 22, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806. Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5533. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on May 13, 2016 at 81 FR 29882.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance-Technical Submission.

    OMB Control Number: 2506-0183.

    Form Number: HUD-40090-3a, HUD-40090-3b.

    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved.

    Description of the need for information and proposed use: This submission is to request an extension of a currently approved collection associated with the Technical Submission phase of the Continuum of Care (CoC) Program Application. This submission is limited to the Technical Submission process under the CoC Program interim rule, as authorized by the HEARTH Act. Applicants who are successful in the CoC Program Competition are required to submit more detailed technical information before a grant agreement. The information to be collected will be used to ensure that technical requirements are met prior to the execution of a grant agreement. The technical requirements relate to a more extensive description of the budgets for administration costs, timelines for project implementation, match documentation and other project specific documentation, and information to support the resolution of grant conditions. HUD will use this detailed information to determine if a project is financially feasible and whether all proposed activities are eligible. All information collected is used to carefully consider conditional applicants for funding. If HUD collects less information, or collected it less frequently, the Department could not make a final determination concerning the eligibility of applicants for grant funds and conditional applicants would not be eligible to sign grant agreements and receive funding. To see the regulations for the CoC Program and applicable supplementary documents, visit HUD's Homeless Resource Exchange page at https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/. The statutory provisions and the implementing interim rule (also found at 24 CFR part 587) that govern the program require the information provided by the Technical Submission.

    Respondents (i.e., affected public): Applicants that are successful in the Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Grant competition.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 750.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 750.

    Frequency of Response: 1.

    Average Hours per Response: 8.

    Total Estimated Burdens: 6,000.

    Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of response Responses
  • per annum
  • Burden hour per response Annual burden hours Hourly cost per response Annual cost
    750 1 750 8 6,000 21 126,000 Total 750 1 750 8 6,000 21 126,000
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: July 13, 2016. Anna P. Guido. Department Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17258 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCOS00000 L11500000.PH000016X] Notice of Public Meetings, Southwest Resource Advisory Council AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Southwest Resource Advisory Council (RAC) is scheduled to meet as indicated below.

    DATES:

    The Southwest RAC meeting will be held on August 19, 2016, in Gunnison, Colorado.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Southwest RAC will meet August 19 at the Gunnison County Fairgrounds Multi-Purpose Building, 275 S. Spruce St., Gunnison, CO 81230. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 4 p.m. A public comment period regarding matters on the agenda will occur at 11:30 a.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shannon Borders, Public Affairs Specialist, 970-240-5300; 2505 S. Townsend Ave., Montrose, CO 81401. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Southwest RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of public land issues in southwest Colorado. Topics of discussion for all Southwest RAC meetings may include field manager and working group reports, recreation, fire management, land use planning, invasive species management, energy and minerals management, travel management, wilderness, land exchange proposals, cultural resource management and other issues as appropriate. These meetings are open to the public. The public may present written comments to the RACs. Each formal RAC meeting also has time, as identified above, allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of people wishing to comment, the time for individual oral comments may be limited.

    Ruth Welch, BLM Colorado State Director.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17265 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCON05000-L16100000.DU0000-16X] Notice of Meetings, Northwest Resource Advisory Council White River Field Office Travel Management Subgroup AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Northwest Resource Advisory Council's (RAC) White River Field Office (WRFO) Travel Management Subgroup will meet as indicated below.

    DATES:

    The Northwest RAC's WRFO Travel Management Subgroup has scheduled two meetings. The first meeting is August 23, 2016, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m., with a public comment period regarding matters on the agenda at 2 p.m. The second meeting is September 14, 2016, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., with a public comment period regarding matters on the agenda at 11 a.m. A specific agenda for each meeting will be available prior to the meetings at http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/BLM_Resources/racs/nwrac.html.

    ADDRESSES:

    The first meeting (August 23, 2016) will be held at the Meeker Public Library, 490 Main St., Meeker, CO 81641. The second meeting (September 14, 2016) will be held at the BLM WRFO, 220 E. Market St., Meeker, CO 81641.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Heather Sauls, Planning and Environmental Coordinator, WRFO, 220 E. Market St., Meeker, CO 81641. Phone: (970) 878-3855. Email: [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 15-member Northwest RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in northwest Colorado, which includes the WRFO, Little Snake Field Office, Grand Junction Field Office, Colorado River Valley Field Office and Kremmling Field Office. The Northwest RAC has formed a 12-member Travel Management Subgroup to assist with the WRFO's Travel and Transportation Management Resource Management Plan (RMP) Amendment. The purpose of the meetings is to discuss the RMP Amendment's preliminary alternatives. At the first meeting (August 23, 2016), the focus of the discussion will be to explain the alternatives and the rationale behind them to the Subgroup. At the second meeting (September 14, 2016), the discussion will focus on whether the BLM has developed an adequate range of alternatives and if those alternatives address the planning issues. The Subgroup provides recommendations to the RAC but does not directly advise the BLM. The public may make oral comments to the Subgroup or submit written comments for the Subgroup's consideration. Summary minutes for the Northwest RAC's WRFO Travel Management Subgroup meetings will be maintained in the WRFO and will be available for public inspection and reproduction during regular business hours within thirty (30) days following the meeting.

    Ruth Welch, BLM Colorado State Director.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17267 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 16-15] Nicholas J. Nardacci, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On December 7, 2015, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Show Cause to Nicholas J. Nardacci, M.D. (hereinafter, Respondent), of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Show Cause Order, at 1. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration AN9444592, pursuant to which he is authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V as a practitioner, as well as the denial of pending applications, on the ground that Respondent does not have authority to dispense controlled substances in New Mexico, the State in which he is registered with the Agency. Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(3)).

    As factual support for the proposed actions, the Show Cause Order alleged that Respondent's medical license had expired on July 14, 2014 and had not been reinstated by the New Mexico Medical Board. Id. The Show Cause Order also alleged that Respondent's New Mexico controlled substance license had expired on October 31, 2013 and had not been reinstated by the New Mexico Pharmacy Board. Id. The Show Cause Order thus alleged that Respondent is currently without authority to handle controlled substances in New Mexico, the State in which he is registered, id., and therefore, his DEA registration is subject to revocation.1 Id. at 2.

    1 The Show Cause Order also notified Respondent of his right to request a hearing on the allegations or submit a written statement while waiving his right to a hearing, and the procedure for electing either option. Show Cause Order, at 2 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43).

    On December 18, 2015, the Government accomplished service of the Show Cause Order on Respondent as evidenced by the signed return-receipt card. On January 19, 2016, Respondent requested a hearing on the allegations as well as an extension of time to find an attorney. The matter was placed on the docket of the Office of Administrative Law Judges and assigned to ALJ Charles Wm. Dorman.

    On January 20, 2016, the ALJ issued an Order which directed the Government to submit evidence supporting the allegation and an accompanying dispositive motion by February 4, 2016. The ALJ also granted Respondent's request for an extension and ordered that if the Government filed such a motion, Respondent was to file his reply by February 25, 2016. Briefing Schedule For Lack Of State Authority Allegations, at 1.

    On February 4, 2016, the Government filed its Motion for Summary Disposition. As support for its Motion, the Government provided a copy of Respondent's registration information, an affidavit from a Diversion Investigator (DI) and printouts she obtained from the New Mexico Medical Board and New Mexico Board of Pharmacy.2 The Medical Board printout showed that Respondent's medical license had expired on July 1, 2014 and subsequently lapsed. As for the Pharmacy Board printout, it showed that Respondent's state controlled substance license had expired on October 31, 2013. The Government thus argued that Respondent is without authority to dispense controlled substances in New Mexico and does not possess the authority required by the Controlled Substances Act to be registered and therefore, his registration should be revoked. Mot. at 5.

    2 The DI averred that during a phone conversation with Respondent, he acknowledged that both of his state licenses had expired. DI Declaration, at 2.

    On February 18, 2016, Respondent submitted a letter to the ALJ wherein he noted that he was negotiating with the Medical Board over the withdrawal of his application for reinstatement of his state license. Letter from Respondent to Hearing Clerk, OALJ (Feb. 16, 2016). Respondent further requested that the ALJ grant him “a 30 day extension to” allow him “to reach a settlement with the Medical Board” after which he would either withdraw his DEA application or challenge the Show Cause Order. Id. Respondent explained that the Board was requiring him to pass a competency exam in order to be reinstated; he also noted that he was having difficulty finding an attorney he could afford. Id. at 2. Respondent attached to his letter, a December 31, 2015 letter from the New Mexico Board informing him that the Board was offering him the opportunity to withdraw his application, but that if he chose not to do so, the Board would issue him a Notice of Contemplated Action to deny the reinstatement of his license. Id. at 3. Respondent did not, however, dispute the Government's contention that he is currently without state authority to dispense controlled substances in New Mexico.

    Thereafter, the ALJ denied Respondent's request for a second extension, finding unpersuasive his contention that he was in negotiations with the Board to reach a settlement and needed more time. Order Denying The Resp.'s Request For An Extension, Order Granting Summary Judgment, And Recommended Rulings, Findings Of Fact, Conclusions Of Law, And Decision, at 3. The ALJ also found unpersuasive Respondent's other justification for needing an extension, i.e., that he needed more time to find a lawyer, noting that Respondent had more than two months to find one. Id.

    Turning to the Government's Motion, the ALJ found that there was no factual dispute that Respondent does not possess state authority to dispense controlled substances and thus cannot maintain his DEA registration. Id. at 4. The ALJ thus granted the Government's Motion and recommended that Respondent's registration be revoked and that any pending application be denied. Id.

    Neither party filed exceptions to the ALJ's Recommended Decision. Thereafter, the record was forwarded to my Office for Final Agency Action. Having considered the record in its entirety, I adopt the ALJ's rulings, as well as his findings of fact, legal conclusion and recommended sanction. I make the following finding of fact.

    Findings

    Respondent was the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration AN9444592, pursuant to which he was authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V as a practitioner at the registered address of 2919 Commercial Street NE., Albuquerque, New Mexico; this registration had an expiration date of October 31, 2014. Motion for Summ. Disp., Attachment 1, at 1. Because Respondent did not submit a renewal application until November 28, 2014, this registration expired, in accordance with its terms, on October 31, 2014. Id. However, because there is a pending application, this case remains a live controversy.

    Respondent also formerly held a medical license issued by the New Mexico Medical Board. However, Respondent's license expired on July 1, 2014 and was subsequently deemed by the Board to have lapsed. Moreover, according to the online records of the New Mexico Medical Board of which I take official notice, on February 22, 2016, Respondent entered into a Stipulation And Order For Withdrawal Of Application For Licensure, which the Board approved on February 29, 2016, pursuant to which he agreed to withdraw his Application for Reinstatement.3

    3 Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), an agency “may take official notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding-even in the final decision.” U.S. Dept. of Justice, Attorney General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm. W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 1979). In accordance with the APA and DEA's regulation, Respondent is “entitled on timely request to an opportunity to show to the contrary.” 5 U.S.C. 556(e); see also 21 CFR 1316.59(e). Respondent may dispute my finding by filing a properly supported motion within fifteen calendar days of this Order which shall commence on the date this Order is mailed.

    Respondent also formerly held a New Mexico Controlled Substances license. However, this license expired on October 31, 2013.

    Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f), “[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners . . . to dispense . . . controlled substances . . . if the applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.” Id. § 823(f). Moreover, the Controlled Substances Act defines the term “practitioner” to “mean[ ] a physician . . . licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by . . . the jurisdiction in which he practices . . . to distribute, dispense, [or] administer . . . a controlled substance in the course of professional practice.” Id. § 802(21). See also id. § 824(a)(3) (authorizing the revocation of a registration upon a finding that the registrant “has had his State license or registration suspended, revoked, or denied by competent State authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances”). Based on these provisions, the Agency has repeatedly held “that a practitioner can neither obtain nor maintain a DEA registration unless the practitioner currently has authority under state law to handle controlled substances.” James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371, 71372 (2011) (collecting cases), pet. for rev. denied, Hooper v. Holder, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012).

    Here, there is no dispute as to the material fact that Respondent does not hold authority under New Mexico law to dispense controlled substances and is thus not a practitioner within the meaning of the Act. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Accordingly, his application must be denied. 21 U.S.C. 823(f).

    Order

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 28 CFR 0.100(b), I order that the application of Nicholas J. Nardacci, M.D., for a DEA Certificate of Registration as a practitioner, be, and it hereby is, denied. This Order is effective immediately.

    Dated: July 11, 2016. Chuck Rosenberg, Acting Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17264 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 10-71] Turning Tide, Inc. Decision and Order; Procedural History

    On August 17, 2010, the former Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration issued an Order to Show Cause and Immediate Suspension of Registration (hereinafter, Show Cause Order or Order) to Turning Tide, Inc. (Respondent), of Rockland, Maine. Show Cause Order, at 1. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration RT0370015,1 which authorized it to dispense controlled substances as a Narcotic Treatment Program pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), and the denial of any pending applications to renew or modify its registration, on the ground that its “continued registration is inconsistent with the public interest, as that term is defined in 21 U.S.C. 823(f).” Id. at 1.

    1 The Order alleged that Respondent's registration was due to expire on November 30, 2010.

    The Show Cause Order specifically alleged that “Respondent is owned by Angel Fuller-McMahan” and that its “registration is conditioned upon a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with DEA which prohibits Ms. Fuller-McMahan from (1) having physical access to Respondent's premises; (2) ordering controlled substances on behalf of Respondent; and (3) executing any renewal applications . . . on behalf of Respondent.” Id. at 1-2. The Order then alleged that Ms. Fuller-McMahan had been arrested on July 13, 2010 and charged with unlawful possession of cocaine, and that at the time of her arrest, she had in her possession approximately 25 grams of cocaine and two hypodermic needles.2 Id. at 2. The Order further alleged that Ms. Fuller-McMahan had “arranged to purchase cocaine” from both a patient and an employee of Respondent. Id. The Order also alleged that “[w]hile serving as Respondent's Program Director, Ms. Fuller-McMahan approached another patient . . . and offered to trade methadone for cocaine” by “creat[ing] a fraudulent order for methadone,” even though she was then prohibited by the MOA from ordering controlled substances on behalf of Respondent. Id. The Order then alleged that Ms. Fuller-McMahan had purchased cocaine in three sepa